We could see a lot of people saying "NO" to paying nearly $400 per year and just shift to using different color standards to define branding. ![]() If Pantone wants to erect a pay-wall for their digital swatch books they may just see the reverse happen. If new colors get added to the digital swatches it might do more to convince users to buy new physical swatch books that match. Or the digital swatches could be called a form of advertising for the physical books. I've always looked at the digital versions of Pantone swatch books as a loss leader -as a way to sell the physical books and other real world materials. That puts the cost of fooling around using Pantone as a reference at upwards of $400 per year. They want an extra $15 per month for digital copies of these colors on top of the high cost for the physical color books. I guess that's not enough money for X-Rite or whoever owns Pantone now. And you're supposed to replace them on an annual basis since the printed colors on all those paper strips can fade over time and get damaged with use (and Pantone adds new colors from time to time). Those things are expensive! A Pantone Formula Guide containing 2 swatch books (coated and uncoated spot colors) costs close to $200. It's bad enough those of us who need to use Pantone spot colors as references for color matching have to spend a ridiculous amount of money on the physical swatch books. But this thing with Pantone angers me more than any of these other downgrades. Support for Postscript Type 1 fonts is ending. Font Bureau and I think a couple other firms pulled fonts from the Adobe Fonts service. Dolby encoding was pulled from Audition and Premiere Pro. ![]() We've seen other things removed from Creative Cloud in the past. ![]() This situation with Pantone is just unspeakably stupid.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |