Just got PS CS and I'm really not impressed

Discussion in 'Design and Graphics' started by Bobdude161, Sep 9, 2006.

  1. Bobdude161 macrumors 65816


    Mar 12, 2006
    N'Albany, Indiana
    Bought a copy of CS1. Being converted from PS 5.5, CS1 isn't much of a difference. Did they just convert the exact same thing from PS 5.5 to OS X? Also I did one of those free trials of CS2. Same thing as CS1. I haven't been up to date on versions of PS, but it's all dissapointing.

    One thing I did notice in CS1 was that when you make a new file in PS you have the option of choosing 8-bit and 16-bit color. Pretty cool, but it seems that in 16-bit color, alot of the filters are grayed out and not availible. Any reason why?
  2. apfhex macrumors 68030


    Aug 8, 2006
    Northern California
    There aren't a lot of immediately obvious new features, but between versions 5.5 and 7.0 there were a lot of changes, some of which I really miss when I find myself using an older version. You'll probably have to use it a while to realize what's new and what's changed... CS/7.0 is a bit nicer.
  3. vectormasked macrumors member


    Sep 3, 2006
    Somewhere in Canada
    I don't know why you say the difference is not that big between those two versions. My guess is that you're not very experienced or you don't explore photoshop enough. I think of the changes with every upgrade to be huge.
  4. generik macrumors 601


    Aug 5, 2005
    I always thought that each version of PS is a scam... because nothing seems to change! What exactly do they change with each new version? Apart from having RAW support from new cameras etc? :confused:
  5. exabytes18 macrumors 6502

    Jun 14, 2006
    Suburb of Chicago
    Yea, I can see that.

    Most people like to have the latest and greatest version of Photoshop. With relatively minor updates, Adobe releases a new version to extract all the money they can from people. I'm sure the fact that PS is one of the most pirated pieces of software ties into all of this.
  6. Felldownthewell macrumors 65816


    Feb 10, 2006
    As I was reading the wikipedia release history I noticed that CS2's codename was space monkey. This is very, very weired considering what just happened to me the other day. I re-installed OS X and put all my apps and documents back onto the HDD from the external disk they were on. This included PS CS2. When I tried to launch it instead of the usual feather loading screen I got this:


    Now photoshop dosen't work- I had installed my friend's copy (no I didn't pirate it! Although I tried once for a windows version and it didn't work. Probably a good thing) and he still has the disks, but I thought I'd share.

    Anyway, on topic, I've only ever used CS and CS2, and while there are differences, there is nothing major- at least not that I used very often. The only big difference I found- probably because I was using it so often- was that the magic wand tool got smarter, but thats about it. The upgrade price is a bit too much for what you are getting. Although CS3 will sell like hotcakes because of the UB update, which crafty little Adobe has obviously factored into their plans.
  7. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Jul 4, 2004
    With the bundling of the Creative Suite, Photoshop has become subservient to the timing of InDesign's releases much as Illustrator has become the red-haired step-child... InDesign is the product that Adobe want growth and marketshare from. With the quiet death of Freehand, InDesign remains the one Adobe product in their 'print' package that doesn't have a near-monopoly in its market.

    Therefore, as predominantly Quark users, we're only buying every second release of the Creative Suite from Adobe as opposed to buying every new version of Quark. Apart from the occasional CS2 EPS that's been sent to us, it hasn't been a problem apart from Adobe not updating RAW handling for Photoshop CS.

    In my view, Adobe are treading a fine line by adopting some of the tactics used by Microsoft in terms of planned obsolescence and file lock-in.
  8. ATD macrumors 6502a

    Sep 25, 2005
    Photoshop is a mature program, the changes in the first versions were big (I have been using it since version 1). The changes since 5 have been much smaller by compairision. The most radical change was version 3 when they introduced layers, Photoshop before layers was painful. A lot of the changes now are much more specialized. For example Lens blur and HDRI are two excellent additions for me but very few people have the need for them. But I have to agree that the later versions are not adding up for most users.

  9. faustfire macrumors 6502a


    Jul 17, 2002
    Agreed, with Freehand gone Illustrators development is just going to stagnate even more than it already has.
  10. ATD macrumors 6502a

    Sep 25, 2005
    I think 5.5 has 16 bit color, I know it's in 6. Unless you have a real need for it, it's not worth fooling with. I only use it when my source material is 16 bit and even then it's not that useful. The filters are grayed out simply because they will not work in that bit depth. And from what I understand, many of the ones that do work in 16 bit are not fully 16 bit anyway. For example if you open up Levels with a 16 bit file you should in theory (I would think) see a slider range well beyond 0 to 255.

    However, HDRI does have bit depth well beyond 16, I have heard of images as high as 96 bit. I think Photoshop stops at 32 bit. When you adjust an HDRI with Exposure you no longer have number scales because the scale can get insanely large (2 to the power of 32 for a 32 bit image). Also when you use HDRIs just about everything is grayed out.

    Over the next few years you might be hearing a lot more about HDRI, it could be a big change in the way things are photographed and how they adjusted in Photoshop.

  11. Bobdude161 thread starter macrumors 65816


    Mar 12, 2006
    N'Albany, Indiana
    noob :rolleyes:

    lol. I'm glad I'm not the only one who notices this. I've been a PS 5 man for 4 years or so. Although it's all the same, I do like the Mac OS X port. No more choppy Mac OS 9 PS!

    One thing that bugs me though is I have to deselect a selection by pressing CMD-D or I have to select the whole selection by using the unselect tool (which is default btw). Back in the days of 5.5 to unselect a selection you could just click somewhere and it would dissappear or select something else and the last selection would disappear as well.

Share This Page