Adobe defends Photoshop for iPad after receiving a wave of poor reviews

nanoguy

TS Addict
Staff member

Earlier this week, Adobe took the stage at its MAX Conference to announce the much-awaited Photoshop for iPad, which is the company's adaptation of the desktop app tailored for tablets.

The new app is built from the same codebase as the "real Photoshop," and has many of the most commonly-used features. However, creative professionals think it doesn't quite measure up to the hype, and slammed it with negative reviews. Photoshop for iPad sits at below 2.5 stars as of writing and in some regions like the U.K. it's as low as 1.7 stars.

While it shouldn't be a surprise that the first version of the app doesn't quite offer the same amount of functionality present in the desktop version, some people took to Twitter to express their disappointment. The overall sentiment is that Adobe overpromised and underdelivered, missing many features that are already present in other iPad apps like Procreate and Affinity Designer.

As evident from many of the tweets and reviews, a lot designers expected Adobe to perfectly mirror the desktop Photoshop experience on iPad. Instead, they were surprised to find the company delivered what can be described as a work in progress that doesn't have the ability to incorporate plugins, among many other limitations.

Following the negative reception, Adobe’s chief product officer, Scott Belsky took to Twitter to defend the release. He noted the company chose to come up with a minimum viable product (MVP) and then build from there, which inevitably leads to a long journey where most people will feel the experience is too limited for their use case.

Belsky argues that keeping the app in development until it reached feature parity with software developed over three decades would have been much less productive. His point is that it's better to start with fundamentals like "perfect PSD support" and a tablet-friendly user interface before adding more advanced features.

He does, however, admit that Adobe didn't do a great job of managing everyone's expectations.

It's unlikely the company will port every feature from the desktop Photoshop to the mobile app, and some people have pointed out that Photoshop for iPad could have more success if it was marketed as a companion app. Others have suggested that asking for $10 per month for the privilege is making it a hard sell for people who would otherwise be fine with the limitations.

Permalink to story.

 

umbala

TS Maniac
Adobe can try to explain away their problems all they want. The fact is that they pushed out a half baked product as soon as possible in order to start raking in subscription profits. That's the only reason, period. Since you can only "rent" Adobe products now instead of buying them, it's really in their interest to start charging the subscription fee as soon as they can.
 

captaincranky

TechSpot Addict
[The new app is built from the same codebase as the "real Photoshop," and has many of the most commonly-used features. However, creative professionals think it doesn't quite measure up to the hype, and slammed it with negative reviews. Photoshop for iPad sits at below 2.5 stars as of writing and in some regions like the U.K. it's as low as 1.7 stars
First off, you have to consider people using a tablet for "serious imaging work", defective as well.. IMO, if you're not sitting at @ 31" 2K or 4K 10 bit color depth monitor, your heart's really not in it anyway.

Next, "Photoshop Elements" already exists, and it's "built off the same code base as Photoshop", as well.

The question becomes, is Adobe playing, "let's see how stupid our customers are really"? IMO, that's exactly what they're doing.

Photoshop Elements is Adobe's last "buy on DVD without a subscription" program. (Although the movie editing "Premier Elements", is also available on DVD)

So, it's easy to see that since they already had an impaired, (or "crippled" if you will) version of Photoshop available, why couldn't they just port that to a USB stick, charge the people $99.95, the same as they do for PSE, and be done with it..

Both PSE and "Lightroom", (the formerly on DVD but now subscription pro app), have cataloging functions), Photoshop itself comes with the simpler, (and supposedly free), "Adobe Bridge".

Given that the average megapixel count of modern DSLRs and mirrorless cameras is running about 27 Mpx, it's pretty easy to see the the available onboard storage capacity of your run of the mill tablet, would be eaten up rather rapidly by today's image files. Not to mention the concept of doing imaging work under whatever light source is available, is way too overly optimistic.

The way the story should end (again IMO), is Abode splits Photoshop Elements editor apart from its "Organizer" section, and offers it on USB for $69.95 per edition. Well, that's not bloody likely to happen, now is it? :rolleyes:

Although PSE is still available on DVD, it still has a "subscription mentality" built in. Adobe codes PSE to accept the latest camera RAW files at the time of the particular version's release, but doesn't update with codecs for later cameras. Thus, were you to buy a newer camera, you'd, of necessity, have to buy a later version of the programs, to be able to manipulate the new camera's new RAW filing system.

Here's a link to the latest version of Photoshop Elements ("2020"). It's got at least double the capability that anyone bellyaching about deficiencies in "Photoshop for iPad", will ever need


Now why couldn't the leeches at Adobe simply port this to iPad?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: yRaz
First off, you have to consider people using a tablet for "serious imaging work", defective as well.. IMO, if you're not sitting at @ 31" 2K or 4K 10 bit color depth monitor, your heart's really not in it anyway.
...
Given that the average megapixel count of modern DSLRs and mirrorless cameras is running about 27 Mpx, it's pretty easy to see the the available onboard storage capacity of your run of the mill tablet, would be eaten up rather rapidly by today's image files. Not to mention the concept of doing imaging work under whatever light source is available, is way too overly optimistic.
Sry, I don’t agree to the upper point...if you have ever seen or worked with affinity photo on ipad AND on desktop, you will be surprised. actually besides of very slight differences (sure, the gestures!) they deliver the same application on two platforms. which adobe is obviously not able to do, just checked out photoshop on the ipad today, which is a bit of a joke, ESPECIALLY compared to affinity on the ipad. I use affinity for a long time there as part of my mobile setup... lightroom (because I don’t like affinitys raw engine) and ap for more complicated manipulations.

the onboard storage is as well not really a problem, while I have only 256gb on the ipad, I have 2tb on the icloud...which imo makes total sense anyways if you have more macs and cupertino stuff. buuuut, since I know the stunts you have to perform to use on your macs the icloud storage instead of the way to pricey adobecloud for use/integrate it with the adobe applications... let’s see how hard they will make it for users of the ipad app to use the existing icloud storage. even I prefer on the desktop to use photoshop over affinity, I will definitely not expand that adobe cloud over the minimum.

that said, it’s a joke anyways:
you had ONLY lightroom mobile subscription before, 4,99€/month...100gb adobe cloud...not too much, but ok.

you migrate to the photographer abonnement including PS/LR, 12,99€/month...and suddenly you have only 20gb cloud storage🙈
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadowboxer

captaincranky

TechSpot Addict
Sry, I don’t agree to the upper point...if you have ever seen or worked with affinity photo on ipad AND on desktop, you will be surprised.ore complicated manipulations.
Well OK, and I still disagree with you about the same issue.

At the end of the day, the more square inches of monitor you have, the less zoom you need to use to work at the pixel level. So yeah size, (as well as the quality of ambient light), matters

the onboard storage is as well not really a problem, while I have only 256gb on the ipad, I have 2tb on the icloud...which imo makes total sense anyways if you have more macs and cupertino stuff. buuuut, since I know the stunts you have to perform to use on your macs the icloud storage instead of the way to pricey adobecloud for use/integrate it with the adobe applications... let’s see how hard they will make it for users of the ipad app to use the existing icloud storage. even I prefer on the desktop to use photoshop over affinity, I will definitely not expand that adobe cloud over the minimum.
And I have 12 Terabytes of storage in my imaging box, and don't even need an internet connection to access it. So your issues with amount of cloud storage is pretty much a non starter as far as I"m concerned.

As for that in Adobe's direction, we finally found something we can agree on.

Photoshop is. likely the single most pirated program of all time. I've wondered on occasion, if that weren't the case, would Adobe's subscription model have come to pass.

With that said, obviously the $600.00 price tag of Photoshop was likely inflated to cover their losses due to pirating. Adobe's profit numbers would be interesting to compare pre and post subscription era.

The majority of self proclaimed "photographic experts", have Photoshop on the brain. Photoshop Elements would work and even be more than what's needed for 95+% of the people who are paying for PS-CS subscriptions.
 
Last edited:

Puiu

TS Evangelist
First off, you have to consider people using a tablet for "serious imaging work", defective as well.. IMO, if you're not sitting at @ 31" 2K or 4K 10 bit color depth monitor, your heart's really not in it anyway.

Next, "Photoshop Elements" already exists, and it's "built off the same code base as Photoshop", as well.

The question becomes, is Adobe playing, "let's see how stupid our customers are really"? IMO, that's exactly what they're doing.

Photoshop Elements is Adobe's last "buy on DVD without a subscription" program. (Although the movie editing "Premier Elements", is also available on DVD)

So, it's easy to see that since they already had an impaired, (or "crippled" if you will) version of Photoshop available, why couldn't they just port that to a USB stick, charge the people $99.95, the same as they do for PSE, and be done with it..

Both PSE and "Lightroom", (the formerly on DVD but now subscription pro app), have cataloging functions), Photoshop itself comes with the simpler, (and supposedly free), "Adobe Bridge".

Given that the average megapixel count of modern DSLRs and mirrorless cameras is running about 27 Mpx, it's pretty easy to see the the available onboard storage capacity of your run of the mill tablet, would be eaten up rather rapidly by today's image files. Not to mention the concept of doing imaging work under whatever light source is available, is way too overly optimistic.

The way the story should end (again IMO), is Abode splits Photoshop Elements editor apart from its "Organizer" section, and offers it on USB for $69.95 per edition. Well, that's not bloody likely to happen, now is it? :rolleyes:

Although PSE is still available on DVD, it still has a "subscription mentality" built in. Adobe codes PSE to accept the latest camera RAW files at the time of the particular version's release, but doesn't update with codecs for later cameras. Thus, were you to buy a newer camera, you'd, of necessity, have to buy a later version of the programs, to be able to manipulate the new camera's new RAW filing system.

Here's a link to the latest version of Photoshop Elements ("2020"). It's got at least double the capability that anyone bellyaching about deficiencies in "Photoshop for iPad", will ever need


Now why couldn't the leeches at Adobe simply port this to iPad?
Believe it or not, many artists and designers, while they also have a big screen on their desk, use drawing tablets like those from Wacom.

Some of the designers I work with are literally incapable of using a mouse and need a tablet and pen. (for example, you can't really simulate pressure with a mouse when drawing) And some even prefer to use a laptop (like a macbook pro) alongside the drawing tablets just so they can take it home on the weekend.

Having the ability to take your work on the go with just a tablet is really appealing for them since they don't need to carry both a laptop and a drawing tablet. But as it stands they need to either work with a featureless product or try to port their work to another app that has more features.

Adobe was promising exactly this and failed to deliver. They really need to work fast on adding must have features (no color swatches? wtf? they are missing basic features)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 0dium

captaincranky

TechSpot Addict
Believe it or not, many artists and designers, while they also have a big screen on their desk, use drawing tablets like those from Wacom.

Some of the designers I work with are literally incapable of using a mouse and need a tablet and pen. (for example, you can't really simulate pressure with a mouse when drawing) And some even prefer to use a laptop (like a macbook pro) alongside the drawing tablets just so they can take it home on the weekend.
Right, but a tablet is a connected device, and not a computer in and of itself. When drawing on a tablet connected to either the corporate behemoth, (possibly as large as a twin processor server rig), but more than likely a multi-core pro desktop WITH a pro video card which deals with 10 bit depth monitors. What do you estimate the computing power of those, or the power aforementioned "MacBook Pro", in relation to the best iPod to be?

Having the ability to take your work on the go with just a tablet is really appealing for them since they don't need to carry both a laptop and a drawing tablet.
Which could easily be dismissed as a "fantasy", or even, "a delusion", on the part of iPad "artists".

Given the present state of an iPad's overall functionality and raw computing power, I'm tempted to post a video of "The Impossible Dream", from "Man of LaMancha, as it to relates to the glorious imaginings what full Photoshop functionality would be like if I could have it on my $499.95 iPad.

Besides, "artists" are prone to whimpering about a variety of things such as social injustice, and having to "carry this big heavy laptop and this big heavy tablet back and forth to my good paying job". I say, "stuff them both up your Tesla, and move on with your life"

What I have noticed over the years, is that a goodly percentage of people dealing with only imaging work, know know squat about computers.

But as it stands they need to either work with a featureless product or try to port their work to another app that has more features.
Or perhaps simply shut up, and keep on keepin' on, with the gear that is suitable to the task

Adobe was promising exactly this and failed to deliver. They really need to work fast on adding must have features (no color swatches? wtf? they are missing basic features)
Since when have corporate entities stopped lying about what their products are going to do for a person? I haven't noticed that massive change in tactics one iota. If you have, then you're as much victim of their propaganda campaign as anybody that signed on to this Photoshop for iPad absurdity, nothing more.

Thank god Adobe hasn't released "Premier Pro" for iPad yet, because then we'd hear, "this program doesn't work, it takes forever to render even a short clip", in a collective nasal whine, from across the entire industry.
 
Last edited:

Puiu

TS Evangelist
Right, but a tablet is a connected device, and not a computer in and of itself. When drawing on a tablet connected to either the corporate behemoth, (possibly as large as a twin processor server rig), but more than likely a multi-core pro desktop WITH a pro video card which deals with 10 bit depth monitors. What do you estimate the computing power of those, or the power aforementioned "MacBook Pro", in relation to the best iPod to be?

Which could easily be dismissed as a "fantasy", or even, "a delusion", on the part of iPad "artists".

Given the present state of an iPad's overall functionality and raw computing power, I'm tempted to post a video of "The Impossible Dream", from "Man of LaMancha, as it to relates to the glorious imaginings what full Photoshop functionality would be like if I could have it on my $499.95 iPad.

Besides, "artists" are prone to whimpering about a variety of things such as social injustice, and having to "carry this big heavy laptop and this big heavy tablet back and forth to my good paying job". I say, "stuff them both up your Tesla, and move on with your life"

What I have noticed over the years, is that a goodly percentage of people dealing with only imaging work, know know squat about computers.

Or perhaps simply shut up, and keep on keepin' on, with the gear that is suitable to the task

Since when have corporate entities stopped lying about what their products are going to do for a person? I haven't noticed that massive change in tactics one iota. If you have, then you're as much victim of their propaganda campaign as anybody that signed on to this Photoshop for iPad absurdity, nothing more.

Thank god Adobe hasn't released "Premier Pro" for iPad yet, because then we'd hear, "this program doesn't work, it takes forever to render even a short clip", in a collective nasal whine, from across the entire industry.
You are putting way too much emphasis on the power of the system. Trust me, iMac's or Macbook Pro's are not that good/powerful :D You don't need such behemoths to do this kind of work, those workstations are reserved for rendering, encoding and.maybe complex 3D works

You have some weird misconceptions on what pros use at work.
 

captaincranky

TechSpot Addict
You are putting way too much emphasis on the power of the system. Trust me, iMac's or Macbook Pro's are not that good/powerful :D
Are you trying to suggest they don't have more oomph than some trash iPad?
You don't need such behemoths to do this kind of work, those workstations are reserved for rendering, encoding and.maybe complex 3D works.
Are you're sure these "artists" know exactly where those abilities end on an iPad and begin on a work station?

Since we're on the "artist analogy", I also know the difference between a scratch pad, and the final work painted on canvas.

You have some weird misconceptions on what pros use at work.
Maybe so, but all the imaging work I did at college was done on the school's desktops. (Although they were running Windows '95). Today's phones likely have more ballz than those turds.

As a matter of fact, the best uses I've seen for tablets, has been single task applications by IT service technicians. In other words, .the guy who comes to your house to install the FIOS board and router. The Slomin' Alarm system tech who came to my house the other day to upgrade the wireless x-mitter from 3-G to 4-G. He had a dedicated tablet as well.

You're concluding incorrectly that I hold Adobe blameless. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's the same crap of an American company bleeding Americans for their software, and using nothing but cheap off shore labor to code it as M$.

I've had a number of editions of Photoshop elements over the years, and PSE-7 was a real dog. I bought a copy of Photoshop 4 (PS-CS-4), on a half price sale ($300.00) and it won't even import RAW files from my 6 year old Nikon D-90.

That said, there's plenty of blame for this Photoshop for iPad fiasco to go around.

The only thing an iPad has going for it, is that fact that "C:/" is always an SSD.
 

ZedRM

TS Member
Thank god Adobe hasn't released "Premier Pro" for iPad yet, because then we'd hear, "this program doesn't work, it takes forever to render even a short clip", in a collective nasal whine, from across the entire industry.
Give it time, they'll find a way, and then the suggested nasal whining will begin.

Adobe has become little more the shysters of old who used to offer "protection" for a monthly price.
 

Puiu

TS Evangelist
Are you trying to suggest they don't have more oomph than some trash iPad?
Are you're sure these "artists" know exactly where those abilities end on an iPad and begin on a work station?

Since we're on the "artist analogy", I also know the difference between a scratch pad, and the final work painted on canvas.

Maybe so, but all the imaging work I did at college was done on the school's desktops. (Although they were running Windows '95). Today's phones likely have more ballz than those turds.

As a matter of fact, the best uses I've seen for tablets, has been single task applications by IT service technicians. In other words, .the guy who comes to your house to install the FIOS board and router. The Slomin' Alarm system tech who came to my house the other day to upgrade the wireless x-mitter from 3-G to 4-G. He had a dedicated tablet as well.

You're concluding incorrectly that I hold Adobe blameless. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's the same crap of an American company bleeding Americans for their software, and using nothing but cheap off shore labor to code it as M$.

I've had a number of editions of Photoshop elements over the years, and PSE-7 was a real dog. I bought a copy of Photoshop 4 (PS-CS-4), on a half price sale ($300.00) and it won't even import RAW files from my 6 year old Nikon D-90.

That said, there's plenty of blame for this Photoshop for iPad fiasco to go around.

The only thing an iPad has going for it, is that fact that "C:/" is always an SSD.
Yes I do know because I work with designers everyday. I've been working at a branding agency for almost 2 years now.

Most design work falls in the small category that can be done on even an macbook air if need be. These smaller works, that don't need that much power, can be done on an iPad. (mockups, illustrations, icons, logo draft iterations, etc)

When they go in projects that involve big files (I'm talking gigabytes) then yes, that's where a big system is required. Hell, I personally made small 3D renders and animations on a simple Macbook Pro laptop for some presentations (even though I'm a programmer :D).
 
Last edited:

Dosahka

TS Addict
I think there is a misconception, while I was reading the comment I was reading iPads aren't for pros and does not compare to laptops...khm...I think some if you talking about iPads (9.7-inch ones) and others about the iPad PRO lineup. Both are way different in specs and capabilities.
I have seen many of iPad Pro artists (some called them "artists" - notice the quotes please) and I can tell the that the 3rd gen iPad Pros are laptop killers like big time, specially in their price range, not to mention with new functionalities which comes with iPadOS/iOS13. These iPads have better performance than other Windows or Mac equivalent which has no touch screen or pen support (now Macs has the Sidecar app).

What I'm saying is that please do some research in the new iPad Pros (3rd gen or 2018) and what they can do/achieve. As an IT Support, we have Single app locked (reception and for other tasks) iPads (mini and 6th gen) and personally using a 12.9 iPad Pro 2018 as a daily driver alongside my MacBook Pro/Windows laptop, and to be honest I rather carry my iPad which can be used for the same tasks (and more sufficiently) than a 15-inch MBP or a Dell 2-in-1 14-inch with touchscreen, also getting notes on the fly when getting shoulder tapped way quicker than on a Windows/Mac laptop, not to mention it's way lighter and easy to carry.

Also when we are bored we are playing activity with them (draw something and AirDrop it to the other one).
One of my buddy using Pro Create and he told me that PS on iPads are trash, way less to offer than Pro Create and customers should wait at least 2-3 years before switching over to PS from Pro Create.
 

captaincranky

TechSpot Addict
I think there is a misconception, while I was reading the comment I was reading iPads aren't for pros and does not compare to laptops...khm...I think some if you talking about iPads (9.7-inch ones) and others about the iPad PRO lineup. Both are way different in specs and capabilities.
I have seen many of iPad Pro artists (some called them "artists" - notice the quotes please) and I can tell the that the 3rd gen iPad Pros are laptop killers like big time, specially in their price range, not to mention with new functionalities which comes with iPadOS/iOS13. These iPads have better performance than other Windows or Mac equivalent which has no touch screen or pen support (now Macs has the Sidecar app).

What I'm saying is that please do some research in the new iPad Pros (3rd gen or 2018) and what they can do/achieve. As an IT Support, we have Single app locked (reception and for other tasks) iPads (mini and 6th gen) and personally using a 12.9 iPad Pro 2018 as a daily driver alongside my MacBook Pro/Windows laptop, and to be honest I rather carry my iPad which can be used for the same tasks (and more sufficiently) than a 15-inch MBP or a Dell 2-in-1 14-inch with touchscreen, also getting notes on the fly when getting shoulder tapped way quicker than on a Windows/Mac laptop, not to mention it's way lighter and easy to carry.

Also when we are bored we are playing activity with them (draw something and AirDrop it to the other one).
One of my buddy using Pro Create and he told me that PS on iPads are trash, way less to offer than Pro Create and customers should wait at least 2-3 years before switching over to PS from Pro Create.
For any of this to be truly meaningful, we would have to know exactly for which line of iPad Adobe ported this edition of PS.

If it was a blanket, "this works on iPad", it's easy to understand why so much dissatisfaction prevails.

Once upon a time, (and is probably still true), the chief advantage of Photoshop over Photoshop elements was that PS's had the ability to work in the CMKY color space. This enabled the output to be sent to honest to god printing presses with printers inks, for printing books and such.

Since trash ink jet printers are indifferent to file type, and work in RGB color spaces, (but use CMKY inks), CMKY is completely unnecessary. for PSE and home use.

One complaint that caught my eye was "no swatches", which obviously would cripple someone trying to draw on an iPad. I have to assume the eyedropper tool is available, but you need "somewhere to stick it" (so to speak) to obtain the exact color you need..

There probably is enough blame to spread around, some attaches to exaggerated expectations from inadequate equipment, and the omnipresent Adobe greed in all software which has anything to do with imaging.

I'm sure the slicksters at Adobe are thinking, "well once we get consumers onboard with subscriptions, we can fix any issues at our own leisurely pace".

Whether this would attach to current editions of PS or not, I don't know But I built a machine based on an Intel i5-6600K & Z170, and PSE (13) wouldn't even launch off of a HDD.

I installed the OS and all my normal programs to a small HDD, with the idea I would migrate the entire system to SSD, while tossing the HDD in a drawer as a backup. As soon as I migrated the system to SSD, PSE launched almost instantaneously

It also has to be said that Adobe's estimates of "minimum system requirements", are more or less, overly optimistic. I actually thought I screwed up the install, but after transfer to SSD, the system ran perfectly
 
Last edited:

Zorak

TS Rookie
Blah blah blah, something something, here's a half-baked app for an iThing, enjoy, see ya later.
GOD I'm so fffffff tired of modern software releases!