• I want to thank all the members that have upgraded your accounts. I truly appreciate your support of the site monetarily. Supporting the site keeps this site up and running as a lot of work daily goes on behind the scenes. Click to Support Signs101 ...

Adobe's new pricing strategy

MikeD

New Member
If you're a printer you should always be at the latest version of Adobe CS, full stop. Annoying customers by making them save down is how you lose customers. Print is way too competitive to risk hassling people over something like that.


You actually have clients that send usable art!?! I'm used to getting tiny jpegs...if I ask for vector, they will usually place a bitmap into Illustrator and save it that way.

Actually, I have had some people send me some CS5 files and although I didn't directly open them in CS4, I was able to import them and they were fully editable.

I do however agree with you that it is always in a business owner's best interest to make it easy for their clients.

I have 14 workstations that I don't want to pay to upgrade.
 

Bobby H

Arial Sucks.
oldgoatroper said:
Really, if you're a printer, you should be accepting only PDFs...

Most printers will take anything a customer provides even if it makes the end result look laughably horrible. I'll even go so far as to say many sign companies will do exactly the very same thing. I've had lots of belly laughs looking at vehicle wraps featuring low res JPEG art with pixels big enough to support a game of checkers. I could go on and on from there.

A PDF-only policy is going to be very bad for business in terms of off the street traffic from small businesses. The average person doesn't know the difference between a JPEG image, a vector-based EPS file or some cheesy stuff thrown together in Microsoft Publisher. Any print business needs to be able to handle all that garbage, as well as field the quality art files that come in via someone who composed a document in Illustrator or InDesign.

Thankfully, sign manufacturers have certain artwork requirements that just are not flexible. Somebody's dopey web page JPEG is 100% irrelevant for use on a CNC routing table or cutting vinyl. Conversion is required and that doesn't come for free.

I deal with a few different service bureaus for specialty items like laser cutting, grand format billboard face printing, etc. None of them have a PDF-only rule. Every service provider has their own setup. A sign company with both the latest versions of major Adobe applications and Corel will be able to comply with the artwork submission rules of just about any service provider. Some of these companies do have their own peculiar sets of artwork submission rules. One wants files names all lowercase, no spaces, no numerals. Another wants everything in 1" = 1' scale. Some of those demands are a little more time consuming to honor than merely saving an Illustrator layout as a PDF or down to CS3 or CS2.
 

oldgoatroper

Roper of Goats. Old ones.
Most printers will take anything a customer provides even if it makes the end result look laughably horrible. I'll even go so far as to say many sign companies will do exactly the very same thing. I've had lots of belly laughs looking at vehicle wraps featuring low res JPEG art with pixels big enough to support a game of checkers. I could go on and on from there.

A PDF-only policy is going to be very bad for business in terms of off the street traffic from small businesses. The average person doesn't know the difference between a JPEG image, a vector-based EPS file or some cheesy stuff thrown together in Microsoft Publisher. Any print business needs to be able to handle all that garbage, as well as field the quality art files that come in via someone who composed a document in Illustrator or InDesign.

Thankfully, sign manufacturers have certain artwork requirements that just are not flexible. Somebody's dopey web page JPEG is 100% irrelevant for use on a CNC routing table or cutting vinyl. Conversion is required and that doesn't come for free.

I deal with a few different service bureaus for specialty items like laser cutting, grand format billboard face printing, etc. None of them have a PDF-only rule. Every service provider has their own setup. A sign company with both the latest versions of major Adobe applications and Corel will be able to comply with the artwork submission rules of just about any service provider. Some of these companies do have their own peculiar sets of artwork submission rules. One wants files names all lowercase, no spaces, no numerals. Another wants everything in 1" = 1' scale. Some of those demands are a little more time consuming to honor than merely saving an Illustrator layout as a PDF or down to CS3 or CS2.


Um yeah... I suppose I forgot to mention that our PDF requirements are for customers who insist that they are sending us print-ready artwork and are geared toward those who actually do have some clue about what's what. We will also take a high-res, flattened CMYK TIF image, as well.

But for the rest of the un-washed masses, we actually do accept anything else, as well, but then the process is called design and layout. Nothing, (obviously, to all of us) that comes in pieces -- jpgs, gifs, text, emails, faxes, pieces of paper -- is print-ready, though you'd be surprised at what some customers think.

What I was specifically referring to in the previous post, is that someone, for example, who is submitting an InDesign file that is supposedly ready for print, should have the knowledge and wherewithal to be able to produce an acceptable PDF for press. If they can't, then whatever they submit is subject to design and layout charges according to the deficiencies.

Our PDF policy is not absolute, but gradually, big players like the Regional Health Authority are coming around. For example, the Pharmacy dept at the local regional hospital has interns produce a large poster presentation on some subject as part of their curriculum and we used to get just everything under the sun. But, over time we have educated them and now we get nothing but trouble-free PDFs. They know what to do. We are constantly trying to educate our larger ongoing accounts and they are embracing it because they see the benefits
 

guato

New Member
I have Corel X5 and Adobe Design Premium CS4.
For vector drawing I use mostly Corel Draw, For converting pic or publishing pic for web site Corel Photo Paint, for posters and other HQ image Photoshop.
I just want to point out, that I feel better with Draw tan with Illustrator.
 

WildWestDesigns

Active Member
who cares what they do, Ill always be two versions behind buying used versions!


That's good, I don't have that luxury apparently. I've had more then a few already ask can I take 5.5 files or do they need save to a legacy format.

It all just depends on what that customer base is. Now I'm not saying everything that I get is wonderful work, it just happens to come in vector format. My work isn't to correct what they have, but to get it ready for a certain type of production, in most instances. Sometimes there is correction, but just to make it work for production.
 

signmeup

New Member
That's good, I don't have that luxury apparently. I've had more then a few already ask can I take 5.5 files or do they need save to a legacy format.
Just tell them they need to save to a legacy format.

I'm sticking with CS2. I can clone "uncle Bob" out of photos just fine with it.
 

royster13

New Member
Some clients will get bothered if you ask them to do extra stuff to run their orders....Especially if you are not dealing directly with the graphics people....It just takes losing 1 or 2 clients that send their work elsewhere to recover the cost of keeping current...
 

WildWestDesigns

Active Member
Some clients will get bothered if you ask them to do extra stuff to run their orders....Especially if you are not dealing directly with the graphics people....It just takes losing 1 or 2 clients that send their work elsewhere to recover the cost of keeping current...

That's the pickle for sure. It starts to really get bad when they don't save it down correctly or they don't change certain aspects to make it more production friendly and you have to ask them yet again. For embroidery I can work off a jpg and it'll be fine, so I don't have to worry so much with the legacy issues (don't get me wrong, I still prefer vectors, but it isn't as much of an issue here), it just can get hairy with sublimation work.
 

signswi

New Member
Just tell them they need to save to a legacy format.

I'm sticking with CS2. I can clone "uncle Bob" out of photos just fine with it.

CS4 is revolutions beyond CS2 and CS5/5.5 added a ton of nice things to Illustrator for sign people.

I always stay at the latest version. Usually make up the cost in productivity gains within a few months, if not faster. Adobe has really been knocking it out of the park the past few upgrade cycles with things that shave time or allow for new working methods.

Plus I don't like annoying people with "save down" requests. When I was an in-house designer sending my stuff off to print vendors and I was asked to save down it was really irritating and a signal to me that the print vendor wasn't staying on the edge of the industry. Those vendors tended to get less work (or no work) from our company as a result. I was just one guy doing maybe $400k in printing a year extrapolate that out across your industry...
 

Bobby H

Arial Sucks.
I don't see much of any problem at all in saving down to a legacy version of Illustrator. The only way it will be a problem is if the art has some kind of live effect in it that is dependent on the latest version. But I have the habit of flattening/expanding a lot of that stuff so it can be portable to all sorts of other graphics applications.

I'll recommend Illustrator CS5 and Photoshop CS5 for some of the nifty and time saving features they have.

Content Aware Fill is one of the best additions to Photoshop in a long time. I took a high quality photo of a billboard ad we installed a couple weeks earlier. Pigeons had crapped on the face in numerous places. Normally it would take a good amount of work to remove the bird droppings from the image. Content Aware Fill makes it as simple as drawing a selection around the blemish and using the Content Aware option when applying a fill. Other distractions in an image, like power lines, people, etc. can be removed pretty quickly.

I like how Illustrator CS5 will allow you to change stroke thickness on different areas of a path. Its anchor point editing tools are getting a little closer to CorelDRAW in terms of features and control.

Still, I don't see it as a mandatory requirement for just any sign company to always have the latest edition of Adobe's Creative Suite, or even the latest edition of CorelDRAW for that matter. If the tools you currently have are getting the job done well and the newest upgrade doesn't seem enticing enough why waste the money?

Most people aren't going to automatically upgrade just because the new release is the newest release. With each upgrade there is a diminishing level of returns on ground breaking features and technology. The pressure is on Adobe and others to keep introducing great new features to make the upgrades worth it and to stay ahead of competitors, even in the open source area (Inkscape and The Gimp aren't bad).

Adobe recently showed off a beta tool they're working on for de-blurring slightly out of focus photos. Pretty amazing stuff. It might actually make those phony baloney "enhance" cliches we see in so many movies and TV shows actually seem a tiny bit plausible. No word yet on whether this filter will be in Photoshop CS6 or CS7 or perhaps in a different app.
 

WildWestDesigns

Active Member
The pressure is on Adobe and others to keep introducing great new features to make the upgrades worth it and to stay ahead of competitors, even in the open source area (Inkscape and The Gimp aren't bad).

More of a Zara Xtreme fan myself.

Adobe recently showed off a beta tool they're working on for de-blurring slightly out of focus photos. Pretty amazing stuff. It might actually make those phony baloney "enhance" cliches we see in so many movies and TV shows actually seem a tiny bit plausible. No word yet on whether this filter will be in Photoshop CS6 or CS7 or perhaps in a different app.

Slightly? The videos of see, I wouldn't have called the photos slightly out of focus. Are you talking about the tool that determines the movement of the camera and uses that to deblur the photo?
 

signmeup

New Member
De-blur is available as a plugin from Topaz Labs. It doesn't seem to work very well. There is still no substitute for a real photographer.
 

WildWestDesigns

Active Member
De-blur is available as a plugin from Topaz Labs. It doesn't seem to work very well. There is still no substitute for a real photographer.

That isn't the same thing that is coming out in a new version of Photoshop. If the tool in the videos is the same quality of the tool that is going to be in the program having a real photographer is going to be a little less necessary as far as clearing out a blurry picture.
 

signmeup

New Member
That isn't the same thing that is coming out in a new version of Photoshop. If the tool in the videos is the same quality of the tool that is going to be in the program having a real photographer is going to be a little less necessary as far as clearing out a blurry picture.
Yeah....
The one from Topaz Labs is pretty impressive in the brochure too. My advice... eat a banana before you snap that photo.
 

Bobby H

Arial Sucks.
Here's a link to the Adobe de-blurring thing, which was sneaked at Adobe MAX 2011:
Adobe MAX 2011 - Photoshop Image Deblurring Sneak

WildWestDesigns said:
More of a Zara Xtreme fan myself.

Unfortunately the open source version is apparently available only for Linux. Windows users have to get the paid versions, now called Xara Photo & Graphic Designer 7 and Xara Designer Pro 7. They cost $89 and $299 respectively. Despite the claims of Xara having the fastest performance I'm far more concerned about creative capabilities, quality of output and file support throughout the graphics industry. Illustrator and CorelDRAW are the industry leaders.

Inkscape might be doing better if the SVG graphics format was more commonly supported. The latest desktop web browsers support SVG images to some degree. Plug ins are required for older versions of Internet Explorer, like those running on all those Win XP machines so many people are still using. Mobile device support for SVG is spotty at best.

That brings up the persistence of Flash. From a designer's perspective there are no good alternatives to Flash. To get a lot of the same visuals and interactive function one can place it a SWF, a designer would have to hand code a bunch of JavaScript & CSS to manipulate "HTML 5" Canvas and SVG elements -things that are not well supported by older web browsers like Internet Explorer 8 and earlier.

Of course Adobe is beta testing its Muse application, which would work as a HTML 5 replacement for Flash. But it looks like Adobe won't sell it with a perpetual license. They want you to rent it for a never ending monthly fee. Ultimately they want all Adobe customers to go the Creative Cloud route.
 

signswi

New Member
Install VirtualBox + Ubuntu if you want to use it on Windows then. That said...Adobe has me. It's just a fact of business, their stuff is so superior and universal. At least they don't rest on their laurels, CS2+ have each been really major upgrades.
 

signmeup

New Member
Unfortunately the open source version is apparently available only for Linux. Windows users have to get the paid versions, now called Xara Photo & Graphic Designer 7 and Xara Designer Pro 7. They cost $89 and $299 respectively. Despite the claims of Xara having the fastest performance I'm far more concerned about creative capabilities, quality of output and file support throughout the graphics industry. Illustrator and CorelDRAW are the industry leaders.
The red high lighted part is the problem with Xara in a nutshell. It is capable of doing things that niether Corel nor Illustrator can do but it has very poor compatibility with other programs... I think mainly because if a program can't do a particular function, it can't import a file that has that function in it. Don't let the $89 price fool you... Xara is very powerful. (it even makes websites, and it comes with 1000 fonts, many of which are quite nice) It just isn't able to play with other software.
 
Top