I feel it's just your classic money grab by someone to show increased profits in a board room. And they have taken something that used to be in the Creative Cloud subscription and removed it and made it a separate subscription suite.Ĭ.
But what has happened now is that our Photoshop and Creative Cloud All Apps package is now a lessor package than what we used to get. Understandably why, given this substance3d app now in Adobe skinned software is simply amazing.
Now they have purchased Substance3d and decided to completely drop 3D from Photoshop. Adobe has always failed at 3d offerings in the past but not without trying, and therefore getting us to try try try to learn to use their 3d offerings within photoshop and illustrator. But they were always seperate apps, not seperate collections. The couple apps they never brought into it, framemaker and captivate were always a strange decision to most inquiring why. Now you got ALL apps, one of the great features you get to make it worth the annual payments. When they moved to subscription plans they combined many of their seperate "collections" and used that combining to sell the idea of this subscription format. But I'm 100% with you that these should be included for a number of reasons.Ī. It takes a lot of money and time to shift that, and its unlikely to come around anytime soon at the same quality level.They are using Creative Cloud which is installed on all our machines to advertise the new substance 3d products, and give us easy access to the trials. People looking for alternate software, can do so with the suggestions, but if people are hoping to suddenly get an alternative to an industry standard then think again. Regarding your comment on them being the standard, thats absolutely the case they are - I agree, just like photoshop is the standard.
Some are some are not - this is even pointed out on substance source Hence my choice of words originally ) Its the same thing, I dont think on an international forum it really matters to be that pedantic about choice of words But in case it was not clear, yes I meant prodedural materials (Although if we are being pedantic, I should point out not all substances are procedural. Saying "fully procedural" is no different than a material that adapts, through procedures etc, to the surface/model at hand.
0 kommentar(er)
