Adobe Updates Photoshop and Illustrator CS6 with Retina Display Support

[Uplift]

Originally Posted by beestigbeestje

When saving for web, you have to save 2x the resolution to view it correctly on a rMBP. Say, you want to have a 100px width for an image, you'll have to save it as 200px and use css to make it preview correctly at 100px (best for retina scale). If you save the image for web at 100px, it's 2x smaller when opening afterwards in preview on a retina screen. The photoshop canvas shows you retina quality image, but when exporting you have to make sure you have twice the pixel count, otherwise your actual image wil be smaller on your rmbp. Now, if you just "save as" then the image is as big as it was on the canvas on the rMBP screen. So using that wil make the images twice the size on regular screens.
does this make any sense?

I hardly ever use save for web.

As a test i created 1024x768/72 canvas, this was quite small... when i save this (save as) on retina it will come out as 512x384 ? and on non-retina it will display normal. So to accomodate for retina i need to create my documents at 2048x1536px/72 .. when i save this on retina it will give me 1024x768px, but on non-retina it will be twice the size (2048x1536px) .. to over come this i just need to set the size of the image on the web so that it displays correctly?

Do we keep the resolution at 72?

What about background images, we can only use background-size in IE9+ so thats not a viable solution.

I try to keep image use low and use CSS where possible so i'm hoping it's not going to be a major issue.

Finally, what about print? If i create an A4 poster at 210x297mm/300, is this exactly what i'm getting?

[JavaTheHut]

Originally Posted by Exponent

WhaddaYouMean? I've been using the 15" rMBP for 5+ months now, and love it!

I drive it in full resolution mode, and it's like having a Cinema Display on a laptop. I finally have the screen real-estate I need to to all kinds of multiple-window, multiple-program engineering work.

How do you have more screen real estate by having a 15" with higher res.? You need a larger screen or second monitor for more screen real estate. Or are you working with tiny little icons and tiny little text etc. sharp resolution but small?

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by JavaTheHut

How do you have more screen real estate by having a 15" with higher res.? You need a larger screen or second monitor for more screen real estate. Or are you working with tiny little icons and tiny little text etc. sharp resolution but small?

Screen inches are not real-estate. 1280x800 is 1280x800 whether it's on a 13" screen or a huge hulking 19" monitor. The same content will be displayed on both, you won't fit more text on screen, as text size is mostly fixed to pixel count.

Real-estate comes from upped pixel counts. Running a 2880x1800 screen in normal mode instead of HiDPI mode (which would be 1440x900 points over 2880x1800 pixels) gives you much more room to display things, albeit, they'll all look smaller.

I personally run my 15" rMBP in 1920x1200 scaled mode. I think it's just perfect really.

[Digital Skunk]

Originally Posted by huntermaclean

If only I had $1000+ to buy CS6...

I would agree, but I've long since given the Creative Cloud a try, and I have to say that renting it at $50 a month is much better than buying it, and I get WAY more than I would paying for the Master Collection outright.

Originally Posted by mrxak

Hopefully they get Lightroom updated by the time I get a retina display.

Agreed. I am in the market for a new mobile workstation, and Lightroom is a key app for me.

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

Screen inches are not real-estate. 1280x800 is 1280x800 whether it's on a 13" screen or a huge hulking 19" monitor. The same content will be displayed on both, you won't fit more text on screen, as text size is mostly fixed to pixel count.

Real-estate comes from upped pixel counts. Running a 2880x1800 screen in normal mode instead of HiDPI mode (which would be 1440x900 points over 2880x1800 pixels) gives you much more room to display things, albeit, they'll all look smaller.

I personally run my 15" rMBP in 1920x1200 scaled mode. I think it's just perfect really.

I would agree. I remember us going back and forth on the death of the 17" MBP, but I must say that 1920x1200 on the rMBP gives me the same workspace in a smaller package. I say this after 6 years of using 17" 1920x1200 screens.

[JavaTheHut]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

Real-estate comes from upped pixel counts. Running a 2880x1800 screen in normal mode instead of HiDPI mode (which would be 1440x900 points over 2880x1800 pixels) gives you much more room to display things, albeit, they'll all look smaller.

I personally run my 15" rMBP in 1920x1200 scaled mode. I think it's just perfect really.

Yes this is exactly what I was referring to The screen resolution needs to be set to a comfortable working size for usability.

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by JavaTheHut

Yes this is exactly what I was referring to The screen resolution needs to be set to a comfortable working size for usability.

The thing is, Apple always had huge shortcomings in this department. Something they got better on the high-res 15" MBP, right on the 2010 MBAs and now with the scaled modes on Retina MacBook Pros. All their other line-ups have atrociously low pixel counts for their screen sizes. 1280x800 13", 1440x900 15" models, those are just ludicrously bad.

Now, 1440x900 on the 13" MBA is passable, 1680x1050 on the 13" rMBP (scaled) is great, 1920x1200 on the 15" rMBP is just awesome. Those are actual comfortable sizes that provide the maximum amount of real-estate. Before, all we had were Duplo sized pixels.

Heck, Dell had better offerings a decade ago, albeit, as optional panels for their laptops.

[chocolaterabbit]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

Just a useless reply to my useless post.

Here's a thought... What's worse, a useless post or a useless reply to a useless post?

I don't know which one of you is worse, but I do know that the worst is me making a useless post to reply to the useless posts from the two of you

[JavaTheHut]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

The thing is, Apple always had huge shortcomings in this department. Something they got better on the high-res 15" MBP, right on the 2010 MBAs and now with the scaled modes on Retina MacBook Pros. All their other line-ups have atrociously low pixel counts for their screen sizes. 1280x800 13", 1440x900 15" models, those are just ludicrously bad.

Out of curiosity, since your using 15" rMBP in 1920x1200 scaled mode. When do you use the Hires mode?

Don't get me wrong I am not a detractor of higher resolutions its the future, just interested in hearing the workflow with the small 15" screen and higher res.
Thx.

[Mike07335i]

Photoshop update won't install for me for some reason. (downloaded the direct FTP link)

Mike

[Builddesign]

crispy vectors!

[Dcr2k]

Originally Posted by thaweesak

Update the Adobe Application Manager to the latest version (6.2), and everything should be updating as it should.

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloa...jsp?ftpID=4774

This worked. Thank you based gawd.

[GorgonPhone]

Originally Posted by Mr. Retrofire

Great! :-)

yeah i would skip the retina macs.. not worth the extra money at this time

[Comeagain?]

Originally Posted by huntermaclean

If only I had $1000+ to buy CS6...

Creative Cloud my friend.

[Technodynamic]

Updates are a little FUBAR.

I had to update the updater after many failed attempts. Doing so allowed me to run the patches. Photoshop looked no different.

Now I run the updater again and it appears as if EVERY product in my Adobe Suite has an update. So.... letting it download a ton of updates now and waiting...

[Dreamer2go]

Originally Posted by Asherpotter

I think you mean minority.

what was I thinking. My bad yeah I mean minority -.-

[jpadhiyar]

Quite a lot of designers have been waiting for this. Perhaps now we can say that this changes everything again. Apple probably can take the credit for (yet again) mass-marketing the Retina philosophy..

[jorgetuix]

my problem is that:

"have not been possible to apply the updates"

Is very strange because with update 13.0.1 I haven't any problems

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by JavaTheHut

Out of curiosity, since your using 15" rMBP in 1920x1200 scaled mode. When do you use the Hires mode?

Hires mode ? I don't use 2880x1800 as a native resolution, that would make things waaaay too small for me (Apple uses a god damn small font in Terminal and my workflow is entirely based around Terminal to begin with). 1920x1200 scaled is fine.

----------

Originally Posted by GorgonPhone

yeah i would skip the retina macs.. not worth the extra money at this time

What extra money ? The 15" rMBP is the same price as a similarly configured 15" cMBP and the screen alone makes it definately worth it.

[winston1236]

Originally Posted by gmanist1000

Why?

For professional work a retina display is worthless, youll never reproduce those colors on 99% of the screens ib the world

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by winston1236

For professional work a retina display is worthless, youll never reproduce those colors on 99% of the screens ib the world

Retina displays have nothing to do with color. You're talking about IPS displays ?

[derbothaus]

Originally Posted by winston1236

For professional work a retina display is worthless, youll never reproduce those colors on 99% of the screens ib the world

Pixel density has nothing to do with color reproduction. They are separate measurements. You don't get more color with a retina screen. You get more color with extended/ wide gamut.

[gmanist1000]

Originally Posted by winston1236

For professional work a retina display is worthless, youll never reproduce those colors on 99% of the screens ib the world

Time for the world to catch up.

[stueee123]

If you're having problems getting the update on applications acquired through unsavoury means, try reinstalling the applications, and immediately updating them as soon as they're installed. Then replace the amt.framework file after the update (your second time doing it). Don't update Adobe Application Manager with a patch from Adobe's website. Hope this helps

[willcapellaro]

Originally Posted by stueee123

If you're having problems getting the update on applications acquired through unsavoury means, try reinstalling the applications, and immediately updating them as soon as they're installed. Then replace the amt.framework file after the update (your second time doing it). Don't update Adobe Application Manager with a patch from Adobe's website. Hope this helps

How unsavoury are we talking about and how much do we need to thaw the thumb the original owner's thumb before scanning it?

[Konstruktor]

Originally Posted by beestigbeestje

When saving for web, you have to save 2x the resolution to view it correctly on a rMBP. Say, you want to have a 100px width for an image, you'll have to save it as 200px and use css to make it preview correctly at 100px (best for retina scale). If you save the image for web at 100px, it's 2x smaller when opening afterwards in preview on a retina screen. The photoshop canvas shows you retina quality image, but when exporting you have to make sure you have twice the pixel count, otherwise your actual image wil be smaller on your rmbp. Now, if you just "save as" then the image is as big as it was on the canvas on the rMBP screen. So using that wil make the images twice the size on regular screens.
does this make any sense?

Dank u! Thanks!

I don't think I quite understand it yet though .
In your above example, is the PS canvas 100px or 200px?
And how is a 100px canvas displayed in PS? With 200 'retina' pixels, or 100 'retina' pixels (e.g. smaller then another screen)?

----------

Originally Posted by Uplift

I hardly ever use save for web.

As a test i created 1024x768/72 canvas, this was quite small... when i save this (save as) on retina it will come out as 512x384 ? and on non-retina it will display normal. So to accomodate for retina i need to create my documents at 2048x1536px/72 .. when i save this on retina it will give me 1024x768px, but on non-retina it will be twice the size (2048x1536px) .. to over come this i just need to set the size of the image on the web so that it displays correctly?

Do we keep the resolution at 72?

What about background images, we can only use background-size in IE9+ so thats not a viable solution.

I try to keep image use low and use CSS where possible so i'm hoping it's not going to be a major issue.

Finally, what about print? If i create an A4 poster at 210x297mm/300, is this exactly what i'm getting?

Is your first alinea a question, or did you find it out? The question marks make it a bit confusing .