Adobe Announces Creative Suite 5 including Photoshop CS5 and Flash Catalyst CS5

[samwise]

Right, getting bored with hearing this type of comment. Some of it is most certainly my lack of knowledge of HTML 5 and for that I confess my sins (I am a Flash dev in case you hadn't guessed )

When I think about the kind of applications I build (for Toyota and Lexus)...

Are you responsible for the Lexus UK site then? Like most car sites, I see nothing that requires Flash, it could be written to run more efficiently and quickly without - you'd just lose the "prettiness".

Take, for example, the current Flash on the home page, changing between the various car models. I watch the animation, I look at the vehicle, think that I'll click on the 'Explore More' link and, oh, it's disappeared because you decided that I'd looked at that model long enough and time to move on. OK, I'll use the ordinary links, but oh, which model of car was it, I didn't notice - damn, I'll have to wait for the animation to go through the list again.

Bring back simple websites that load quickly and only change what I see when I want them to change by clicking a button.

Oh, and guess what - tell your clients that if I was in the market for a Lexus or Toyota, I wouldn't be able to check the information out when I wanted to as I can't see it on my iPhone. Can't see the exterior colours, it just says:

Buffering
Replay Interior Video
Loading...
Change view:
Alloy Wheel:
Alloy Wheels:
Paint Colour:
Paint Colours:
Paint Colours:
Alloy Wheel:

Doesn't look very professional to me

Hmm, can you tell I'm a software QA - maybe you need some to test the work your company produces

 

[I WAS the one]

I've been using Photoshop since version 5.5, as a graphic designer I'm always looking foward to buy the most advance tool on the market to achieve deadline tasks in my everyday freelance jobs. Since CS3 a Mayor update to the Adobe family referring to features and helpful tricks, but then CS4 doesn't bring features that I personally needed the most so I skip that version and now even that I'm impress with some of the features they show are included in the CS5, I honestly invest in expensive plugins that do the extra mile for me and I don't see this version entering my graphic designer needs either. I don't know what's adobe aiming for, or to whom they are creating this amazing updates, but for some reason the freelancers and individuals as myself that work one client at a time are getting push out from a professional perspective kind of way.

Honestly I've been working in a non-stop basis thanx God with my CS3 and other third party softwares and I don't see the need to upgrade. Adobe is not offering me a reason to upgrade yet.

Don't take me wrong the updates are amazing and it looks very promising for a person that never bought a CS version before or an advanced designer that needs this 3d / poppet / selection tools right now.

 

[AidenShaw]

Perhaps you should read this then.

That piece seems to have some accuracy issues.

For example it says "It wasn’t until 2005 that Adobe ported Photoshop to OS X."

Funny, then, this April 2002 story in MacWorld:

Apr 1, 2002

Photoshop for Mac OS X Arrives: Our Exclusive First Look
by Deke Mcclelland, Kelly Lunsford, Macworld.com

Apple has spent the last four years promoting Mac OS X as the future of the Macintosh--that Apple's existence hinges on the public's adoption of the new operating system is not an overstatement. And yet, for many Mac users, moving to OS X has been contingent on a factor that Apple can't control: the availability of an OS X-native version of Adobe Photoshop.

With Adobe's announcement of Photoshop 7.0 for OS X, the wait is finally over.

http://www.macworld.com/article/1699/2002/04/photoshop.html

Missing the mark by three years isn't very good.


Also http://www.creativemac.com/2002/02_feb/features/photoshop7firstlook.htm (24 Feb 2002) "With the announcement of Photoshop 7, Adobe has finally brought to light the one application that has been keeping so many creative professionals from adopting Mac OS X."

 

[forgetaboutpro]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

Dream on. Photoshop is THE professional standard, especially in the professional print and medical business. It would take Apple more than a decade to come up with something in that league.

That's what Avid said too Software is just that. Software. It can be rebuilt, reverse engineered. Whatever Apple needs they can make on their own. Adobe is going DOWN.

But avid has far more Market share than FCS so what's your point?

 

[Drag'nGT]

Must own. I just need Photoshop though.

 

[Drag'nGT]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)



But avid has far more Market share than FCS so what's your point?

And how much of their technology was showcased in Hollywood recently? Honestly, FCS is the f*cking bomb. Avid is great too, don't get me wrong. I'd just learn FCS if I were heading into that field.

 

[H. Flower]

And how much of their technology was showcased in Hollywood recently? Honestly, FCS is the f*cking bomb. Avid is great too, don't get me wrong. I'd just learn FCS if I were heading into that field.

What do you mean showcased?

Hollywood still uses AVID a majority of the time because it's the industry standard, just like Photoshop.

 

[hajime]

Hello. I visited Adobe Store - International. Looks like it will be shipped by mid-May. If I buy the academic version of CS4 today anywhere in the world, do I get a free upgrade next month? If not, by paying a very small amount, do I get just a disc or a full product in an unopened box? I suppose that the except for the price, the academic version of CS5 is the same as the commercial version. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks.

I asked Adobe. The English version of CS5 will be shipped on April 30. One can download the trial version when the product is shipped. If one buys the english academic version of CS4 now, one can get a free upgrade to the english academic version of CS5 when it comes out. Just keep your receipt.

The only thing I am not sure is the following: I am running the Japanese version of Leopard. If I use the English version of CS5, can I type Japanese in all its components programs such as Illustrator and Photoshop? Can I open files created from Japanese systems and still read Japanese? I guess we won't know until CS5 comes out. I heard somewhere that under the Japanese OS, one can input and read Japanese on the English version of CS4. However, all the words in the menu bar are in English. I guess this is the same to many programs for the Mac. Can CS4 users please confirm this?

 

[miki66]

It's amazing! I must have it replaced old cs3

 

[patent10021]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)



But avid has far more Market share than FCS so what's your point?

And Windows will always have market share over OS X. So what's YOUR point?

My point is Apple can create their own applications that are just as good. Also you must not be informed about the industry because many great movie-makers are using FCSP. Avid was the first therefore many houses still use it because they don't need to change. FCPS is very popular among top film makers.

Your point was?

 

[patent10021]

What do you mean showcased?

Hollywood still uses AVID a majority of the time because it's the industry standard, just like Photoshop.

You're missing the point. It's not the industry standard btw. It was but isn't any more. Avid was the first so many production houses have no NEED to change. If you drive a car that works there's no reason to buy a brand new motorbike because you'll lose time/money learning a new toy. There are a lot of A list names who are using FCPS for very successful movies. It's the production houses that are still using Avid. Not buying Avid new but using Avid that they've already been using for years.

 

[bocomo]

Bah. Glad to see people voting positive. I'm totally against the haters here. Well, regarding Photoshop at least. I haven't used the other programs in a while.

I love Photoshop. Its not an irrational fanboy thing, I've tried all the alternatives. I have a lot of friends who depend on it every day. I run it at all times without issue. It's a very well designed program that isn't bloated at all for my needs.

Optimisations and 64bit support are great. We don't need Apple to make a Photoshop replacement any more than we need them to make a Quark/Indesign replacement. It would be a phenomenal waste of Apple's time and resources, and they'd likely make no impact in the market. How many of the people complaining about PS are people it's not targeted at anyway?

I'm interested in the new content aware features. Looks fun.

this

 

[doctor-don]

Why do all Apple nerds hate Adobe? They're no worse than Apple and them creating their locked-up platform and trying to control everything.

Could it be we are tired of crashes every time we visit a site that happens to have its ads done in flash?

 

[doctor-don]

That piece seems to have some accuracy issues.

For example it says "It wasn’t until 2005 that Adobe ported Photoshop to OS X."

Funny, then, this April 2002 story in MacWorld:



Missing the mark by three years isn't very good.


Also http://www.creativemac.com/2002/02_feb/features/photoshop7firstlook.htm (24 Feb 2002) "With the announcement of Photoshop 7, Adobe has finally brought to light the one application that has been keeping so many creative professionals from adopting Mac OS X."

Mine says Created 4/6/02 6:00 PM

 

[gmcalpin]

According to Adobe's requirements page, you must have a 64-bit system running 10.5.x or 10.6.x in order to run everything. Which app did you see that didn't require 64bit?

Requiring a 64-bit system ≠ being a 64-bit program.

ONLY Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Premiere Pro and After Effects have been stated explicitly to be 64 bit. The rest are still 32-bit, with its inherent limit of addressing only two cores and 4 GB of RAM (under Snow Leopard).

I asked Adobe about Illustrator specifically, and they responded. The other programs, I'm assuming are the same.

18 months of Adobe saying "CS5 will be 64-bit," aaaand, no, it's not. Or at least not the two programs I used the most (InDesign and Illustrator).

 

[doctor-don]

Have you ever tried to do some of that stuff manually? It's a real nuisance. If you're not impressed, find one of your own photos and try editing something out of it by hand. You'll see that what they've done with the content aware filter is really amazing!

It's more than a nuisance. It consumes much time and effort to remove some objects - such as telephone/power lines across homes in Charleston, SC. Personally, however, I am not looking forward to spending more money considering what the Master Collection of CS3 cost me.

 

[AidenShaw]

Mine says Created 4/6/02 6:00 PM

Please explain - "Mine says" isn't that useful. Where are you finding your date (and is it 6 April or 4 June)? Is it a post date or webpage modification date?

And is it worth arguing whether it is April or June 2002 - when the OP is talking about 2005?

 

[AidenShaw]

The rest are still 32-bit, with its inherent limit of addressing only two cores and 4 GB of RAM (under Snow Leopard).

What does 32-bit have to do with "two cores"?

32-bit Windows supports 32 core systems. The current 64-bit Windows systems support 256 core systems. (Since no Apples have more than 8 cores, it's not public if the OS supports more than 8.)

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

Yeah, well... the problem is that this whole "CS" concept enforces a deadline on all the Adobe teams, no matter where their particular product is in the evolutionary process. Therefore there are always a couple of CS products in each iteration that offer little to nothing new. In CS4, Flash saw some major improvements, but in Dreamweaver there was almost nothing, aside from the CS-wide overhaul of the GUI that is. In CS5 there's tons of new stuff in Photoshop and After Effects, but almost nothing in Flash. If Adobe weren't so hell bent on bundling everything (and the users weren't so hell bent on buying the bundles), each product could evolve at its own pace and be released when it's worthy.

Agreed. It seems like what the management needs to do is set bigger deadline windows for the entire suite. For example, have a CS "year." Have maybe the Photoshop, After Effects, etc. team release there CSx products in Q1, then roll over to help finish the rest of the developers' work on product A, B, C for a Q3 release, etc. I don't know. The whole entire thing makes me feel there is some level of mismanagement.

 

[Terminal.app]

For the same low, low, recession-busting price of $97350420948357239! Pirates? What pirates? The real pros know they have to pay us anyway! Man, do we love a captive audience. And now we have a Vaudeville-style musical number for you about why leaving control of the Web in our capable hands is a good thing! Take it away, boys!

(But yes, content-aware fill will be quite a relief.)

I do so wish this forum used the reputation system...I'd send you a +rep for that.

 

[LethalWolfe]

You're missing the point. It's not the industry standard btw. It was but isn't any more. Avid was the first so many production houses have no NEED to change. If you drive a car that works there's no reason to buy a brand new motorbike because you'll lose time/money learning a new toy. There are a lot of A list names who are using FCPS for very successful movies. It's the production houses that are still using Avid. Not buying Avid new but using Avid that they've already been using for years.

Avid still is the top dog in Hollywood. According to a survey of ACE members (an honorary society of film editors) in 2008 80% were using Avid. It's still notable when a film is cut on FCP because the de facto standard is Avid when it comes to that level of production. FCP dominates places where the budgets aren't as big such as indie films and the prosumer market but they have made some inroads into the higher end of things. A couple of years ago, for example, 20th Century FOX started doing all of its in house movie editing on FCP. Avid and Adobe aren't standing still though and, IMO, have progressed a lot more over the past 3-4 years than Final Cut Studio has. Companies like Avid, Adobe, and Blackmagic are lighting it up at NAB this year and I don't know what Apple has planned for the next FCS update but it needs to be jaw dropping.

Personally I love all the competition and look forward to running Avid MC, FCP and maybe even PPro depending on what the situation calls for.


Lethal

 

[inertiat]

I think I need a rant about AE, and I hope other AE users in the same position will agree:
- First off, why has it taken so long to get to 64-bit native???
- Second, why did a lone guy in France have to develop his own entire IK animation plug-in to get AE to a place where it can actually be somewhat used for animation?? (http://ik.duduf.com/) It is an amazing plug-in, but why couldn't a multi-million $ company implement it ages ago??
- Why still no way of applying different amounts of feathering to independent points on a mask??

My gripe is that Adobe treat AE as if it's the best compositing tool ever. It isn't. It will never be. Give me Nuke, or Shake, any day - an node-based compositor is always going to be better.
Where AE recoups from this though and totally throws down the competition is as a motion graphics tool - the thing has so much damn potential. But is there 1 feature in this new release that make me think Adobe even realises this? Nope. But there are a hundreds companies and individuals out there who do and are releasing plug-in after plug-in - really good ones too, but surely Adobe could have come up with a few of them themselves and implemented them into the base code of AE? That way we'd have better stability (ok that's a maybe from Adobe) and would ultimately pay less on our entire investment. Personally I'm sick of having to fork out for Red Giant products. They're so damn good they should have been in AE to begin with!

It's just like what a previous poster said about Flash - it could have been a freaking awesome animation tool, but Adobe neglected that side of Flash for years and have now turned it into some shovel-ware app devkit. What's going to happen to AE with Adobe running around with their heads up their ass thinking AE can take on an node-based compositor and they can neglect the things that AE is actually brilliant at?? Guess I'm just going to have to buy a zillion more high-priced plug-ins (now the 64-bit versions) to get what I need to do done. Or move to Motion (I joke... at least for now)

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

I can't believe Adobe have bumped up the prices. I bought CS4 Design Creative Suite for £264 when it was released, and now the same package in CS5 is £305? Something doesn't add up... Even Photoshop on its own is £40 - its a joke.

 

[macgeof]

Are you responsible for the Lexus UK site then? Like most car sites, I see nothing that requires Flash, it could be written to run more efficiently and quickly without - you'd just lose the "prettiness".

lol, I knew I was opening myself up for all sorts of feedback by posting that

Yes you are right I dev for a design agency that has Toyota (and hence Lexus) among its clients. I personally am responsible more for the Toyota site than Lexus - but that's not me hiding from yuor points, all of which I think are very valid.

Flash apps for them are built based on signed-off creative designs which are then passed to Flash devs to actually make. So some of what you say is probably more relevant to the creative decisions made with the client, and as for testing, please don't even go there! We have testers obviously, but being pan-European there is a lot of testing required to show all apps work in all localised deployments.

So yes, there are flaws in the Flash deployed both at the creative and quite possibly code level. And yes, their sites are not viewable on an iPhone or non-Flash client machine/browser, but that is the client's decision. I would always advocate having a non-Flash fallback in place for such systems, but they feel it is not necessary (as yet they feel that anyway, but they are free to change their minds).

My main point for posting was to say that this is what the client wants, and I am not aware of how HTML5 can produce the same results - which was in response to an earlier poster saying Flash devs NEVER post examples of what they make and why it is in Flash.

Thanks for your feedback tho, I'll pass it on to account/project managers (and the testing team)

 

[JarredWagner]

Hopefully CS5 will play nice with Spaces. I doubt it.