Next Version of Photoshop to be GPU-Accelerated

[Everythingisnt]

Needless to say, that is *extremely* impressive.

How it will perform on our Mac Pros with their somewhat outdated GPUs is another matter though..

 

[babybluecollar]

In the long-run, I would bet on Pixelmator too. At some point, Adobe is going to get too big and lumbering to keep up and it's going to take someone fast and small to stay ahead of them. I've seen so many would-be Photoshop challengers come and go but Pixelmator is the first one I've seen where I think it seriously stands a chance. I would buy and use Pixelmator too but it doesn't run for crud on older hardware (still chugging away on a G4 iMac here.) However, that's the sacrifice a developer makes in the decision to stay ahead of the big corporate alternative. Still, one of the first things I will install on my next Mac is Pixelmator.

The sad thing is that if the developers behind GIMP would get off their high horse about copying Photoshop's UI, we'd already have a true competitor. I've used GIMP and it's got loads of great features, but the interface is mired in a weird mix of modern day and mid-90s-isms, and it's hard to work efficiently around such a scatterbrained approach to the tools.

Ok I am a little tired of the comparisons between pixelmator and photoshop. Yes, if u want to make cool picture to post on facebook or myspace, pixelmator will work. For us that actually do this for a living, no it will not. I need support for high resolution ACCURATE, print ready files. With the ability to color correct and it be ready to send to a real printer, not my inkjet.

I need to be able to seperate to DSC for plates.

I need to be able to export to a variety of formats for other purposes.

I need to work with multigigabyte files and have the preview reflect the final rendered image... down the the pixel.

and... i need friggin keyboard shortcuts so I can do this quickly!

so no... pixelmator will never be a serious competitor on a professional level.

 

[MacFly123]

Adobe sucks! Yes that's right they suck! I say its just time for Apple to release a Creative Suite killer

 

[Hajs]

Ok I am a little tired of the comparisons between pixelmator and photoshop. Yes, if u want to make cool picture to post on facebook or myspace, pixelmator will work. For us that actually do this for a living, no it will not. I need support for high resolution ACCURATE, print ready files. With the ability to color correct and it be ready to send to a real printer, not my inkjet.

I need to be able to seperate to DSC for plates.

I need to be able to export to a variety of formats for other purposes.

I need to work with multigigabyte files and have the preview reflect the final rendered image... down the the pixel.

and... i need friggin keyboard shortcuts so I can do this quickly!

so no... pixelmator will never be a serious competitor on a professional level.

yes, blimey this whole discussion seems strange to me.
how many people on this forum have photoshop and use it in anger?
It seems to me that there are quite a few hobbyists floating around here that would like to think they know what they are talking about, but really just are doing wedding invitations for their friends etc etc. I wish them luck with pixelmator.

 

[babybluecollar]

yes, blimey this whole discussion seems strange to me.
how many people on this forum have photoshop and use it in anger?
It seems to me that there are quite a few hobbyists floating around here that would like to think they know what they are talking about, but really just are doing wedding invitations for their friends etc etc. I wish them luck with pixelmator.

THANK YOU!

 

[Hajs]

THANK YOU!

Thanks,
That was my first post BTW, felt quite liberating! I have been observing from a distance for a while. H.

 

[babybluecollar]

Welcome to the board, I am new too.

I just get frustrated that people sometimes don't understand that even though these are the flashiest of tools... they are professional level. And doing cheesy amateur stuff with them is possible... but some of us rely on the things that the teenagers don't find important to make a living.

 

[Hajs]

Welcome to the board, I am new too.

I just get frustrated that people sometimes don't understand that even though these are the flashiest of tools... they are professional level. And doing cheesy amateur stuff with them is possible... but some of us rely on the things that the teenagers don't find important to make a living.

Hah! nice to meet you.
Im sure i read about someone earlier talking about lens flare. Hmm, case in point.

 

[babybluecollar]

definitely... they could really get rid of the entire "filters" tab and not upset me one bit.

The power of photoshop is really under the surface on a professional level.

But yay gradients and bevels and lens flares FTW!

 

[inkswamp]

Ok I am a little tired of the comparisons between pixelmator and photoshop. Yes, if u want to make cool picture to post on facebook or myspace, pixelmator will work. For us that actually do this for a living, no it will not. I need support for high resolution ACCURATE, print ready files. With the ability to color correct and it be ready to send to a real printer, not my inkjet.

I need to be able to seperate to DSC for plates.

I need to be able to export to a variety of formats for other purposes.

I need to work with multigigabyte files and have the preview reflect the final rendered image... down the the pixel.

and... i need friggin keyboard shortcuts so I can do this quickly!

so no... pixelmator will never be a serious competitor on a professional level.

Okay, thanks for posting your resume.

BTW, I've done professional design and pre-press work as well and I know what you're talking about. I wasn't making the point that Pixelmator can replace Photoshop. The point is that Pixelmator is the first application I've seen where it really seems like the developer has a good idea of how an image app should be built in the OS X era, from the ground up. If they keep up with that and aim for feature parity with Photoshop, I think Adobe will have their first true competitor in this space. And that's something Adobe's customers really need. They don't need Adobe milking them with halfhearted updates.

 

[babybluecollar]

But really you have got it all wrong. Pixelmator is fun for filters... yay GPU acceleration! But it really doesn't compete with photoshop on what is important. There is a reason pixelmator is 59 dollars and photoshop is several hundred. I am not gonna be preparing images for press with pixelmator.

Its not a resume, its just reality. Sometimes you get images that you need to color correct in 32 bit, just so it will print right.

Sometimes you need your paths to translate into indesign so the pre-press folk can mask correctly.

Sometimes you need something other than GPU accelerated eye candy. Don't get me wrong, I think pixelmator is an excellent application, BUT IT IS NOT A PROFESSIONAL APPLICATION.

 

[Hajs]

Okay, thanks for posting your resume.

BTW, I've done professional design and pre-press work as well and I know what you're talking about. I wasn't making the point that Pixelmator can replace Photoshop. The point is that Pixelmator is the first application I've seen where it really seems like the developer has a good idea of how an image app should be built in the OS X era, from the ground up. If they keep up with that and aim for feature parity with Photoshop, I think Adobe will have their first true competitor in this space. And that's something Adobe's customers really need. They don't need Adobe milking them with halfhearted updates.

I do understand what you are getting at here.
All the stuff I use PS for is saved (normally as pretty large hires files) how is the GPU going to help this? This tends to be the most lengthy part of the whole editing process when creating artwork.

 

[skellener]

In the long-run, I would bet on Pixelmator too. At some point, Adobe is going to get too big and lumbering to keep up and it's going to take someone fast and small to stay ahead of them. I've seen so many would-be Photoshop challengers come and go but Pixelmator is the first one I've seen where I think it seriously stands a chance. I would buy and use Pixelmator too but it doesn't run for crud on older hardware (still chugging away on a G4 iMac here.) However, that's the sacrifice a developer makes in the decision to stay ahead of the big corporate alternative. Still, one of the first things I will install on my next Mac is Pixelmator.

Pixelmator runs just fine on my G4 (Dual 1 Ghz PPC). Adobe is already too big and lumbering to keep up. I'll bet Pixelmator has even more features by October. They just released an update recently that added curves and rulers. I think a lot of people may look at just spending the $59 for GPU processing over the $500 (or whatever upgrade for CS4 is this year) and sit this upgrade out on the Mac side. Adobe may lose out all together by CS5. Think how much ground Pixelmator will have covered by then. It already has GPU acceleration. It could have 64-bit support long before CS5. I'd really like to see these guys unseat Adobe. I wish them good luck!

 

[babybluecollar]

Pixelmator runs just fine on my G4 (Dual 1 Ghz PPC). Adobe is already too big and lumbering to keep up. I'll bet Pixelmator has even more features by October. They just released an update recently that added curves and rulers. I think a lot of people may look at just spending the $59 for GPU processing over the $500 (or whatever upgrade for CS4 is this year) and sit this upgrade out on the Mac side. Adobe may lose out all together by CS5. Think how much ground Pixelmator will have covered by then. It already has GPU acceleration. It could have 64-bit support long before CS5. I'd really like to see these guys unseat Adobe. I wish them good luck!

And your filtered "myspace" photos still will not be appropriate for press.

 

[mashinhead]

CS4 in October? Seems like only recently that CS3 came out.

i had the same reaction. the cs 2 cs 3 gap was like 4 yrs..

 

[inkswamp]

But really you have got it all wrong. Pixelmator is fun for filters... yay GPU acceleration! But it really doesn't compete with photoshop on what is important. There is a reason pixelmator is 59 dollars and photoshop is several hundred. I am not gonna be preparing images for press with pixelmator.

Its not a resume, its just reality. Sometimes you get images that you need to color correct in 32 bit, just so it will print right.

Sometimes you need your paths to translate into indesign so the pre-press folk can mask correctly.

Sometimes you need something other than GPU accelerated eye candy. Don't get me wrong, I think pixelmator is an excellent application, BUT IT IS NOT A PROFESSIONAL APPLICATION.

You're either incapable of understanding my point or being intentionally obtuse so you can carry on about your work needs for whatever reason. I thought I made it clear that as Pixelmator stands, it's not a replacement for Photoshop. It is however the first image processing application that appears to have a solid grasp on how an image app should be built nowadays from the ground up. That's the kind of thing that could evolve into a serious PS competitor should the developer choose to go that way with it. I hope they do.

Okay, here's the part where you claim Pixelmator isn't a PS replacement again even though this is the second time I've said that.

Pixelmator runs just fine on my G4 (Dual 1 Ghz PPC).

Yeah, my iMac G4 is blazing along at 700 Mhz. Someday, I'll rejoin civilization.

I'd really like to see these guys unseat Adobe. I wish them good luck!

I just want Adobe to be scared a little bit, enough to actually make a Photoshop update that actually matters to anyone.

 

[davidmaxwaterma]

SGI O2 + Adobe Photoshop3 was accelerated on GPU

Geez, it's about blooming time! Adobe has been so far behind the times with Photoshop - no 64 bit support and no GPU support. It's really ridiculous how long it's taken them to get the GPU support.

Actually, Adobe Photoshop 3 had used the GPU for acceleration on SGI O2 computers. It was quite amazing how much faster it was that the PC version.

Ah, looks like it might have been both GPU and DSPs (probably part of the gfx hardware, but maybe ICE) :

This second
directory contains code which uses image processing hardware, such as
DSPs (digital signal processors) directly or calls OpenGL to perform
tasks such as color space conversion, filtering, and resampling (for
resizing and rotating).

Here's what was accelerated :

The following list of menu items invoke
hardware accelerated functions: Mode/CMYK Color, Mode/Lab Color,
Image/Rotate/Arbitrary..., Image/Image Size..., Filter/Blur/Blur,
Filter/Blur/Blur More, Filter/Blur/Gaussian Blur..., Filter/Blur/Motion
Blur..., Filter/Noise/Despeckle, Filter/Pixilate/Facet,
Filter/Sharpen/Sharpen, Filter/Sharpen/Sharpen Edges,
Filter/Sharpen/Sharpen More, Filter/Sharpen/Unsharp Mask,
Filter/Stylize/Emboss..., Filter/Stylize/Find Edges,
Filter/Other/Custom...

Not extensive, but I'm sure it was very noticable.

I wonder why they didn't decide to continue the trend back then? Nice to see they've finally got with the program - a decade or two late, but there you go

 

[winterspan]

But really you have got it all wrong. Pixelmator is fun for filters... yay GPU acceleration! But it really doesn't compete with photoshop on what is important. There is a reason pixelmator is 59 dollars and photoshop is several hundred. I am not gonna be preparing images for press with pixelmator.

Its not a resume, its just reality. Sometimes you get images that you need to color correct in 32 bit, just so it will print right.

Sometimes you need your paths to translate into indesign so the pre-press folk can mask correctly.

Sometimes you need something other than GPU accelerated eye candy. Don't get me wrong, I think pixelmator is an excellent application, BUT IT IS NOT A PROFESSIONAL APPLICATION.

I understand your point, and I don't have any experience with PixelMator, but what Inkswamp is trying to say is that the developers of PixelMator, having created a great application from the ground up with an excellent interface, may have the potential of taking their app to a professional level in the future, eventually reaching professional feature parity with Photoshop. For now, there's not really any comparison; but we all would benefit greatly if Photoshop were to get a true competitor. I'm unsure why I'm having to explain this to you -- are you reading his posts?

 

[Michael CM1]

You should always export to Distiller from Quark, even Quark 7.

The damn program can't make a PDF to save its life!

For prosperity, yeah. But we have to send a couple of proofs via e-mail and just really need it legible for one person to look at. The problem is Quark 4 isn't even integrated with Distiller like 5 is. You gotta export to .eps then distill. Of course this royally sucks when you have about 10 Power Macs and have 2 copies of Distiller. Yes, our company is famously cheap. Our other computers are Power Mac G3s or eMacs. The non-Power Mac G5s can't even load Google correctly now.

 

[Michael CM1]

They still offer all the apps individually though, right? Or do you mean that they are much more expensive individually, and so they are only worth buying in the suites?

I was thinking the same thing. I just own Creative Suite 3 because I got the education version and just use it for junk at home and to learn more so I can eventually get a better job.

But considering the fact that usually a major version upgrade means older version people are left out in the cold, I don't get a one-year turnaround on CS4. Mac OS usually takes 2-3 years, and it's only $120 per copy. If I spent $700 on Photoshop or $8 million on the entire CS3, I'd be pissed if Adobe was upping the version so quickly.

 

[chewy5000]

definitely not october

http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2008/05/oct_1.html

 

[yesthisisapc]

They just released an update recently that added curves and rulers.

This is a fakepost, right?

I find it a little hard to believe that a program that just updated to include something that even the most basic free image editing apps have is going to unseat even freeware programs like GIMP.

...

Does GIMP have CMYK support yet?

 

[winterspan]

http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2008/05/oct_1.html

Thank you for the link! Since many won't end up clicking on it, I thought Id post his blog post so everyone reads it. and I'd like to comment that I entirely agree with his point; the online tech press has become a steaming pile of trash lately. NO ONE FACT-CHECKS, they repeat rumor as fact, and take things out of context. They also all are connected in this big web of ********. One blog or website writes something speculative, someone else copies it and references it, and pretty soon it's gone round-robin around the internet and transforms from random speculation into a fact confirmed by "trusted sources". I'm so sick of that nonsense.


Straight From the Adobe Engineer that gave the presentation all of this info is based upon:

*emphasis mine*

It seems that news of the demo I did the other day (a repeat of what we'd shown publicly three weeks earlier) is bouncing all around the online tech press. People are excited that the Photoshop team is exploring ways to make the app feel faster and smoother, and that's all good. What's irritating, though, is just how much bogus info is getting invented, passed around, and swallowed without question.

Gizmodo is repeating info found on a site called TG Daily, stating that "Photoshop CS4" (a term that I've never heard anyone from Adobe use publicly) "is expected to be released on October 1." Uhh... expected by whom? And based on what?

I didn't say anything about schedule. In fact, I never said that any of this stuff is promised to go into any particular version of Photoshop. Rather, as with previous installments, it's a technology demonstration of some things we've got cooking--nothing more.

Doesn't matter, though: Someone pulled a date apparently out of thin air, and now everyone who can copy & paste is dutifully repeating it. The fish story grows with the telling, too. In addition to repeating the date, Electronista is inventing new details (e.g. "CS3 has already had limited support for graphics processing units (GPUs) for certain filters"; sorry, no; "An upcoming wave of video cards with special physics processing will also help, Adobe explains"; nope, didn't say that; and more). Where do people get this stuff? It's particularly annoying to see made-up info presented as a response from Adobe--to questions that were never asked. (Contacting Adobe PR, or me directly, to confirm some detail isn't exactly tough.)

I'm not feeling a lot of confidence in the tech press these days. People just make up whatever they want, creating a bunch of expectations & misperceptions that people like me have to try to unravel. There's no disincentive to doing so: the sites still get their ad impressions, and clearly bloggers and readers are all too happy to take what they read at face value.

I don't know what to tell you, as the quest for ad bucks is eroding journalistic standards across the board. "Caveat lector," and I'll keep trying to share actually legitimate information here.

J.

 

[krazygoat]

Pixelmator may not be a professional app for some markets, but it works fine in other.

If you have gone to see Iron Man or I am Legend you have seen Pixelmator in action. So just because it doesn't work for your niche doesn't mean it doesn't work for some other professional niches.

And for us we fine Pixelmator a huge speed improvement over PS3, which we also still use in the niche we need it for.

Pixelmator has a horrible name but for a version 1 app it is pretty darn good not even considering the price.

 

[Eraserhead]

But really you have got it all wrong. Pixelmator is fun for filters... yay GPU acceleration! But it really doesn't compete with photoshop on what is important.

...

Sometimes you need something other than GPU accelerated eye candy. Don't get me wrong, I think pixelmator is an excellent application, BUT IT IS NOT A PROFESSIONAL APPLICATION.

Not yet, though by version 5.0 it may well do.