Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

CS Reviews without an Adobe ID

Oct 27, 2010 2:45 PM

Is it possible to create a review for someone who does not have an Adobe ID? I see that you can publish a document for someone without an ID to view but can not create a review. Is this possible? There would be cases where I do not want to ask a client to create an Adobe ID in order to review a job. They can look a a file but not leave comments.

 

Thanks.

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 9, 2010 12:10 PM   in reply to tj_harley

    Currently a Adobe ID sign in is required for participants to get access to your CS Review documents. It is fairly painless process.

     

    Here is what is looks like:

    From the CS Review Web Client, open the review, click Share with individuals, enter their email address, enter some text in the body to the effect of... you will need to click sign up for a Free Acrobat.com account to get access to this review... this way they their expectations are set properly.

     

    Your reviewer gets an email. (If they don't get it their SPAM filter may have caught it) They click on the link from the email invite which routes them to a simple sign up (no obligation to pay page). They enter the email address to which the invite was sent as their Adobe ID... fill out the rest of the form, accept legal terms of use... then they are in.

     

    Here are some screen shots:

    Screen shot 2010-11-09 at 1.21.10 PM.png

    Click Share and send them a invite.

    Screen shot 2010-11-09 at 1.21.50 PM.png

    Invitation has been sent. Grayscale avatar.

    Screen shot 2010-11-09 at 1.26.35 PM.png

    Invitee has successfully signed up. Color avatar. Note- you can customize this avatar by clicking My Account in the top right of the Nav Bar.

     

    If they do not get the email... You can send them a invitation link from the Collaborator Bar to try again:

    Screen shot 2010-11-09 at 1.22.09 PM.png

    I know this does not directly address the scenario you outlined. This is how Sharing with individual participants works in our initial version of the service. The Product team is considering ways to make this simpler... so let me throw out an idea of something we could explore:

     

    Share via link- You can email or IM the link to reviewers. They can click on the link to view the content, but if they click any of the Add Comments buttons or gestures, they will be asked to sign in with an existing Adobe ID or Sign Up for a free account. After they sign in they are added to the review with the "reviewer" role. You can turn off Sharing via URL at any time and continue to remove participants as necessary.

     

    NOTE: This is the same workflow as supported by Acrobat.com Buzzword. We're considering adopting something similar for CS Review.

     

    Is this an improvement in the right direction? Thoughts or concerns?

     

    -Mike

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 10, 2010 6:06 AM   in reply to Mike Wallen

    Share via link- You can email or IM the link to reviewers. They can click on the link to view the content, but if they click any of the Add Comments buttons or gestures, they will be asked to sign in with an existing Adobe ID or Sign Up for a free account. After they sign in they are added to the review with the "reviewer" role. You can turn off Sharing via URL at any time and continue to remove participants as necessary.

     

    NOTE: This is the same workflow as supported by Acrobat.com Buzzword. We're considering adopting something similar for CS Review.

     

    Is this an improvement in the right direction? Thoughts or concerns?

     

    Mike,

     

    I'm not the OP, but I'd like to echo those requests. Unfortunately, necessitating the creation of an Adobe ID--while relatively painless--is a major turn-off. In an era of locked down IT policies and having to sign up and create IDs for every little thing, this simply gets in the way of what is otherwise an elegant, effective, and rather well-thought-out system. One of the clients I do work for requires up to 10-12 sets of eyes on a piece of work--if everyone needs to generate an Adobe ID to gain access, the ship is going to sink before it leaves the dock.

     

    I guess my stumbling block is why exactly an Adobe ID is needed--other than the established method of using it to provide access to the review system, it doesn't serve any other function for the people reviewing the work I post to it. I can see it being needed/necessary for other collaborators, but for the client reviewing a :30 second commercial, this is clutter. I think having the option is fine, but another method of entry to a review needs to be implemented.

     

    I think sharing via a link is fine; when the user accesses the review via that link, pop up a box that asks them to add their name and probably an email address so that there is some uniqueness to their login. Gray out the "OK" button until they do so. Make it work similarly to how ClipNotes used to function in this regard--all we really care about is knowing who said what about a review. The elements of an individual's review could be tracked via the name/email address, rather than another sign-up.

     

    My primary use of CS Review is going to be for video, so I'll use that as my example. I also use (sorry to bring it up here, but for comparison's sake) Sorenson Squeeze and their 360 review platform. While in no way, shape or form is it anywhere as complete or capable as CS Review, it steals CS Review's lunch money when it comes to simplicity.

     

    When you generate an encode from the Squeeze interface, you can tack on "notifications" that are based on an email address (you can also do SMS, but that's not really that helpful as far as I'm concerned). The notification specifies that that person is to be contacted (by the specified method or methods) when the encode is complete. You alternatively can add "Review and Approval Rights" and also require a password, if necessary.

     

    When the encode is completed and uploaded into the 360 platform, the reviewer(s) I specify are notified automatically via email with a blind/gibberish link to the review video. Technically, anyone with this link can view the video, but only the individual who is specified in the notification and has Review and Approval Rights can actually click the Approved/Please Revise button (like I said--it's way more simplistic than CS Review).

     

    So, here's my thinking, boiled down in CS Review terms:

     

    • Eliminate the requirement for reviewers to have an Adobe ID. Collaborators are fine; that part makes sense for them to have an Adobe ID.
    • Allow the user to specify individuals and groups of individuals who will be notified when a review part is online, and give those individuals access/review rights. It would be on the review creator's shoulders to establish the logins/profiles of the reviewers. I personally don't think that the ID tracking for a review needs to be any more detailed/complicated than this.
    • Notify the reviewers via email when a review part is online; provide them with a link to the review directly, and don't require any additional signing up/logging in than absolutely necessary. If something is truly top-secret and needs to be kept FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, specify a password in the profile creation, and require the reviewer to enter this password.
    • Add a SUBMIT REVIEW button to the interface so that after the reviewer is done adding comments, the content creator can be notified via email that new comments are available. Obviously, the comments will be appearing live in the web interface and shortly thereafter in the CS Review Panel, but it would be really helpful to have a flag of this sort pop up for the content creator. Additionally, if the reviewer forgets to click the SUBMIT REVIEW button, perhaps the system could automatically generate the email notification to the content creator after a time-out period--15 minutes or something like that.

     

    I do recognize Adobe's desire to keep everyone within the Adobe ecosystem, but I think that this needs to be far more transparent than it is now. When you're sending out a review to a client, the fewer hurdles they need to jump through, and the less that they feel their being diverted through some other third-party, the better.

     

    (By the way, I'm assuming you guys have looked at the Sorenson 360 system, but if not, please feel free to contact me and I'll send you a review so you can see how the system works. As mentioned, I'd really much rather use CS Review, since the integration with my Premiere Pro sequence is a-w-e-s-o-m-e, but from a reviewer standpoint, I can't use it right now.)

     

    Thanks for listening.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 10, 2010 9:06 AM   in reply to Colin Brougham

    I completely support Colin's estimation of the situation.

     

    CS Review is a fantastic product.  It is, without a doubt, one of the best solutions for review and approval that's come down the line, and I'm stoked to see it evolve and put to good use.

     

    However - requiring a client to create an Adobe ID is a major roadblock. It all hinges on the level of sophistication of the end reviewer and if the "part" (hate that - by the way -- can we call it an element, or something else ?) - needs to be reviewed by committee. Which in corporate video production, happens constantly.  The easier this can be, the less horsing around with login credentials and flaming digital hoops -- the more compliance will be found.  No doubt about it.

     

    As currently configured, CS Review is a great share tool between folks who work in the content creation realm and don't mind adding another account to their list of accounts (and who undoubtedly already have an Adobe ID).  As to deployment to the general public / end client user / reviewer - it's not there yet.  It's asking too much of them. I know this may sound petty, and adding a simple user ID doesnt' seem like asking for much.  Trust me, for these cats - it is, and to be fair, they have been trained by sites like YouTube, which allows for immediate anonymous commenting (which isn't necessarily a good thing, but I'll save my decline-of-western-civilization-via-the-systematic-destruction-of-tho ughtful-communication-rant for another forum).

     

    I think you get the point though.

     

    Simple. Minimal. Fast. Easy. No ID, no passwords, the abiity to share with multiple eyes, and accept multiple review comments.  THAT would be one system to rule them all.

     

    By the way ... I am a confirmed Final Cut Pro switcher.  CS5 has changed my entire workflow for the better. Thanks.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 13, 2010 6:36 AM   in reply to Matthew Lamphere

    I agree 100% with the statements above. Even if they do have an Adobe ID, CS Review requires 3rd Party Cookies enabled? THAT will just never fly in todays IT world. These two factors will certianly block my Marketing Dept from using this tool.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 19, 2010 8:20 AM   in reply to piersant

    I'll add another vote to getting rid of the 3rd party cookies. After falling in love with CS Review, my IT department is telling me to stop using Acrobat.com. Apparently Adobe sells user information to a third party—Adecn dot com. Is that true? I would have expected more from Adobe.

    -David

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 19, 2010 3:57 PM   in reply to David Fisher Fast

    Apologies for being late to this discussion (I was away for a while).

     

    First, thanks everyone for your input, happy, sad or otherwise.  We do appreciate you providing feedback.

     

    I believe that others have been looking into the issue of cookies, and hopefully we'll have some more definitive info that we can share soon.  Stay tuned.

     

    We have heard the concerns about requiring all users, including casual reviewers, to set up their own Adobe ID and log in - the idea being that this represents a barrier to participation for some users.  Of course, we want to remove all the barriers to use that we can.  That said, the requirement is there for the time being (it's not something that could be changed easily) but we continue to look for all the ways we can make the service more attractive and easier for users, and a simplified, more streamlined way to engage is on our lis of goals. I can't say anything specific about what we might or might not do, but rest assured that we have heard similar requests and take them seriously.

     

    With regard to the notion that Adobe is selling user information obtained from Adobe IDs to some third party, that's the first I've heard of that, and I would be quite surprised if that was the case. I will see if I can get some clarity on that and will post back with what I can find.

     

    Thanks again for the feedback.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 19, 2010 5:09 PM   in reply to David Herman - Adobe

    CS Review really is the application that I've (and I'm sure many others) have been waiting for - for a very long time.  It really does have the potential to change the way content is reviewed / approved / and created.  Really leveraging the collaborative value of the internet.  Pretty cool, if you ask me.

     

    If these bugs can be ironed out -- I'll switch over in a heart beat and use the system for all of my clients (modest list that it is).

     

    Also, it's very nice to be able to have an ear at Adobe.  Really means a lot to the end user that the company building the software seems to actually care about user experience.

     

    Thanks Adobe.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Katharine Gilbert
    164 posts
    Apr 6, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 20, 2010 5:39 AM   in reply to Matthew Lamphere

    Matthew, I dido all that you have said. This is a wonderful arena for communication and know that it will only get better! My usage is now as a fine artist and it has been very enlightening in many ways. Had this been around when I was running my graphic design business it would have been a real boom to the process- not only a time saver but also a financial one for me as well as my clients. So dido to Adobe---thanks!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 22, 2010 7:03 AM   in reply to David Herman - Adobe

    We have heard the concerns about requiring all users, including casual reviewers, to set up their own Adobe ID and log in - the idea being that this represents a barrier to participation for some users.  Of course, we want to remove all the barriers to use that we can.  That said, the requirement is there for the time being (it's not something that could be changed easily) but we continue to look for all the ways we can make the service more attractive and easier for users, and a simplified, more streamlined way to engage is on our lis of goals. I can't say anything specific about what we might or might not do, but rest assured that we have heard similar requests and take them seriously.

     

    David,

     

    Thank you for weighing in on this. Just to echo the echoes here: I believe that making log in as streamlined, unobtrusive, and non-technical as possible is vitally important to making this a viable review platform. I know you guys at Adobe are listening--I've already seen changes to the CS Review interface (at least the Premiere portion, which is what I'm using) that reflect feedback from users, like the drop-down selector to navigate to a review part--but I don't think that the importance of ease-of-access can be overstated enough.

     

    Basically, that first impression is like the "curb appeal" when you're house shopping. If you don't like the way it looks from the road, chances are good that your impression of the interior--no matter how nice--is going to be skewed. Since our clients (that is, the clients of endusers of CS Review) are the house shoppers here, any negative impression they create from that first visit is a reflection back on us--not Adobe. Our clients don't want to know and don't care who Adobe is, and the less that you're in our way, the better. Don't get me wrong--we love you guys (mostly )--but you should not be coming between us and our clients. We're the ones paying you, and they're paying us (usually ), so there is no reason for you to be in the midst of the transactions with our clients. I realize this sounds really aggressive, but there is a pretty delicate balance you need to strike and maintain when dealing with purchasers of your creative content. Adobe makes and sells the tools to help us get this done--after that, get out of the picture.

     

    As has been stated before, this is really an amazing system, but it needs to be unshackled. We demand it because our clients will demand it of us. Don't sink the ship before it leaves the dock.

     

    Thanks for listening.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 3, 2011 1:48 PM   in reply to tj_harley

    I finally got around to using CS Review. When I initially saw a demo of it, I got really excited. It looked like the remote review process had really come to fruition, after some rather poor attempts earlier on.

     

    Then I sent the email invites to a couple of clients. That's where the whole process fell apart. Seems as if they are prohibited from filling out and submitting any forms at all online via their office network. They also wanted to know why they had to sign up for an Adobe ID just to review their video -  I had no answer.

     

    So, I jump on here to fire off a post, and lo and behold, I find that I'm not alone!

     

    Until this requirement is released, CS Review will simply fade into the past as a wholly unusable service, like Adobe Clip Notes. While the process might be 'painless' to some, to others it may present an impenetrable roadblock. There are actually those out there in the corporate world who, when shown a fullscreen image of a flashing sign that says "Check your email Inbox for an email with a link to verify your email address", and will turn to you and ask - "OK, what do I do next"? Granted, this may seem like hyperbole, and there may be only 10 or so out there in the world who would not be able to understand such a simple direction. If so, then I have had all 10 of them as clients - plus my wife.

     

    We all know why the requirement for contact info exists here - it's the same reason that Kroger needs your contact info to issue a 'Kroger Plus Card'. When CS Review's role as a marketing tool ends, then perhaps it can become the editing tool that it purports to be.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 4, 2011 8:22 AM   in reply to sebrame

    Great example.

     

    To beat this horse one more time (mostly because I really want to see this product fly) :  If this product is going to work, it must be simple.  We (those that work with clients) can't make the review process any more difficult or complex than it already is.

     

    The technology should not present any barriers to the task at hand. If it does, the whole process is sunk, and our credibility / competence is questioned.  If this happens enough times, you may lose a client.

     

    In short, instances like this are completely unacceptable & need to be eliminated for this to be a viable solution.

     

    The folks using this product as end users are not, generally speaking, creative industry professionals. This needs to work for them, the un-geeks ... those that hold control of the coveted "check-book".

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 27, 2011 7:37 PM   in reply to Matthew Lamphere

    Allow me to add my support for this thread. I would use and pay for CS Review in a heartbeat, if my clients could use it without logging in or creating any accounts...

     

     

    Best,

     

    Ben

     

    Benjamin Freedman

    PrimeImage Media

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 28, 2011 6:51 AM   in reply to tj_harley

    I can certainly understand the need for a login in order to store the metrics of 'who viewed what review when', but that only needs to be an email address and password, and possibly their name, but that's all. There is absolutely no need whatsoever to collect any other info from anyone unless you are creating a sellable database.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 6, 2011 5:13 PM   in reply to tj_harley

    Is there any recent update on this? It's been 6 months and no changes have been rolled out, are they in development? Planned at all? I'm so very excited about this tool, but this is the one issue that is preventing me from utilizing it for my clients.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 6, 2011 5:50 PM   in reply to the_biggles

    It was said in an earlier post that this is "not something that could be changed easily". It wasn't specified as to whether this was in reference to the corporate reasons for collecting the info, or the actual coding aspects. I would suspect the former, for if they are claiming the latter, they would not be absolutely truthful. All that would be required would be to turn off which fields of information were required - a simple task, code-wise.

     

    Having said that, I have constructed a canned email that I send to all clients explaining the requirement, and alleviating their fears of providing such info. So far this is working well. As far as the cookie issue, I've been fortunate enough to not have that issue - yet.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 21, 2011 11:14 AM   in reply to tj_harley

    i totaly agree with the aboth! - i would certanly pay a subscription fee for this service (review of Videos) - but the registration process and even a login progress for a client would make things just more complicated for the client than it is now. Therefore there is no way for me to use this service at the current state!

     

    hopefully there will be an update in the future!

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points