Um... Photoshop for the web?
-
Just found this out today, Apparently Adobe was all like "hold my beer" when MS did Office Online and made a web version of Photoshop. I'm sure it's not as full-featured as the offline version, but still... This screenshot is old (it's no longer in beta), but it'll give you the idea: [clickety](https://web.dev/static/articles/ps-on-the-web/image/the-photoshop-web-app-run-a5ccbdcdef1e6.png).
Jeremy Falcon
-
Just found this out today, Apparently Adobe was all like "hold my beer" when MS did Office Online and made a web version of Photoshop. I'm sure it's not as full-featured as the offline version, but still... This screenshot is old (it's no longer in beta), but it'll give you the idea: [clickety](https://web.dev/static/articles/ps-on-the-web/image/the-photoshop-web-app-run-a5ccbdcdef1e6.png).
Jeremy Falcon
Priced attractively too! (Sarcasm intended)
Photoshop on the web is included in all Photoshop plans starting at US$22.99/mo.
A home without books is a body without soul. Marcus Tullius Cicero PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.4.0 (Many new features) JaxCoder.com Latest Article: EventAggregator
-
Priced attractively too! (Sarcasm intended)
Photoshop on the web is included in all Photoshop plans starting at US$22.99/mo.
A home without books is a body without soul. Marcus Tullius Cicero PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.4.0 (Many new features) JaxCoder.com Latest Article: EventAggregator
𝗧𝗢𝗨𝗖𝗛 & 𝗚𝗢 - 𝙒𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 ���𝙤𝙪... 1998 - YouTube[^] ;P :laugh:
-
Just found this out today, Apparently Adobe was all like "hold my beer" when MS did Office Online and made a web version of Photoshop. I'm sure it's not as full-featured as the offline version, but still... This screenshot is old (it's no longer in beta), but it'll give you the idea: [clickety](https://web.dev/static/articles/ps-on-the-web/image/the-photoshop-web-app-run-a5ccbdcdef1e6.png).
Jeremy Falcon
I see a big wave of "before vs after" comparisons of a lot of females or famous people incoming after the first leak of their servers... We do not keep any copy of your pictures... HA! Explain me another joke, I already knew that.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Priced attractively too! (Sarcasm intended)
Photoshop on the web is included in all Photoshop plans starting at US$22.99/mo.
A home without books is a body without soul. Marcus Tullius Cicero PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.4.0 (Many new features) JaxCoder.com Latest Article: EventAggregator
I wish GIMP just ripped off PS's interface though... they did sorta, but made it worse in the process. But yeah, IMO the subscription thing both Adobe and MS does with Office is no bueno.
Jeremy Falcon
-
𝗧𝗢𝗨𝗖𝗛 & 𝗚𝗢 - 𝙒𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 ���𝙤𝙪... 1998 - YouTube[^] ;P :laugh:
This is what I'd envision an acid trip would be like if visiting Smurfland. :laugh:
Jeremy Falcon
-
I see a big wave of "before vs after" comparisons of a lot of females or famous people incoming after the first leak of their servers... We do not keep any copy of your pictures... HA! Explain me another joke, I already knew that.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
Nelek wrote:
We do not keep any copy of your pictures
However, we will extract all relevant features from your pictures, and use them as training data to our Photoshop AI. :-)
-
I see a big wave of "before vs after" comparisons of a lot of females or famous people incoming after the first leak of their servers... We do not keep any copy of your pictures... HA! Explain me another joke, I already knew that.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
For that reason, if you ever have a copy of Photoshop CS6 laying around... keep it. No subscription needed. But more important than that, if you don't need any AI stuff it still works great for image editing and it doesn't phone home all the time.
Jeremy Falcon
-
For that reason, if you ever have a copy of Photoshop CS6 laying around... keep it. No subscription needed. But more important than that, if you don't need any AI stuff it still works great for image editing and it doesn't phone home all the time.
Jeremy Falcon
Same for Lightroom. It cause an uproar when they changed the licensing model. I hang on Lightroom Classic (or whatever it's called now).
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
-
I wish GIMP just ripped off PS's interface though... they did sorta, but made it worse in the process. But yeah, IMO the subscription thing both Adobe and MS does with Office is no bueno.
Jeremy Falcon
Yeah I don't do subscriptions. I have the last version of stand alone Photoshop and that's good enough for me, I rarely use it anyway. I can do most of my photo editing in Lightroom.
A home without books is a body without soul. Marcus Tullius Cicero PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.4.0 (Many new features) JaxCoder.com Latest Article: EventAggregator
-
𝗧𝗢𝗨𝗖𝗛 & 𝗚𝗢 - 𝙒𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 ���𝙤𝙪... 1998 - YouTube[^] ;P :laugh:
Great track, it's in my playlist actually :D The whole album is pretty sweet :thumbsup:
Best, Sander Azure DevOps Succinctly (free eBook) Azure Serverless Succinctly (free eBook) Migrating Apps to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript
-
Just found this out today, Apparently Adobe was all like "hold my beer" when MS did Office Online and made a web version of Photoshop. I'm sure it's not as full-featured as the offline version, but still... This screenshot is old (it's no longer in beta), but it'll give you the idea: [clickety](https://web.dev/static/articles/ps-on-the-web/image/the-photoshop-web-app-run-a5ccbdcdef1e6.png).
Jeremy Falcon
The first thought that comes to mind upon reading this thread is... why? Photoshop runs faster as a desktop application than it ever could through a web browser. What about memory resources? Modern web browsers are memory hogs. Running Photoshop as a desktop application ties up a ridiculous amount of memory to begin with. Google Chrome is already a memory hog. To run such a resource-intensive application such as Photoshop on top of a web browser like Chrome sounds absolutely ridiculous. It's like strapping a camel onto the back of a donkey. I assume that Photoshop's scratch disks reside in the cloud. If Adobe uses something like SDD drives w/ data transfer speeds as fast as 3000 MB/s over a 300 Gbps network, that may be sufficient for most scenarios, but what if you want to run Photoshop batch actions for a couple thousand 100 MB bitmaps? Even with such fast data transfer speeds, it sounds ridiculous. Think of the load that it puts on the processing speed of the client machine. Would you even be able to run the aforementioned Photoshop batch actions without bringing the system's processing speed down to a crawl? I don't know. Maybe, but it sounds ridiculous. I wouldn't be surprised if it crashed Notepad under such demands. Maybe it's something you could do, but as I said before, why? I forget what the data transfer speeds are for my home network, but I'd imagine that's where the bottleneck would occur. Even if it were practical in terms of data speed and processing power, what about the shortcomings of the web browser itself? What a nightmare. HTML5 may provide a plethora of tools to work with and most of the standards for major web browsers are fairly consistent, but what kind of nutcases embark upon such a terror-inducing journey of digital torture? I know that if I were a front-end developer at Adobe, and was assigned to this project, I'd immediately leap out of my chair, sprint toward the nearest window, and smash right through it in a desperate attempt to escape. Then I'd run as fast as I could until reaching the nearest road and jump in front of a speeding bus.
-
The first thought that comes to mind upon reading this thread is... why? Photoshop runs faster as a desktop application than it ever could through a web browser. What about memory resources? Modern web browsers are memory hogs. Running Photoshop as a desktop application ties up a ridiculous amount of memory to begin with. Google Chrome is already a memory hog. To run such a resource-intensive application such as Photoshop on top of a web browser like Chrome sounds absolutely ridiculous. It's like strapping a camel onto the back of a donkey. I assume that Photoshop's scratch disks reside in the cloud. If Adobe uses something like SDD drives w/ data transfer speeds as fast as 3000 MB/s over a 300 Gbps network, that may be sufficient for most scenarios, but what if you want to run Photoshop batch actions for a couple thousand 100 MB bitmaps? Even with such fast data transfer speeds, it sounds ridiculous. Think of the load that it puts on the processing speed of the client machine. Would you even be able to run the aforementioned Photoshop batch actions without bringing the system's processing speed down to a crawl? I don't know. Maybe, but it sounds ridiculous. I wouldn't be surprised if it crashed Notepad under such demands. Maybe it's something you could do, but as I said before, why? I forget what the data transfer speeds are for my home network, but I'd imagine that's where the bottleneck would occur. Even if it were practical in terms of data speed and processing power, what about the shortcomings of the web browser itself? What a nightmare. HTML5 may provide a plethora of tools to work with and most of the standards for major web browsers are fairly consistent, but what kind of nutcases embark upon such a terror-inducing journey of digital torture? I know that if I were a front-end developer at Adobe, and was assigned to this project, I'd immediately leap out of my chair, sprint toward the nearest window, and smash right through it in a desperate attempt to escape. Then I'd run as fast as I could until reaching the nearest road and jump in front of a speeding bus.
I had the same thought about MSOffice lately. Some things shall not run in a web browser - the name says it all : it is made for browsing. Period.
-
I had the same thought about MSOffice lately. Some things shall not run in a web browser - the name says it all : it is made for browsing. Period.
Rage wrote:
I had the same thought about MSOffice lately. Some things shall not run in a web browser - the name says it all : it is made for browsing. Period.
That's one of the most beautiful things I have ever read in my life. You are a light of hope in an otherwise dismally bleak void of infinite darkness. Web pages and web apps belong in browser windows; industry-standard photo editing software belongs on the OS desktop. In no way can a web browser function to accommodate such complex and performance-demanding software. Perhaps one day in the future that may be different, but current web browsers? No. It's absurd. It's been hours, and I still haven't been able to figure out what the benefit of running Photoshop inside a web browser could possibly be. We don't put toaster ovens inside washing machines. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure that one out. :wtf: I'll be back on a bit later. I need to go drive my car into my swimming pool. Then, I need to gather firewood so I can light a fire inside my refrigerator. After I do that I need to swallow a bar of soap. It's going to be a busy day. Oh, no! I forgot to put my chainsaw in my mailbox. How could I forget to do something so important?
