Other Software > Found Deals and Discounts
Sagelight Editor - $39.95 Lifetime Promotion Ending July 1st
Dormouse:
The one comment I'd make about price at this point is that people need a sense of stability and long term support if they are being asked to pay a higher price. The extended, unpredicted and unannounced, absences unfortunately don't give this impression. Neither does the loss of the old forum posts or announcing a price change and limited time offer that then apparently goes on forever.
I understand the need to replenish and the new features that have been added, but the price people will pay isn't just about the features on offer. Current users are very supportive, but that might not always be the case if you manage to extend your market (as should be possible) and especially if the price goes up. I appreciate your ethics and concerns about all your users, some of whom may have difficulty with higher prices but, at the same time, it won't be a going concern as a program if it doesn't make the money you need out of it.
JavaJones:
Good points Dormouse. One perhaps counter-intuitive (but nonetheless effective) change you might consider is being less frequent and detailed with releases and release promises and instead settle on a regular schedule you can stick to within the year. People like updates, but reading through this thread and your blog, you can see that the "It took a lot longer than I thought" comment is frequent and regular. So you'll say "4.2 is coming soon" but then it won't because hey, it took longer than you expected. That's fine, the problem isn't necessarily (or at least solely) with it taking longer than expected but that you externalized that expectation by hinting at or even in some cases announcing it. If you had said nothing and instead just had a general policy of bi-annual updates, and making them major updates (i.e. 4.0 at beginning of the year, 4.5 mid-year, 5.0 at the beginning of next year), that would create that sense of stability while taking some pressure off you.
Heck even annual releases are not necessarily to be expected from a lot of (professional) software. Lightroom gets point releases, but they're mostly bug fixes and support for new camera RAW files. With Version Control you can easily do patch releases while working on separate tracks with major features and merge them later for a big release.
I would not suggest reducing communications overall necessarily, I think your engagement with your users through the blogs, videos, and tutorials is part of the appeal of SL, but you could stick to helping people learn existing tools, creating videos for future features behind the scenes if desired and then releasing those when the version with those features eventually comes out.
Just a thought... All I know for sure is not announcing release dates ahead of time has worked a lot better in my experience. :D
- Oshyan
Rob Nelson:
Hi...
Rob, if I'm at all typical of your customers, then the choice for Sagelight was made over upgrading Corel PaintShop Pro, which I can purchase for ~$90. Since I decided that your app is superior, at least for editing of photos, I think it would be possible to go with a number in that neighborhood. (FWIW, PSP is probably better for some kinds of tasks, but when it comes to optimizing a photograph, you're the hands-down winner)
-CWuestefeld (November 21, 2011, 12:54 PM)
--- End quote ---
Thanks... I have chosen $79.95 for the number right now, and that seems to be reasonable with the feedback I've received about it. As I said, I am currently looking at different options on how to keep Sagelight accessible to everyone while dealing with the price issue at the same time. I think there is a solution, and I have been doing quite a bit of research over the last few months on pricing models and strategies.
You didn't actually ask, but I'll weigh in on future functionality -- because that's the kind of guy I am :P
-CWuestefeld (November 21, 2011, 12:54 PM)
--- End quote ---
No Problem. ha... It's always great to get comments and constructive criticism.
When I'm using Sagelight, I still rely on two plugins: Alien Skin Image Doctor and Topaz DeNoise. So from my perspective, the quickest way to become my full-feature editor is to provide those function -- easy-to-use noise and more effective noise filtering, and object removal. I'd also love to see some kind of object detection coupled with the masking feature.
-CWuestefeld (November 21, 2011, 12:54 PM)
--- End quote ---
Pretty much on the top of the development list is more noise reduction, a real-time version (in the Power Box), and also an NL-means implementation. I really like the NL-means algorithm, and I have developed some algorithms that will hopefully make it useful on a reasonable time. I have seen some packages take up to 20 minutes on a fairly small file, and I've wanted to avoid that kind of timing. Either way, I agree and it should appear fairly soon (the Power Box version first, then the more aggressive NL-means independent function).
With the object removal. That is also something I have planned for version 5. It turned out that the NL-means algorithm and the "content-aware" object removal have the same base algorithm, so when I get to the NL-means noise reduction, I can start on the object-removal, too.
Right now, I recommend the Wire Worm plugin which can do a great job. But, I am finding that the plug-ins don't get much traction in a general sense; that is, if you have a plug-in that you like, then you tend to use it. After that, I don't see people trying the plug-ins. So, even though I consider the Wire Worm a very, very nice tool (which is why I didn't write one, as I wanted to support Martin Vicanek's work), a lot of people don't even know it is there. I wanted to put a menu item for it in the tools list, right under cloning, but Martin was not comfortable with it. As much as I really want to refer to that plug-in, I may have to end up writing a blemish/object-removal function myself just so I can make it obvious in the function list.
Something else you just said struck a chord with me: "extended layers/stacks". You're currently referring to this as "layers", but that's confusing because it really has nothing to do with the layering feature found in PSP or Photoshop. Changing terminology to "stacks" might prevent such confusion.
-CWuestefeld (November 21, 2011, 12:54 PM)
--- End quote ---
For the time-being, I will just use the term 'layer', as that it really what I am talking about. The term 'layer' can tend to mean different things based upon the context. Sagelight, for example, uses a lot of layers internally in most control. Because of that, I don't see any need to do 'adjustment' layers, since each control is essentially just that, and if you want to work with one as a layer, you will just be able to do what you would do with an adjustment layer in Photoshop and edit it the same way; except that you will have multiple controls instead of just the one layer (which can get tedious). The basic idea is that each thing you do in the history becomes a potential layer, if you want to assign it that way, and then you will be able to click on the Quick-Edit layer and adjust the controls -- such if you realize something became blown out or too saturated in that layer; that sort of thing.
So, it kind of does have to do with the layers in Photoshop, but with just a different (and, I think, more modern) approach in using them.
I'm also talking about more stack-like layers, too, where they can be useful to group together. I am planning something very comprehensive, so it's still a little TBD, which is why I used the term 'layers/stacks'. My main goal is to get some real power out of them, while not making them so much of the UI that they're unavoidable. I finally have a design I like, so it will be nice to start putting them in!
Rob
Rob Nelson:
As someone whose "other editor" is $300 (Lightroom), I find your pricing considerations and general range to be very, very reasonable! Now granted LR does things that Sagelight does not do, things I wish SL did, and I cannot replace LR with SL right now because of that. Photo organizing, tagging, and uploading are the majority of that, but also things like HDR plugins. At the same time SL can do things that LR doesn't, or at least do things in ways that are easier to control and/or produce better results. The new lens blur/bokeh stuff is a great example.
So while I understand people's comments about "the app world" and whatnot, I also see the other side of things where SL is actually a tremendous deal compared to other *similarly capable* apps. That's the thing though, does SL have a professional reputation and if not, could it develop one? That's what you need to charge more than about $50 I think, or $100 at most. It's little or nothing to do with the actual capabilities which, as I've said, are excellent and already surpass programs that cost much more in some ways.
If I'm being honest, I think the UI design is probably the lest professional-seeming thing about SL. It's hard to put my finger on, but it feels less clean and polished than LR, Bibble, and the like. More colors, gradients, and icons than clear lines and text, perhaps. Beveled edges, that sort of thing. And the general feel and workflow is good, but still somehow just doesn't "feel" as "solid" as LR and others. That may be just my personal, subjective opinion of course.
At any rate I definitely understand the pricing difficulties. I admire your dedication to keeping features accessible, and that's one thing I've dealt with personally at Planetside Software where we make a fully free (with some limitations) version of our software available. I also understand the pro vs. hobbyist vs. amateur debate and the difficulty in establishing the right perceptions of your product, *especially* when you want to keep things accessible to a wide range of users and price points. I suspect that sometimes you do just have to make a sacrifice of one or the other, or take some radical approach like making an entirely different product (at least in name). But I do have some suggestions for a pro vs. "light" split if you're interested. I suspect you might not agree, but I think any decision you make on it is going to involve some compromise in your core desires and values. If that weren't the case I expect you'd have made a decision by now. ;)
By the way, great to hear that HDR functionality (that I recently emailed you about) is planned!
- Oshyan
-JavaJones (November 23, 2011, 12:57 AM)
--- End quote ---
note to everyone: I can see that I am doing a lot of writing in answering. I want to be sure to answer all the questions, comments, and suggestions posted in the last few days.
As someone whose "other editor" is $300 (Lightroom), I find your pricing considerations and general range to be very, very reasonable! Now granted LR does things that Sagelight does not do, things I wish SL did, and I cannot replace LR with SL right now because of that. Photo organizing, tagging, and uploading are the majority of that, but also things like HDR plugins. At the same time SL can do things that LR doesn't, or at least do things in ways that are easier to control and/or produce better results. The new lens blur/bokeh stuff is a great example.
-JavaJones (November 23, 2011, 12:57 AM)
--- End quote ---
Thanks. I really don't care to charge $300, or even $200, and just need to figure out the pricing in issue in terms of avoiding the devaluation concept in marketing one's product. That is to say, I'd rather keep it cheaper, but to do it in a traditional setting just wouldn't work. More about that in some commentary below (not sure if it was this post or not, but it is here somewhere!)
About the things Sagelight does that LR doesn't and vice-versa. That's basically why I have been working on more powerful functions, even at the expense of some things that are really starting to show. For example, I put in the Light Blender, but it has so much to it that the UI is clearly not keeping up with it. One of the next releases will have that cleaned up in a measurable way. The Lens/Blur bokeh tabs worked out well, so I am going to start doing more of that sort of design to keep the UI cleaner. The current level of pop-ups becomes a little overbearing, I think -- as in too much information at the same time.
That's the thing though, does SL have a professional reputation and if not, could it develop one? That's what you need to charge more than about $50 I think, or $100 at most. It's little or nothing to do with the actual capabilities which, as I've said, are excellent and already surpass programs that cost much more in some ways.
-JavaJones (November 23, 2011, 12:57 AM)
--- End quote ---
Thanks again... Sagelight is just starting to get a professional reputation. I never pursued the professional market directly, but have written a lot of documents on the engine, and more and more people who are professionals are starting to compare the results with other professional apps. In the last few months, I've seen more professionals who use Sagelight than I have before. That's nice, and that's why there is more pressure on Sagelight to do things that didn't matter quite as much as it did before. I kind of like the pressure, because it's helping me make Sagelight much more well-rounded, and I think that will make it better for everyone, even if they're not consciously using certain elements of it.
With the $50 thing... That does become an issue. I saw a message board where someone posted an example of an image edited with Sagelight. Everyone liked it, and that was nice. The person posted the price, and at $39.95, it really looked misplaced because everyone there was using Lightroom or Photoshop. It was clearly a devaluing issue, which is why I need to deal with it. I'd keep it at $39.95 if it wasn't for that (not with the lifetime, though).
If I'm being honest, I think the UI design is probably the lest professional-seeming thing about SL. It's hard to put my finger on, but it feels less clean and polished than LR, Bibble, and the like. More colors, gradients, and icons than clear lines and text, perhaps. Beveled edges, that sort of thing. And the general feel and workflow is good, but still somehow just doesn't "feel" as "solid" as LR and others. That may be just my personal, subjective opinion of course.
-JavaJones (November 23, 2011, 12:57 AM)
--- End quote ---
I'd be interested in hearing more thoughts about that. As it turned out, I like the Sagelight UI over LR, and consider LR's UI very utilitarian. But, sometimes it is just a personal choice. There has been some evolution in the UI, and that may cause some consistency issues, as I've had to streamline the UI with things like the Power Box, which looks markedly different than the rest of the Quick Edit Mode.
But, I am pretty sure what some people react to is (I'll just throw it out here... let me know what you think): Sagelight controls, for the most part, are laarrrggeee... ha... It's just tends to be a visual thing that smaller, diminutive controls tend to look more utility-like and more like a professional program. Here is why they are large in Sagelight... The Quick Edit Mode, for example, has sliders that are 201 pixels wide, to support a 1:1 resolution with -100 to 100. This causes the sliders to be much larger than LR (and most other editors, since most other editors copy LR, at least for the overall look-and-feel). When I put in the Power Box, I shortened the sliders to 161 pixels wide, but most sliders still have a range of -100 to 100. This immediately causes resolution problems. Since I have wide sliders, I put the values and slider name on the top, causing much more space to be used vertically.
To my mind, I think this is part of the issue. granted, the rounded corners don't help... I was watching the Miami Vice DVDs a lot when I designed the UI. :)
The UI is being redesigned, but I am only planning that for version 5 (except for the glaring updates, such as the Light Blender and Power Box consistency), as I have a fairly large restructuring plan -- Sagelight has something like 80+ functions right now, and Version 5 is going to add quite a bit to that, so that they are more organized (as well as personally organizable). A lot of the people on the Sagelight Discussion Board have really been great in letting me know what they'd like to see.
At any rate I definitely understand the pricing difficulties. I admire your dedication to keeping features accessible, and that's one thing I've dealt with personally at Planetside Software where we make a fully free (with some limitations) version of our software available. I also understand the pro vs. hobbyist vs. amateur debate and the difficulty in establishing the right perceptions of your product, *especially* when you want to keep things accessible to a wide range of users and price points. I suspect that sometimes you do just have to make a sacrifice of one or the other, or take some radical approach like making an entirely different product (at least in name). But I do have some suggestions for a pro vs. "light" split if you're interested. I suspect you might not agree, but I think any decision you make on it is going to involve some compromise in your core desires and values. If that weren't the case I expect you'd have made a decision by now. ;)
-JavaJones (November 23, 2011, 12:57 AM)
--- End quote ---
I didn't know you guys made Terragen until just now... I've always loved Terragen, and looked for it just the other day. I just downloaded the free version. I'll definitely be playing with it!
It can definitely be a slippery slope. The free version you guys have seems pretty powerful, but the 800x600 limitation is good. From a consumer perspective (and I just went through this about Sagelight), I just don't know if a higher sample would encourage me more (say 1200x800), or would make me feel like it's enough so I don't want to buy the purchase version as much. I am coming out with a new Sagelight free version to replace the old one (since it's so old by now), and what to put in and leave out is a very complex question. I want something that shows enough power (and isn't diluted), but I don't want to give away too much, either.
As far as suggestions for a split -- sure, I am very interested in hearing your thoughts.
By the way, great to hear that HDR functionality (that I recently emailed you about) is planned!
-JavaJones (November 23, 2011, 12:57 AM)
--- End quote ---
I've been looking forward to getting it in for quite some time, and I think it will complement the Light Blender fairly well. I am hoping to get it in version 4.3 as an extra sizeable function before I start on version 5.
Rob
Rob Nelson:
Hi.
The one comment I'd make about price at this point is that people need a sense of stability and long term support if they are being asked to pay a higher price. The extended, unpredicted and unannounced, absences unfortunately don't give this impression. Neither does the loss of the old forum posts or announcing a price change and limited time offer that then apparently goes on forever.
-Dormouse (November 23, 2011, 03:28 AM)
--- End quote ---
It was a shame about the old forum. It just destroyed itself one day and was unrecoverable. In a way, it may have been a favor, because the new discussion board is much nicer, open, and easier to use. It's also easier to maintain. I used to have such a spam problem with the other one, and this one has received two spam messages in the last three months.
With the absences. Sadly, those have been hard to deal with, as well. There were some company issues going on there, but I agree I should have done a better job explaining what was going on. I don't see any of that happening again, especially now that Sagelight is starting to get some maturity both in it's level as a product and getting known generally.
There have definitely been some setbacks that have cost publicly, but the overall growth has been more positive. At this point, if nothing else, I think everyone realizes how committed I am to Sagelight, even when I do hit some learning curves on how to handle everything at once. :)
With the sale that seems to never end... Well, that is definitely becoming an issue, which is why I wanted to express some thoughts on it here.
As I see it, it's also been part of the growth process for Sagelight. But, in a way I hadn't anticipated. When I first started Sagelight, my goal was to give away a free version and then charge $20 for the pro version, even as it is today (which is about 4 times the size it was back then). The idea being that a low cost would attract more people, and that would solve the issue of keeping Sagelight cheap while also making it powerful. But, I quickly found out you can't do that. People look at products differently when the are $20 vs. $40 vs. $80. I've mentioned this before, but I'll put it here...when I doubled the price, I suddenly saw things never noticed being taken very seriously. Now that Sagelight is growing more and more, this is still an issue at $39.
So, I decided it was time to raise the price. But, I wanted to give everyone interested a chance to get it, and to be supportive I also wanted to offer a lifetime license. Part of this was because I knew that I was going to dramatically increase the power and functionality of Sagelight from version 3 to version 4, and I didn't want to put people in a position to have to pay more and more and more. A lot of this is how the market has evolved. For example, I've never appreciated paying $700 or so for Photoshop and then having to pay $179 every year for an update.
Here's the part I didn't see coming (but should have). One of the things that started happening with Sagelight is that it got noticed by a major part of the demographic for whom I wrote Sagelight: Beginners who want to do and learn more (with a low or flat learning-curve) as well as hobbyists who want to work with their pictures. Sagelight was already getting known to hobbyists and advanced amateurs and enthusiasts. These two distinct groups are exactly why I wrote Sagelight.
I take your point very well, and I agree with it. I feel awkward about it, really, not to mention slightly embarrassed. But, I really want to make a way for both groups, and, as I mentioned in the first post, the price at $80 becomes prohibitive. I am looking at alternatives, such as possibly a monthly, or even yearly payment plan, and that sort of thing.
The reason the sale still exists today (and with the lifetime version) is because I've known for quite some time that I am going to change the pricing structure drastically, and until I do that, it's far better to give a lifetime version away than to accidentally cause people to have to spend more money later on. I have a few pricing options I am looking at in the sense of 'guerrilla marketing', and I want to make sure anyone who buys it now knows exactly what they have as I change the structure. I am just deciding on which one now. A couple of them are fairly dramatic, so that's another reason why I haven't changed anything yet, so no one feels confused as to what to do (i.e. if you have a lifetime version, then you know what you have).
It's definitely coming to a close in the very near future. I don't personally feel bad about the price, just about the plans (and announcements) that were clearly premature. Sorry about that, and I definitely apologize and take full responsibility for it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version