Spearhead

<blockquote> <p>It's an old IDE system</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> This doesn't matter for an external drive.<br> </p> <blockquote> <p>I was thinking about a case but was wondering if I'd have a problem writing to a SSD drive from this machine. </p> </blockquote> <p> <br> As long as it's USB, there shouldn't be a problem.</p>

<blockquote> <p>i have the 2014 version now...i was hoping for a newer version</p> </blockquote> <p><br />CC2014 was released less than a month ago. Do you expect Adobe to update every week?</p>

<p>If it's external storage, it's not going to be any of those for an external drive. If it's a Pentium 4 system with its original interfaces, it's likely that it's going to be USB.</p> <p>Assuming it is USB, you can buy a housing at very low cost and just install the SSD in it. It's very easy. With a dock, you don't even have to use screws.</p>

<p>An interesting switch to the subscription model is easily found with television. Years ago, you bought the hardware including an antenna and you got everything that was broadcast. Now, virtually all of the content available must be bought via cable or over the internet with monthly fees, and on the cable side, lots of services have to be bought separately from the basic access. With movies, it's moved from ownership of physical media to temporary access via a service provider. I pay Comcast and Netflix on a monthly basis far more than I pay Adobe and for access of somewhat less value than Adobe provides.</p> <p>There are alternatives to cable for some content, but many of them have monthly access fees as well. There are free ways to watch a small percentage of content, but certain content isn't available without a subscription unless it's bootleg.</p>

<p>It's not egos, it's answers you don't like.<br /> <br />It doesn't matter whether or not you charge the brides from a usage perspective given what you have said so far. It does matter if you are marketing your blog with those photos, but you haven't said anything about that. However...</p> <p>You don't have the rights to use the photos. The brides don't have the rights to the photos to give you unless the photographer granted them those rights, which is unlikely.</p> <p>Why don't you answer the question at the end of Matt's post for us? That would make it clear what your intentions are.</p>

<p>Meeting interesting people and going to lots of shows for free.</p>

<blockquote> <p>I believe Sony's electronics business will definitely recover from this recession. </p> </blockquote> <p> <br> There's no recession issue in Sony's business. If there was, Samsung, Apple and Vizio wouldn't have already finished them off. There's little left for them at this point.</p>

<p>SDHC refers to the size, not the speed. Class 4 is the speed indicator. If you buy a Class 10 card, it will be faster. If you buy a UHS-1 card, it should be a lot faster. However, this doesn't matter if you are not filling the buffer shooting stills. Until you fill the buffer, the card speed is irrelevant.</p> <p>You can tell if the buffer is full if you can't shoot any more. The buffer holds around 17 RAW shots on a 6D.</p>

<p>Class 4 is very slow. However, unless you're filling your buffer, this shouldn't matter. The CF card you used could also be a factor.</p>

<p>If you do have to re-install, you don't use product keys, Nik/Google doesn't use them anymore. If you didn't get a personalized download URL after the Google acquisition, you need to email Google for the new download URL. Once you have that URL, you should save it as it seems to be permanent.</p>

<p>To William's points I would add that you should buy or rent a much faster printer, probably meaning a commercial dye sub printer.</p>

<p>People in the financial world are talking about a breakup and sale of divisions at Sony, or at least an early replacement of the guy who was supposed to turn it around as CEO. Cameras are less than 10% of their business. They've lost their place in all consumer electronics categories except game consoles, and they have been losing money on the PS4. Samsung, which pretty much took their place in the consumer electronics world, has a market cap that is more than 10X Sony's, which is not a good sign for Sony. Vizio zoomed past Sony in the TV market when Vizio had fewer total employees than Sony had people in admin jobs in the US.</p> <p>Sony hasn't had a winning product other than the money-losing PS4 in years. It's not a good sign.</p>

<blockquote> <p>when I pay for software I want to own it</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> You never really own it. You have a license. Have you read the terms of every software license carefully? I don't know anyone who has, except maybe in the government.<br /></p>

<blockquote> <ul> <li>connect a network drive to one of the router ports.</li> <li>connect an external drive to one of the computers and "share" it over the network</li> </ul> </blockquote> <p>I highly recommend you try this with Lightroom and report back. You don't seem to have tried it.</p> <p>For the OP, you can't put a Lightroom catalog on a network drive. The best option other than what Andrew suggests is Dropbox.</p>

<blockquote> <p>Do you really want a stranger coming to your home</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> It's pretty simple to go to a coffee shop. This is true with CL also, and is how I sell everything now. It's completely safe and the obvious solution.<br> </p> <blockquote> <p>I've had not so great experiences with Craig's List where people either never show up to agreed-to meetings or just keep lowballing. </p> </blockquote> <p> <br> I always insist on a phone conversation first. I have never had someone not show up, and lowballing has been less than 5% in the few instances it's been an issue.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.thefuturesvoid.net/">EMA</a> in San Francisco.</p> <p><img src="http://spirer.com/images/ema2.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="525" /></p>

<blockquote> <p>There is also the issue of being dependent on the "cloud" and your available (or unavailable) internet connection to use the program</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> This is minor. You only have to "check in" occasionally.<br> <br> </p> <blockquote> <p>There is effectively no competition to Photoshop</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> So go on Kickstarter or Indiegogo and raise money for your own competition to it. It's that easy. Of course if it's that easy, someone out there must be doing it, right?<br> </p> <blockquote> <p>That alternative simply has to be created.</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> You too. What's stopping you from using Kickstarter and starting something to compete?</p>

<blockquote> <p>High relative both to the cost of comparable items</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> Then buy one of them. Why bother if you can use something else?</p>

<blockquote> <p>I'm saying folks have the right to say the cost is high</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> Hight relative to what? The competition? It costs a lot more than Picasa, sure. The value it brings? If there's no alternative, the cost can't be considered too high, it's either do it or lose the value.</p>

<blockquote> <p>I suppose if you never plan on upgrading your camera body or buying a newer lens, then your premise is true.</p> </blockquote> <p>This brings up an interesting financial issue. Let's assume someone is keeping a Canon 5DMkiii body (or an equivalent Nikon body) for five years. We know from posts here that there are people who buy these bodies who are not professional photographers. The body cost the photographer $3200 plus tax in many cases, so let's call it $3500. This is not including any other equipment such as lenses, which will probably be kept longer. That's $58/month. Some people may choose to keep the camera body as a backup, but let's say it can be sold for about $750 (based on actual sales I can find here.) That makes it $46. Let's also assume that the same person replaces their computer every five years. Some people go longer and some go shorter, so that's a safe average. Let's say they buy a mid-range iMac of MacBook for around $1500. We're ignoring the monitor if that's separate, hard drives, calibration device, and printer. That's $25/month. If they sell the five year old computer, it will go for around $400. That makes it $18/month. That makes for $64/month at a minimum for a camera and computer. Photoshop CC adds $10/month to that.<br> Seems like most of one's money is going to hardware that is eventually going to die and/or be replaced, and a small amount to maintaining up-to-date Photoshop and Lightroom. Software is now 13% of total cost of maintaining a photography setup excluding all sorts of other expenses, so this is absolute best case. Of course we see people here who spend $3500 on computers and buy three bodies that they replace. And people who upgrade with every model. So the average could be lower. In other words, it's a lot of complaining about a fairly small piece of the pie.</p>

<blockquote> <p>I said 'won't', not 'didn't'. That automatically makes it a prediction. What kind of data are you thinking of?</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> "Might" is a prediction. "Won't" is not a prediction. Data that shows that "all the others" are in this one group. If you don't have it, "all" is mighty presumptuous.</p>

<blockquote> <p>All the others won't put up with it.</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> "All?" Plenty of people have subscribed to the $9.95 deal. Can you cite a source for your data?</p>

<p>What happened to Shun's suggestions? Or is the only test going to be this one, not very useful photo?</p>

<blockquote> <p>Very few photographers truly understand Photoshop in depth or use the majority of its features.</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> Is there a survey somewhere that shows this? Also, it's common for comprehensive applications to have features that won't be used by every, or even most, users. Word is a good example. Small special-purpose apps for each feature set would create chaos.</p>

<p>That $9.95 includes Lightroom also.</p>