Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Adobe no longer licenses Pantone colors to be used freely Photoshop

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 137 posts

Re: Adobe no longer licenses Pantone colors to be used freely Photoshop

#91

Post by moolcool »

noirscape wrote: post #74
moolcool wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but this is a very obtuse way to look at this problem. "Oh, the data is still there. You just don't have any way to read it". Like that's fantastic if you're a massive pedant, but if you actually want to use your files using with tools you used to create them, it's functionally identical to the file being corrupted. Doubly so if the application is some cloud bullshit that you can't keep old/functional vers…

Data corruption usually refers to actual data loss. The "data is still there but you just can't view it" isn't corruption, it just means your tools aren't up to the task. You can still download older versions of Adobes apps, it's right there in the ARS article even (Creative Cloud lets you download older versions of PS, InDesign and the like), so your second argument about cloud bullshit doesn't go up there either. A…

I'm sorry, but this is just mental gymnastics to justify dark patterns in modern software development and distribution. If I create a file on Photoshop on Monday, I should be able to open it on Friday. Period. Even if I used a feature I used "wasn't meant for me", as if that matters.

This is like pushing a firmware update to DVD players that makes certain disks unreadable. "Actually Grandma, your DVDs aren't corrupted. There's just a licensing dispute between Technicolor and the DVD standards consortium, making your existing tools no longer up to the task. The data is all still there on the discs!"

Re: Adobe no longer licenses Pantone colors to be used freely Photoshop

#93

Post by bborud »

bayindirh wrote: post #61
noirscape wrote: post #52

The title here is slightly misleading; Adobe refused to renew it's licensing deal with Pantone because the main way Adobes products are being used these days is digital art & design. There's no incentive for Adobe to keep paying licensing fees to Pantone (not to mention that the Adobe version of the plugin hasn't been updated since 2011 and is alledgedly very inaccurate and incomplete), so they're cutting the feature…

I think the main problem is how Adobe worded the change. They could have written "We didn't renew our license with Pantone because it was eating into our profits, so you are on your own now. We also changed said colors to black, to make it easier to spot what you are missing. Have a nice day". Instead they've written some corporate speak, and let the thing roll by itself.

I'm no fan of Adobe, but to me this sounds like a completely legitimate business decision.

Of course they are not going to pass on the savings to the user, except perhaps indirectly by having a way of easing the shareholder pressure to increase revenue per user, and thereby being able to push license price increases into the future. (I don't know this is how it would play out, but it is a possibility).

Removing something they are bundling from Pantone today also gives Pantone an incentive to build a direct relationship to the users, which may actually be an opportunity in disguise for Pantone. Or perhaps not: Pantone might find that they are worse off if the market turns out to be smaller in terms of profit potential.

(Disclosure: I don't use Pantone. However I do use color palettes from various manufacturers of paints. Very occasionally. And my requirements aren't really at the level where I need to use a calibrated toolchain. I make pictures, I spray paint, and if it roughly looks like what I saw on screen I'm happy.)

Re: Adobe no longer licenses Pantone colors to be used freely Photoshop

#94

Post by bborud »

amelius wrote: post #63
captainmuon wrote: post #7

I wonder why they don't just charge more for the dyes (or the dye licenses, I think they are not making them themselves). I think it is bizarre that you should need a license to write down in a file "use this-and-that tube of color for printing this shape". If anything, they should be paying Adobe for including their colors. Maybe this is a possible evolution? Third party ink producers create photoshop add-ins allowi…

I think their businessmodel simply expired. They have to think of something new or end up like Kodak.

Do you think their business model expired or do you think the products and services they provide are obsolete?

Re: Adobe no longer licenses Pantone colors to be used freely Photoshop

#95

Post by brudgers »

moolcool wrote: post #65
WillAdams wrote: post #41

Most folks who used PANTONE spot colours had no business doing so --- their gaudy layout w/ a dozen spot colours would never be printed w/ that many plates, and some production person always had to get permission to convert them into the process equivalents. For those few jobs where it is actually getting printed as a spot colour? The job would still print fine --- just send along a PANTONE colour chip, or ask your p…

This is a real Steve Jobs "You're holding it wrong" way to look at this problem. This is an extremely anti-consumer move, and you can't blame the users for it.

Pantone products are professional/B2B.

Re: Adobe no longer licenses Pantone colors to be used freely Photoshop

#96

Post by sizzzzlerz »

bearmode wrote: post #31
captainmuon wrote: post #7

I wonder why they don't just charge more for the dyes (or the dye licenses, I think they are not making them themselves). I think it is bizarre that you should need a license to write down in a file "use this-and-that tube of color for printing this shape". If anything, they should be paying Adobe for including their colors. Maybe this is a possible evolution? Third party ink producers create photoshop add-ins allowi…

I used to work as a GD professionally, Pantones/spot colours are incredibly important in the industry. Process printing (usually CMYK) is great, but often just not accurate enough, and I really doubt Coca Cola or whoever else would be too pleased with you swapping out their pantone colour for an alternative.

Just think of the companies whose brand is represent by color. Coca Cola is certainly one but there's John Deere green, UPS brown, Caterpillar yellow, T-mobile pink, and Home Depot orange. I'm sure there are many international firms as well. Color is just as important to these companies as is their logo and they want to be damn sure it is represented accurately everywhere.

Re: Adobe no longer licenses Pantone colors to be used freely Photoshop

#97

Post by dr-detroit »

bearmode wrote: post #31
captainmuon wrote: post #7

I wonder why they don't just charge more for the dyes (or the dye licenses, I think they are not making them themselves). I think it is bizarre that you should need a license to write down in a file "use this-and-that tube of color for printing this shape". If anything, they should be paying Adobe for including their colors. Maybe this is a possible evolution? Third party ink producers create photoshop add-ins allowi…

I used to work as a GD professionally, Pantones/spot colours are incredibly important in the industry. Process printing (usually CMYK) is great, but often just not accurate enough, and I really doubt Coca Cola or whoever else would be too pleased with you swapping out their pantone colour for an alternative.

No post body was provided.

Re: Adobe no longer licenses Pantone colors to be used freely Photoshop

#98

Post by awkward »

bayindirh wrote: post #61
noirscape wrote: post #52

The title here is slightly misleading; Adobe refused to renew it's licensing deal with Pantone because the main way Adobes products are being used these days is digital art & design. There's no incentive for Adobe to keep paying licensing fees to Pantone (not to mention that the Adobe version of the plugin hasn't been updated since 2011 and is alledgedly very inaccurate and incomplete), so they're cutting the feature…

I think the main problem is how Adobe worded the change. They could have written "We didn't renew our license with Pantone because it was eating into our profits, so you are on your own now. We also changed said colors to black, to make it easier to spot what you are missing. Have a nice day". Instead they've written some corporate speak, and let the thing roll by itself.

It's bad communication as a media play. Adobe drops the licensing in the most expedient and user hostile way possible, and puts the blame on Pantone.

Long term, this might be a better model for Pantone - they're building a direct relationship with the print shops and other businesses that actually need this feature. Short term, a lot of users just treated this as an alternate color picker and Adobe is trying to manage who gets the flack.

Re: Adobe no longer licenses Pantone colors to be used freely Photoshop

#100

Post by aliqot »

postpawl wrote: post #56
pclmulqdq wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They charge designers $X000 for a book or a set of paint chips with swatches of all the colors, so I assume they are trying to continue that revenue stream in a subscription-based way.

Linus tech tips did a video on this recently: https://youtu.be/JF8UziDHqZo The one they got was more like $10k.

That channel sure loves to waste money for the sake of "OMG LOOK $$$ WE GOT IT". Just stick to the tech and stay in your lane. This isn't what we meant when we said 'more RGB stuff'.
Post reply on HN