Comments on: Adobe Announces Photoshop Express Beta

By: Jamie

Jamie — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:18:17 +0000

http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2008/03/a_note_about_ps.html

By: Nicole Young

Nicole Young — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:24:42 +0000

It looks like the fine-print only refers to images that are made public, however, it is enough to keep me from displaying my photos on their site. I checked it out and do think that it’s nice, and liked how they mirrored some of the style from Lightroom, but really have no use for it.

By: liltechguy

liltechguy — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:06:28 +0000

I’ve been keeping up with some of the Flex/Flash technologies for a little while, so technically speaking I wasn’t too surprised with how Adobe approached it and the ease of use. However, even being familiar with the potentials of Flex, I am still wowed at how polished this appears to be. I will definitely be reviewing and writing about this, from a consumers standpoint, soon.

By: Rudi

Rudi — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 09:29:32 +0000

Re: Jamie: “if they find an image they really like, they can pay a fair market price for it.”

What he said! We paid what they considered a fair price for their software, I see no reason why they should be any different…

By: Jamie

Jamie — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 01:19:07 +0000

@Scott: no doubt, I think NatGeo had a similar stipulation with one of their contests. They changed it after a bunch of people complained. I know it’s just a license and not a transfer, but if they find an image they really like, they can pay a fair market price for it.

By: David Dugan

David Dugan — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 00:29:09 +0000

Scott, it’s good to see you chiming in here as the voice of reason, but I’m not sure how you can possibly read “perpetual, irrevocable, and fully sublicensable license to use, distribute, derive revenue or other remuneration from” as just Adobe wanting to license the images for their own use (which I frankly wouldn’t agree to anyway). The phrases “Sublicensable” and “derive revenue or other renumeration” are absolutely unconscionable. Adobe wants a license to sell my photos? Um, no thanks.

Call it hysteria if you like, but I don’t think we’re making mountains out of molehills here.

By: Howard

Howard — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 00:20:34 +0000

If you want to try online photoediting, without the image hosting dimension, Picnik is worth a look (www.picnik.com). This is embedded in Flickr (you can store your pictures there) and has some useful tools. There are file size limitations (2800 pixels) and other constraints, but I don’t see anything in the Adobe announcement (apart from the branding of course) that offers more.