Photographer $9.99 pricing? NO DEAL FOR VIDEO People?

Your pricing for Creative Clouds is structured poorly. You single out Photographers with a deal for three apps for $9.99 when there are thousands of videographers/filmmakers who may only use three apps too. To have them pay $49.99/mo is just CRAZY!!! I want Premiere, Photoshop and Lightroom and I have to pay 4x more then a photographer who gets Photoshop, Lightroom and Bridge. Ummmm, ok? And the logic in this is? Do you not recognize that WPPI had filmmakers talking this year? Perhaps there is a wave of start up filmmakers who would become cheerleaders of Adobe VS Final Cut if you offered a similar pricing structure?

Hi enomis9,
Welcome to Adobe Forums.
You can use the below mentioned links to have a glance of plans -
https://creative.adobe.com/plans?plan=offers&promoid=JTXQY
and
http://www.adobe.com/products/creativecloud/buying-guide-at-a-glance.edu.html
Let us know if that helps!
Thanks
Garima

Similar Messages

Hello, Is there a package deal for 2 people to use Creative Cloud tat the same time? (Photoshop, DW, Illustrator, etc) we already have one subscriber.

Hello, Is there a package deal for 2 people to use Creative Cloud tat the same time? (Photoshop, DW, Illustrator, etc) we already have one subscriber.

Hi there
You could either sign up for another individual subscription for the 2nd user, or consider a Teams account which is priced per user - Creative Cloud pricing and membership plans | Adobe Creative Cloud
Thanks
Bev

3D Graphics Cards for Video Editing (what's the real deal?)

Hi
I've known for some time that 3D graphic cards offers no REAL significant improvements to VIDEO EDITING and RENDERING.
I also know that for real video editing, one needs the likes of Quadro cards, not 3D Gaming Cards like GEforce/Radeon.. and that the SOFTWARE being used needs to have support for using GPU for rendering such as CUDA technology
I tried to update myself and read around a bit... w/ the advancements of software today, 3D gaming cards now offer more improvements for video editing should software use 3D effects, transitions, or similar.. but still not that much really
Q1: am i on top of things so far?
And recently i found out that Adobe Premier CS4 (and other vid ed software) now takes advantage of GPU power.. (really?)
Q2: HOW MUCH advantage though? like a lot like equally as useful as CPU power?? or a bit of gpu power to help cpu?
Q3: So, would it be practical to spend $$$$ on a highend GeForce Card like GTX295 to improve video editing/rendering performance? or would it be rather more useful to spend that on higher CPU or overall PC specs?
Would really like to hear your thoughts on these.
Thanks

In terms of impact on performance, you can rate the various components from most important to least important:
1. CPU
2. RAM
3. Disk setup
9. Video card.
Even a mildly priced card like an ATI HD 48xx is not taxed to its full capacity on a very fast system, even on a 3.8 GHz overclocked Nehalem the CPU is the bottleneck, not the GPU.

Coverflow for video and podcasts

Has it been discussed about implementing coverflow for video and podcasts?
This would make it so much easier to navigate and also help organize the files on the itouch and iphone.
How serious is apple about implementing these, Im dying to get this for simple navigation and organizing needs.

while deleting a thumbnail/icon (by hand or with cocothumbx) might be a quick solution for photos, i expect coverflow to handle this correctly for me. when dealing with thousands of photographs, automatic export from aperture, batch processing in photoshop/bridge etc, i shouldn't have to deal with thumbnails, should i?
coverflow simply isn't where it should be. i also find it strange that quicklook and coverflow seam to use different algorithms to render files. try an adobe illustrator file for example. the finder doesn't show the content as icon (in a folder), coverflow renders the content/artboard correctly, quicklook only displays the oversized icon. what the...?

'Best for video' greyed out in displays prefs

I finally got my macbook(blackbook running 10.5.8) hooked up to my lcd tv (i have been using my old eMac for this a while) & I'm fooling around with the settings to optimize performance & for some reason the 'Best for video' is greyed out in System prefs/Displays but the overscan function works(both in extended desktop mode & in video mirroring mode. I have always used this function on my eMac (OS X 10.3.9) without any problems. For now I'm using the apple mini dvi to video with an Svideo cable until i can afford to go either the hdmi or vga route, but I'd like to optimize this at least..anybody have a clue why 'Best for video' would be greyed out & how to fix this? could this be because of the Intel GMA 950 Gpu chipset in this generation of macbooks? I have posted to a few forums in the last few days with no answers so far...Anybody?

I wouldn't worry too much about that setting. I believe all it ever did was set up a difference between blanking and black level, sometimes called "pedestal" in TV/video terminology. It's no big deal. You are probably correct that the GMA950 doesn't support it, so it's grayed out.

Thinking to buy a new 15inch macbook pro retina display. Aim to use it for video editing and compositing... Is ıt worth for it?

Hi... I am a freelance filmmaker. Now I have 2008 model mac pro and I am thinking to buy a new macbook pro 15 inch retina display. Do you think its worth for it? I aim to use the macbook mainly for video editing, video compositing (after effects) and photo editing. My current old mac pro has 12 GB and the graphics card is ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256 MB (Yes I still use it). My main question is, do you think its better to move to macbook pro or upgrading the old one? Making it 32 GB of RAM and buy a new NVIDIA cuda capable graphic card? I dont have enough budget to make it together... Want to hear your suggestions...

I'm not sure, I've seen pro animators use MBPs but usually with a large monitor. Especially doing video editing, compositing and editing it might make more sense to upgrade the Mac Pro to an SSD as the boot drive. What kind of CPU setup is in your Pro?
Check these out:
mac pro SSD upgrades?
SSD as system disk while users folder + data on HDD
Early 2008 8-Core Mac Pro GPU Upgrades
I deal exclusively with OWC. I'd call them and walk them through your system and see what they say.
What you do takes a lot of CPU, RAM, graphics and boot disk power.
I've upgraded my two computers to SSDs and the first thing I noticed was that Photoshop CS6 opens in 7 seconds vrs. 50 seconds when the application was on a HDD.

Better for Video Editing? MBP 13" or 15" w/9600M GT

I am planning on purchasing a Macbook Pro for relatively extensive use of Final Cut Pro (HD video) along with possibly some light Motion work and video transcoding. In addition I will be using it for photo editing and web editing. I don't plan on using it for any high-end gaming.
I will be purchasing a $200 24" external monitor to use most of the time along with external keyboard and mouse (so MBP screen size isn't an issue), but I need the portability and don't have the funds to purchase an additional dedicated desktop yet.
I am having trouble deciding between the 13" and the 15", mainly due to conflicting opinions I've been hearing over the importance of a dedicated graphics card for video editing. Salespeople at the Apple store tell me it's important and I should get the 15". Research online yielded heated forum arguments over whether it really makes a difference or not.
The price difference is quite significant though at the configurations I picked ($765) so I am seeking advice here for whether people think the cost difference is really justified for my needs. Note that both configurations include 4GB of RAM, smallest hard drive option (i've got external drives) and AppleCare protection.
Pricing with education discount after tax:
13" 2.26GHz - $1520
15" 2.66GHz w/9600M GT 256MB - $2285
*Is there a real difference in video editing performance and if so, is it really worth an extra $765? Or is there a better option that I'm not considering?*

Thanks everyone for the feedback!
Studio X wrote:
Are you planning on making any money at this or are you only in it for fun? Have you ever edited before? Have you ever edited with FCS before? What of the 44 billion HD formats are you planning on editing? Do you have a camera? What format does it record? If it's a flash media based device, what's your back up strategy? How are you planning to externally monitor the HD material ? What are you planning to use as media drives as the system drive should not be used for media capture or playback?
Still, I guess I come down on the side of "it doesn't matter as neither one is a serious editing machine". If I was in the market for a laptop and was limited to the current apple lineup, the only machine of interest is the 17" MacBookPro. The other two MacBookPros you are considering have no expresscard slot and come only with glossy screens - both are serious deficiencies in my world.
I do plan on using this computer professionally. I am a recent college graduate but do have professional FCS editing experience under my belt. However my work was done using both school and employer resources. I do have an archive of work in Mini DV(HDV) and AVCHD formats. I don't currently own an HD camera, however will likely be purchasing one in the near future. As far as externally monitoring HD material, what else would I need other than the 24" external monitor (perfectly capable of full HD) or a separate HDTV? In addition to several older usb2 external drives for backup I do have a 1TB 7200rpm external capable of FW800 and eSATA that I would use as a media drive.
I currently have an old 17" dell notebook with a glossy screen. The screen hasn't really bothered me, but the size and weight of the notebook has. And while the 17" MBP is a little lighter and smaller than my old dell, I would still prefer a 13" or 15". But from the opinions I've been hearing I'm steering away from the 13" and fully realize the downsides to the lack of ExpressCard slot in the current 15" as well. Still wondering while Apple decided to remove it.
MartinR wrote:
If budget is a primary constraint, then consider a refurbished 15" or 17" MBP from Apple, or a used MBP from a reputable supplier.
I hadn't checked into the refurbished options, but now that I did, I found a nice 15" (late 2008 unibody) configuration that would provide a lot more value for the buck. For about $550 more than the new 13" config I would get a faster processor, 2" bigger screen, 9600M 512mb GPU, double the internal storage, removable battery as well as the ExpressCard slot (even though its not listed in specs, it's there). The only trade off I can see is battery life.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC026LL/A?mco=MjE0NjE5MA

Which 1 TB Seagate Barracuda is best for video editing?

Hi,
I'm about to buy a 1 TB drive for my Mac Pro to increase storage space for video files and not sure which one would suit me best out of the:
Seagate BarracudaNL NL35 Hard drive 1 TB Internal 3.5" SATA300 7200 rpm buffer 32 MB
or
Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 Hard drive 1 TB Internal 3.5" SATA300 7200 rpm buffer: 32 MB
Any opinions on which is best or if you think there is a better drive out there in the same price range?
I'm in a bit of a hurry so quick responses would be great.
Thanks

You are in a hurry... so?
Where to get benchmarks and more than just personal ideas and opinions, check out AMUG Reviews along with Barefeats along with AccelerateYourMac along with sites and forums that deal in video. StorageReview has usually done excellent review coverage but has slowed down but they looked at what is going on with Seagate line lately.
http://www.barefeats.com/hard94.html
http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/IDE/1TBHDs_MacPro/1TB_hard_drivetests.html#storytop
It isn't just what to buy, but where, and firmware. Samsung, Hitachi (latest model) and I wish WD would get their latest Black series. OWC checks to insure Seagate drives have the latest firmware as they have been problematic (for years now on Macs).
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/hard-drives/

Final Cut Server is for video and photo archiving?

Too many products in the last few years. I used to use iPhoto to archive both photos and video and edit them. Now I have moved to the professional line but it gets more confusing.
Aperture2: archiving and cataloguing thousands of pictures with minor edits
Adobe CS4: major edits to my pictures
FCP6: video edit but with no archiving and/or metadata capability
Final Cut Server: for what? Can it archive/metadata all my video and all my Aperture files and work
seamlessly between all these four programs?
Please help. I am considering buying Final Cut Server. I am both a photographer as well as a videographer running many different cameras over many different kinds of shoots. And I am trying to simplify my work process.
Thanks,
Brian

We were in a similar situation as well.
We use Adobe products for photo and desktop stuff
and FCP Suite for video.
We ingest images with Bridge and add keywords.
The raw files are backed up and the corrected images
are processed (Photoshop/Image Processor) and dropped
into a Final Cut Server watch folder.
This action automatically adds the files to FCS for
easy access as well as backs up the images to an
external FTP in our desktop publishing office across
town. Desktop has its own version of FCS that adds
the new files and makes them available for designers.
When we shoot video we shoot mainly with Sony EX3
camcorders with SxS media. Footage is downloaded
and tagged in XDCAM Transfer. The folder that is
labeled "Import" in the utility is also a watch
folder which added the files to FCS.
So in other words Final Cut Server has us organized
and working together much better than we were before.

For video editing, is the new 13" MBP enough? Or should I go for 15"?

For video editing, I will be using both Final Cut Pro 7, and Adobe CS5.
Is the new 13" Macbook Pro enough? I'm asking both for the lower-end and higher-end 13". Or should I just go with the 15"?
I'm just seeking for opinions from more experienced mac users, since this is my first transfer from Windows to Mac. Also, I'm taking into consideration in the price difference among these different models.
Thank you very much

It will render much faster on the new quad cores then any other MBP ever made. This new release is really a pretty major deal in the laptop world to my thinking. If I didn't just get a new iMac, I would be probably getting one. I don't do a lot of video and I use FCE not Pro so my need isn't as great, but I do a lot of photography and with several things open at once so the power matched with sufficient ram is pretty amazing. But is it absolutely a must? I had a friend who just until this year was a film music editor and he was using Pro Tools on a G4 Power Book though he had to start working around the machine limitations at the end of the day, but it is possible. Still for the money, the new machines are a great deal at pretty much the same price as what they are replacing. I know I'm advocating here, but I'm just a user not and employee:)

Upgrading PowerMac G4 to the MAX for video production?????

I need to know if I can just upgrade my Power Mac G4 (AGP graphics) to the max for video production? I'll be using 4 main programs.
1. Final Cut Studio 2
2. After Affects
3. Protools
4. Photoshop CS 3
Final Cut recommends this for all applications:
* 2GB of RAM when working with compressed HD and uncompressed SD sources
* 4GB of RAM when working with uncompressed HD sources
Here are my computer stats:
Machine Model: PowerMac3,1
CPU Type: PowerPC G4 (2.9)
Number Of CPUs: 1
CPU Speed: 450 MHz
L2 Cache (per CPU): 1 MB
Memory: 768 MB
Bus Speed: 100 MHz
Boot ROM Version: 3.2.2f1
Can anyone please help? This is my first mac.

Hey DJ,
I'm thinking that, for those specific needs, dollars are better thrown at a newer model than upgrades for your existing one. Here's why:
1) You do not have native support for large hard drives, something that's nice for video work. You'd have to spend money on a PCI adaptor card to add that support. Figure US$40-100.
2) Your video card is likely not up to the task unless it's already been upgraded. Another $70-250 depending on how good a scrounger you are.
3) You need a minimum 1.25Ghz G4 processor and, if you get the upgrade, who's to say if the next version of FC will still support a G4? 1.2G processor upgrades start at over $200 and faster ones are up to $700 (OWC pricing for new gear).
4) You can't stick more than 2G RAM in your computer.
And, after all the upgrades, you still have the basic bus speed limitation inherent in all G4s.
Bottom line is that you can quickly invest enough to buy a faster used Mac. Examples of used G5 prices (usually at the top of the price scale) are here. Even an entry level G5 should be much faster than a fully upgraded G4.
Don't get me wrong--I'm an upgrader and love to do it regardless of cost. In this case, I see the potential for ending up with an upgraded computer that struggles at its intended task and could be obsoleted by the next upgrade of the software.

Adobe Audition for Video Editors webinar recording online

Hi everyone,
Last week, Audition sponsored a screencast hosted by Kanen Flowers covering his workflows for editing audio for video projects. The recording of the event is online at http://seminars.adobeconnect.com/p58yg03mkgg/
We had a great turnout, and if people find these valuable, we'll try to schedule more of them addressing different editing topics.
Have a great day,
Durin

I was interested enough to sign up for the real-time webinar. I want my hour back.
Based on its biling, I expected it to deal a fair amount with dialog editing, but it just touched on the subject and most of that was about trying to fix dialog from a Skype connection -- something of little interest to the vast majority of videographers.
The structure was just a ramble; it seemed to me that Kenan did little to prepare. It was more an ad for Kenan and his show than it was useful for videographers trying to learn how to use Audition. But maybe that was just me; YMMV.
I should add that I've watched several other Abobe webinars. Most were good solid useful information. The bar is set fairly high, which is probably why I was dissapointed in this one.

Hi sir im using fcp 7 for video editing in i mac, how can i edit mts files in fcp 7 without log n transfer, is their solution for fcp 7?

Hi sir im using fcp 7 for video editing in i mac, how can i edit mts files in fcp 7 without log n transfer, is their solution for fcp 7?

>No, you are not right.
Going to question the biggest contributor to this forum? (Yes, my ego is talking). OK then...
>Install the QT-Plugin, restart your Mac and you will be able to import and use .mts files in FCP 7.
Sure...yes, that makes it POSSIBLE to read the files natively in FCP...if they come from a Panasonic camera. BUT...just try working with those files. Right away the system won't be nearly as responsive as it would if they were ProRes. First...there are no sequence settings for that format...so you'll have to use ProRes and have a green render bar. BUT, that's no big deal. The big deal is trying to work with the AVCHD format, which is VERY processor intensive...inside an application that doesn't like to work with much outside of the FCP editing codecs.
Is it possible? Sure? Will it work well...will you be as zippy and error free as if you converted to ProRes? Not by a long shot. OH, but don't just take my word for it. Go ahead...try it and see. No skin off my nose...no waste of my time. See how well this works.
I'm just here to relate real world working solutions to issues. And yes, I did try that plugin, and boy, was editing a pain.

Aperture or Final Cut Pro X for Video Org

I don't really see a reason to keep importing (linking) videos into Aperture at this point, considering the robust meta data capabilities of Final Cut Pro X. Other than having all video and photos in one place (Aperture database), does anyone have a reason?
Thanks for your thoughts.
Angelo

Thanks Shawn,
I'm switching to organizing all videos in FPCX - the keyword and Event options (smart albums) are pretty powerful and it's much easier to skim video. With the direct browsing of Aperture projects in FCPX I will have quick access stills for when combing both in a video. It would be nice to only have to deal with one piece of software when cataloging files from a HDSLR, but Aperture just isn't up to the task for video.

Resolution Settings for Video Projection

I am creating a basic slide show in FCP using color and black and white still images. There are two desired outputs. Currently I'm working on the sequence for video projection, ( a final quicktime movie will be launched on a computer and projected on an 8ft x 8ft screen). The highest resolution of the projector is 1024 x 768. What are the size settings I should use to create my sequence and what compression settings should I use for my final exported piece? Of course I want to maintain the highest possible quality for the photographic stills.
Thanks,
G
Apple G5 Mac OS X (10.4.8)

Create a custom sequence which is slightly smaller than the photos so you could move on them... The Compression should probably be Photo JPEG... In QT playback, the screen will resize accordingly... i.e. if you're working in 1024X768, I'd probably work in that sequence size keeping the stills larger than that... But not more than about 2k in either direction or the computer will most likely choke on them. Raise the still cache in the memory settings up a bit for more RT playback.
Will take a pretty serious hard drive to play this back BTW... as in fast... it's data rate wil likely be about the same as uncompressed HD... set the slider in the compression to abu 75% to gain 4:2:2 color space... 100% will give you larger files that likely won't really look much better.
Jerry

Photographer $9.99 pricing? NO DEAL FOR VIDEO People?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for