4 ms·

Those are not particularly large industries.

• kcplate 4y ago
  Not sure where you are from, but in the US they are still industries that produce significantly more digital image media than most all others. And by publishing, I am not just referring to print. Pretty much almost every photograph that you see on a media company website has been touched, color corrected, cropped or otherwise digitally manipulated by Photoshop.
  • digisign 4y ago
    Anything that is expensive is going to be used less than other options that are free. Personally I've worked in VFX, Internet, medical companies, and while there were a few things got photoshoped here and there externally we almost always used something else, whether expensive or free.
    • kcplate 4y ago
      Your perception of “expensive” might be different than mine and many folks managing photo production workflows. If I have a dozen artists who are not as productive on a less costly package, handicapped by poor automation scripting of a low cost alternative, or are less productive due to training time requirements on a new package for even half a week, those low cost alternatives have zero value to me over a more expensive, better, and de facto standard. I’ll admit it’s value was greater when print publishing was still a thing, but those magazine and newspaper companies that transitioned to digital didn’t necessarily go out and buy all new tools to replace effective tools that already existed, already had a trained base, and already had robust digital asset workflows in place.
      • digisign 4y ago
        For every pro there are a hundred newbs, and other folks who don't care enough.