 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / June 2007Sadly it's time to move on
I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my new Canon Rebel XTi so it is with great regrets I will be moving on to something else, probably Lightroom for which I have found a crack for. I will lose no sleep about using it free of charge since it is a product of the very same people who made the software I dutifully paid for and expected to be supported for at least some time to come, as it is, I am in a dead end, frozen in time. Jean > I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my new > Canon Rebel XTi so it is with great regrets I will be moving on to something [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Jean If you were a registered user of RSP, then you should have received a free copy of Lightroom anyway! Adobe bought RSP with no intentions of furthering it or supporting it, so there should be no surprise at this point... > > I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my new > > Canon Rebel XTi so it is with great regrets I will be moving on to something [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > furthering it or supporting it, so there should be no surprise at this > point... Not true, only the few who were in a beta test program did get a free copy, the others were given a $100 discount just like everyone else in the world who had never purchased anything, no special treatment, no incentive, nada. >>> I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my > new [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > the others were given a $100 discount just like everyone else in the world > who had never purchased anything, no special treatment, no incentive, nada. You might want to double check that!  Signaturejohn mcwilliams Just did... do you have a link I could not see? Jean jean wrote: > "Mike Hamilton" <mike.hamilton@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de > news:1182356900.369661.172150@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com... [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > the others were given a $100 discount just like everyone else in the world > who had never purchased anything, no special treatment, no incentive, nada. You might want to double check that! Signaturejohn mcwilliams > Just did... do you have a link I could not see? > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > You might want to double check that! Given your sentiments expressed elsewhere, fergeddaboudit. Signaturelsmft > Not true, only the few who were in a beta test program did get a free copy, > the others were given a $100 discount just like everyone else in the world > who had never purchased anything, no special treatment, no incentive, nada. I have my Lightroom with an edu discount legitimately. It was $80, and I consider it worth it (my copy of Photoshop CS2 was bought by an employee and sent to me for $50, an even better deal). If you're not using Lightroom commercially, going for an edu discount doesn't hurt Macromedia. > > > I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my > new [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > the others were given a $100 discount just like everyone else in the world > who had never purchased anything, no special treatment, no incentive, nada. If you PURCHASED it, you were entitled to a free, fully functional copy of the non-beta Lightroom 1.0. > I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my new > Canon Rebel XTi Such is life with closed software --- noone can extend it. > so it is with great regrets I will be moving on to something > else, probably Lightroom for which I have found a crack for. I will lose no > sleep about using it free of charge since it is a product of the very same > people who made the software I dutifully paid for and expected to be > supported for at least some time to come, as it is, I am in a dead end, > frozen in time. I understand the feeling, but you did not buy support, you only bought a license to use RawShooter Premium as it is --- any updates etc. are done out of the good heart of the publishers/programmers/owners (or to attract new customers). Obviously, you could use Lightroom on Linux for free without resorting to illegal measures, as this is specifically allowed (at least it was last time I looked.) However, I would urge you not to resort to illegal measures. First, you are easily tracked and found --- even if you hide your email address, just look at the header of your posting. They include these: | Message-ID: <t5ednWmF2rCPs-TbnZ2dnUVZ_oCmnZ2d@giganews.com> | X-Trace: sv3-Up2cFG6NNiTO8zJbW7G50hB77BEbcs2W5VTkwXKk/zmVf6fXYU4Yok3rKps6Xk2TnbIe3RhxM6H/3ZC!MZKYAWKTwfApdPZW/6Hd5sLZnJ2LUlf6sn3QwxqpAB7oSQXkg2fouNasPXqR9Pxc71b7x8Pq | X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com | X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html | X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers | X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Be assured that giganews _can_ track their subscribers down to the second and the IP address. There is no anonymity on the internet. So if the people who sell Lightroom are reading this (or get a tip-off) and feel nasty, they may be able to get a court of competent jurisdiction to give a seize and search order (after all, RIAA can do so, too). Actually, if someone wants to be nasty, you are in breach of http://www.giganews.com/legal/aup.html already: | Altered Headers | Falsifying header lines to obscure the originating server, to | attribute a post to someone else, to falsely indicate moderator | approval, or to make an original post look like a followup are | serious abuses of our service and will result in immediate account | termination. The domain "find.it" actually exists and belongs to "Hypergrid s.r.l." in Pavia, Italy. You have (most likely) no reason to even suspect you may use email addresses from that domain, any more than you may use "try_to@microsoft.com" or "try_to@oracle.com" or "try_to@giganews.com". Having said that --- you may be interested in looking into Bibble (www.bibblelabs.com) to see if that does what you need. Yes, it is closed software, too, but you can extend it (plugins) and they do not look like being bought any time soon. -Wolfgang Well, I guess they could find out who I am and take me to court for admitting planning to use their software free of charge, something I have not done yet BTW, so I will leave it up to them to prosecute me or not, if they think their lawer costs will be less than what they would get for a legal copy, even at full price. I think their morals are as elastic as mine, when they had a sale on Rawshooter, they must have know they would be selling the whole kit and kaboodle to Adobe within a year. This is like buying a toaster on sale only to find out bread size has changed and the toaster is unusable. In software, it is expected to have some form of fixes for bugs or support of new equipment which does not require a rewrite. Just before they sold out, they sent me a patch to handle a 30D, a company with morals could have continued support for new cameras for existing customer rather than leaving them holding the bag. Another BTW, I never received any e-mail from them offering to be part of a beta program, even after I sent them a number of e-mails to get my then new 30D to work with the version I have. All this has convinced me NOT to use Lightroom, at any price, even free, after all what guarantee do I have they will support that for any lenght of time? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me... Jean > > I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my new > > Canon Rebel XTi [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > | Message-ID: <t5ednWmF2rCPs-TbnZ2dnUVZ_oCmnZ2d@giganews.com> > | X-Trace: sv3-Up2cFG6NNiTO8zJbW7G50hB77BEbcs2W5VTkwXKk/zmVf6fXYU4Yok3rKps6Xk2TnbIe3Rhx M6H/3ZC!MZKYAWKTwfApdPZW/6Hd5sLZnJ2LUlf6sn3QwxqpAB7oSQXkg2fouNasPXqR9Pxc71b7 x8Pq > | X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com > | X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > -Wolfgang > All this has convinced me NOT to use Lightroom, at any price, even free, > after all what guarantee do I have they will support that for any lenght of > time? Lightroom is owned by the company that bought your program, not by the people who made your program. Adobe/Macromedia tend to play fairly but rather expensively unless you qualify for an educational discount (or have a friend who can). > Well, I guess they could find out who I am and take me to court for > admitting planning to use their software free of charge, something I have > not done yet BTW, They probably wait till you have done so. > so I will leave it up to them to prosecute me or not, if > they think their lawer costs will be less than what they would get for a > legal copy, even at full price. You know, many companies actually have lawyers as salaried employees ... and others may calculate that you will have to pay their lawyers and other costs once you loose the process. And then there are individuals within companies. And individuals may be agressive, irrational (from a cost7benefit perspective), hateful, etc. They may even think to make an example out of someone illegally using their programs, "pour encourager les autres". > I think their morals are as elastic as mine, Sorry, morality does not come into it. Lawabiding is thge point. > when they had a sale on Rawshooter, they must have know they would be > selling the whole kit and kaboodle to Adobe within a year. No, they may well not have known. Especially with companies that are publically traded, almost noone except highest management knows anything about such movements, until it's done. Sales people are not highest management, even if they organize sales. See "insider trading". > This is like buying a toaster on sale only > to find out bread size has changed and the toaster is unusable. You bought a different size of bread. You knew, or should have reasonably known, that new bread sizes appear all the time and that toasters must be tweaked to work with them, but that they will usually work a long, long time with the old type of bread you still can use. Blaming the toaster company for your bread buying habits is somewhat strange. It may be an American thing though, like drying cats in microwaves. > In software, it is expected to have some form of fixes for bugs or > support of new equipment which does not require a rewrite. Muhahaha. In software, customers are expected to be happy that the crummy broken software does run sometimes, does not crash every 4 minutes and does not scramble the hard drive on _every_ crash. > Just before they sold out, they sent me a patch to handle a 30D, a > company with morals could have continued support for new cameras for > existing customer rather than leaving them holding the bag. Companies do not have morals. People may have morals. Welcome to the real world. And be thankful of the 30D patch. They had no obligation to furnish you with it, unless the contract you signed with them says anything else. Anyway, and this will hurt, if it was free (as in speech, not as in beer) software, you would have the source code and could either patch it yourself, or get a patch from someone else who already did the work (because that someone did also want their camera to work), or pay (singly or as a group of XTi owners) some programmer to create such a patch for you. > Another BTW, I never received any e-mail from them offering to be part of a > beta program, even after I sent them a number of e-mails to get my then new > 30D to work with the version I have. So? > All this has convinced me NOT to use Lightroom, at any price, even free, > after all what guarantee do I have they will support that for any lenght of > time? None, of course, unless you sigh a contract with them, stating it differently. [fullquote removed --- please do not top post, we are not playing jeopardy. It's a pain in the posterior. Leave just enough context for each point and answer below] -Wolfgang PS: Please DO refrain from using find.it as a domain. Use @invalid or @example or @example.com. Dhese domains are there for exactly that kind of usage. See RFC 2606: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2606.txt > I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my new > Canon Rebel XTi so it is with great regrets I will be moving on to something [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > supported for at least some time to come, as it is, I am in a dead end, > frozen in time. What about the possibility that if you (first back-up, then) opened the Rawshooter.exe file in a hex editor, found ascii text for a model that you didn't have (say 300d) and overwrote (must not change byte size of original exe) that with 400d, then saved the changes. Of course if you had the 300d and the 400d then you could keep separate copies (named differently) of rawshooter.exe in the original directory, and use the one you needed at the time without problems. While you might theoretically be stung by "reverse engineering" breach of EULA, that would likely only happen if you distributed copies, which you can't - or shouldn't anyway. I doubt that a software vendor would initiate prosecution on anyone who "needed" to reverse-engineer a product for the reasons you state - because they'd get pummeled. Writing a "patch" and distributing it wouldn't be seen kindly, or it would have probably been done already. I think the difference is the way each camera encodes it's RAW format, the program probably chokes on the 400XTi because the file size is not what it expects so merely changing the camera name is most likely not enough. Jean > > I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my new > > Canon Rebel XTi so it is with great regrets I will be moving on to something [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Writing a "patch" and distributing it wouldn't be seen kindly, or it > would have probably been done already. > I think the difference is the way each camera encodes it's RAW format, the > program probably chokes on the 400XTi because the file size is not what it > expects so merely changing the camera name is most likely not enough. > > Jean You might be surprised. It works with Nikon compressed raw files for unsupported models, except it doesn't read metadata properly so some in-camera settings for w/b etc is lost, but that's no big deal. >> I think the difference is the way each camera encodes it's RAW format, >> the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > it doesn't read metadata properly so some in-camera settings for w/b etc > is lost, but that's no big deal. Hmmm, managed to get 400D cr2 loaded, was looking good, then splat - garbled. So bad luck there. >I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my new > Canon Rebel XTi so it is with great regrets I will be moving on to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Jean Your XTi comes packaged with software that will manipulate your raw images quite nicely, not only avoiding your inexplicable justification for resorting to copyright infringement but to freely admitting it in a public forum as well. It's is included in your purchase price. Are you saying that Adobe has provided no upgrade path from rawshooter premium to lightroom? Bet they have. After all they discontinued rawshooter a year ago. Even when you purchase adobe products outright there are upgrade costs when they release new versions. > >I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my new > > Canon Rebel XTi so it is with great regrets I will be moving on to [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > resorting to copyright infringement but to freely admitting it in a public > forum as well. It's is included in your purchase price. I am using it since Rawshooter does not support the 400XTi > Are you saying that Adobe has provided no upgrade path from rawshooter > premium to lightroom? Bet they have. After all they discontinued rawshooter > a year ago. The "upgrade path" was to purchase Lightroom at the introductory price of $199, same price everyone gets... > Even when you purchase adobe products outright there are upgrade costs when > they release new versions. I am not asking for a new version, just support for a new camera with a different file size and possibly different encoding, they did release a patched copy which worked with the Canon 30D a couple of months before they sold the technology and the programmers to Adobe, that was free of charge. Jean >> >I have been a happy RawShooter Premium user but it doesn't support my >> >new [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Jean But surely you understand that there's no market driven motive for them to go to the expense of developing and releasing updates to a discontinued program, least of all in order to support cameras that didn't exist at the time the program was discontinued? [snip] > The "upgrade path" was to purchase Lightroom at the introductory price of > $199, same price everyone gets... [snip] Not true. The other people here who have been telling you different are right. See: http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc32eb1 -- Barry Pearson http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/photography/ > [snip] > > The "upgrade path" was to purchase Lightroom at the introductory price of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > See: > http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc32eb1 I will take a good look at these links but when I contacted Adobe last march, they basicaly told me the upgrade path was to purchase Lightroom at the "sale" price of $199, period. Not needing any new "functions" since my copy of RawShooter Premium was working fine, I let it be until I tried to use it on my newer camera. Now wondering why did their customer service department led me astray??? Jean >> [snip] >> > The "upgrade path" was to purchase Lightroom at the introductory price [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Jean Perhaps you didn't provide the correct information for them to see that you were indeed a registered Rawshooter Premium user? Those links do provide a means by which to get your copy of lightroom in the event you did not receive an email with instructions. I'd imagine if you do what the link says and provide the right information you'll get what you're looking for! > >> [snip] > >> > The "upgrade path" was to purchase Lightroom at the introductory price [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > receive an email with instructions. I'd imagine if you do what the link says > and provide the right information you'll get what you're looking for! Well, after being led down the garden path for a couple of hours on the phone, there is only a free upgrade if RawShooter was purchased in a very specific time period which was about two months before Adobe purchased Pixmantec, outside of this time frame, nada. Jean > Well, after being led down the garden path for a couple of hours on the > phone, there is only a free upgrade if RawShooter was purchased in a very > specific time period which was about two months before Adobe purchased > Pixmantec, outside of this time frame, nada. Well, maybe it's time to stop complaining here, go take some photos, and find some software that meets your needs. Best of luck. > > Well, after being led down the garden path for a couple of hours on the > > phone, there is only a free upgrade if RawShooter was purchased in a very [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Best of luck. Will do... I will keep using RawShooter for my 30D and use Canon's Digital Photo Professional until I can find something that handles both cameras (probably DXO) Jean >> > "Barry Pearson" <news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> a écrit dans le > message [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > Jean Ah so turns out it's the same as if you switch to one of their programs from a competitor product? Or is it pro-rated like when you upgrade from an earlier version of one of their existing products? Either way you're still not required to pay full new purchase price to get Lightroom though correct? joe > >> > "Barry Pearson" <news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> a écrit dans le > > message [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > > joe Nope, it's $99 if you can qualify to get the educational discount, $199 for the french version (ends today) or $299 for the regular priced version, at least that is what I got from their web site. Jean >[snip] >> The "upgrade path" was to purchase Lightroom at the introductory price of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >See: >http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc32eb1 Which is contradicted by http://www.adobe.com/special/pixmantec/ Apparently even Adobe isn't clear about who get the free Lightroom |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.