Actually yes. We build enormous multiple page tiled documents of technical drawings. We import a lot of CAD files and place some images. Not always above 4 gig's but frequently large files. We're not drawing logos, I'll put it that way. If I had a dime for every hour I've lost to Illustrator crashes I'd be retired. I wish they would take the time to create a stable, fast array of app's (particularly Illustrator) and quit with all the crap upgrades that only introduce a few new tools, tricks, whatever.
That sounds like a job for InDesign, not Illustrator!
$200 to upgrade my Photoshop CS4 to CS5 isn't so bad.
By Adobe standards, maybe. For all of the features that _should_ have been in the CS4 version (i.e., better multi-processor handling and memory management, in particular), $200 is highway robbery.
Frankly, the pricing structure for all of the various components makes my head hurt. I think they've spent more time on their marketing strategies than the actual programs in the suite (more like a squad or platoon). And now they have a "Photoshop Extended" -- WTF?!?!?
I think Adobe's taken a page from Microsoft's multiple-versions-of-Windows strategy and gone to the next super-crazy level.
That's a lot of $$ for Content-Aware Fill, but all the same, that's an awesome feature.
I can't wait to test the distortion corrections in the Lens Correction tool; I'd like to get DxO out of my workflow if Lr+Ps could do the same job. (I'm still waiting for DxO 6 for Mac to ship...)
I'm unclear on what the minimum requirements are to run CS5. It apparently requires a "multicore" Mac? About how old a Mac can you have that CS5 will install on?
Just about every Mac made has been multicore or multiprocessor for quite a few years. You're not really going to spend $1600 on a software suite and then be too cheap to buy a decent Mac to run it on, are you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu
Content Aware Fill will pay for itself in no time.
Funny that people will take that view with a $1600 software package, but when they get vastly greater productivity from a Mac which costs a couple hundred dollars more, it's 'too expensive'.
Sorry I missed that. Is this better or worse than the normal Photoshop? I'm picking being Extended it is supposedly better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Halfen
And now they have a "Photoshop Extended" -- WTF?!?!?
There is a Photoshop Extended with CS4. What's so shocking/offensive about it, Doug?
Lowededwookie: Extended has some video, animation and 3D tools that people working ONLY with still images don't need in any way, shape or form. If you don't need it don't get it. Or surrender your right to complain about it being "bloated."
It comes with the Design Premium version because… well, because. If you pay that much for the full suite, of course they'll give you the most feature complete version.
Apple's smart here because they've got a complete photo-management system. Get em when they're just starting out, with iPhoto. They'll get interested in photography because iPhoto makes it so easy to make photos look good with just a couple of clicks. Then, when the hardcore iPhoto user finally wields a more expensive DSLR, encourage the move up to Aperture with the line: Pro Performance with iPhoto Simplicity.
You might find aperture for a photographer but in no way does it cone close for ad/post production work like Photoshop and like Apple, they are making the hard things much quicker and easier to do and so much faster.
If you aren't a hard core Adobe CS Suite power user it's easy to replace the applications with other applications such as Aperture, Pixelmator, RapidWeaver, Lineform etc.
I used to use CS suite exclusively because I could download it for free. Never used the suite to make a living. It was all in good fun. I'll still download CS5 and try it out for fun, but I have made the switch to the applications above because Adobe applications are too CPU intensive.
They are great apps with great OS X GUIs.
I'm still deciding between Lightroom and Aperture though.
Funny that people will take that view with a $1600 software package, but when they get vastly greater productivity from a Mac which costs a couple hundred dollars more, it's 'too expensive'.
Not sure I get your point there.
I use an i7 PC at work with Photoshop CS4 (soon CS5) and 3DS Max 2010 (soon 2011). How would I be more productive on a Mac?
I'm unclear on what the minimum requirements are to run CS5. It apparently requires a "multicore" Mac? About how old a Mac can you have that CS5 will install on?
I do some work with Adobe, and actually, the Creative Suite 5 Student and Teacher Editions have all the features and functionality of the commercial edition.
The cost of Adobe Student and Teacher Editions is up to 80% off the fully-priced product, and you can always purchase commercial upgrades after you graduate.
Comments
Actually yes. We build enormous multiple page tiled documents of technical drawings. We import a lot of CAD files and place some images. Not always above 4 gig's but frequently large files. We're not drawing logos, I'll put it that way. If I had a dime for every hour I've lost to Illustrator crashes I'd be retired. I wish they would take the time to create a stable, fast array of app's (particularly Illustrator) and quit with all the crap upgrades that only introduce a few new tools, tricks, whatever.
That sounds like a job for InDesign, not Illustrator!
$200 to upgrade my Photoshop CS4 to CS5 isn't so bad.
By Adobe standards, maybe. For all of the features that _should_ have been in the CS4 version (i.e., better multi-processor handling and memory management, in particular), $200 is highway robbery.
Frankly, the pricing structure for all of the various components makes my head hurt. I think they've spent more time on their marketing strategies than the actual programs in the suite (more like a squad or platoon). And now they have a "Photoshop Extended" -- WTF?!?!?
I think Adobe's taken a page from Microsoft's multiple-versions-of-Windows strategy and gone to the next super-crazy level.
That's a lot of $$ for Content-Aware Fill, but all the same, that's an awesome feature.
I can't wait to test the distortion corrections in the Lens Correction tool; I'd like to get DxO out of my workflow if Lr+Ps could do the same job. (I'm still waiting for DxO 6 for Mac to ship...)
$200 to upgrade my Photoshop CS4 to CS5 isn't so bad.
Content Aware Fill will pay for itself in no time.
I can't wait to get my hands on it.
I'm unclear on what the minimum requirements are to run CS5. It apparently requires a "multicore" Mac? About how old a Mac can you have that CS5 will install on?
Just about every Mac made has been multicore or multiprocessor for quite a few years. You're not really going to spend $1600 on a software suite and then be too cheap to buy a decent Mac to run it on, are you?
Content Aware Fill will pay for itself in no time.
Funny that people will take that view with a $1600 software package, but when they get vastly greater productivity from a Mac which costs a couple hundred dollars more, it's 'too expensive'.
Sorry I missed that. Is this better or worse than the normal Photoshop? I'm picking being Extended it is supposedly better.
And now they have a "Photoshop Extended" -- WTF?!?!?
There is a Photoshop Extended with CS4. What's so shocking/offensive about it, Doug?
Lowededwookie: Extended has some video, animation and 3D tools that people working ONLY with still images don't need in any way, shape or form. If you don't need it don't get it. Or surrender your right to complain about it being "bloated."
It comes with the Design Premium version because… well, because. If you pay that much for the full suite, of course they'll give you the most feature complete version.
Just to add re: iPhoto.
Apple's smart here because they've got a complete photo-management system. Get em when they're just starting out, with iPhoto. They'll get interested in photography because iPhoto makes it so easy to make photos look good with just a couple of clicks. Then, when the hardcore iPhoto user finally wields a more expensive DSLR, encourage the move up to Aperture with the line: Pro Performance with iPhoto Simplicity.
Then, hit em up with the following:
http://www.apple.com/aperture/iphoto-to-aperture/
Brilliant.
You might find aperture for a photographer but in no way does it cone close for ad/post production work like Photoshop and like Apple, they are making the hard things much quicker and easier to do and so much faster.
I used to use CS suite exclusively because I could download it for free. Never used the suite to make a living. It was all in good fun. I'll still download CS5 and try it out for fun, but I have made the switch to the applications above because Adobe applications are too CPU intensive.
They are great apps with great OS X GUIs.
I'm still deciding between Lightroom and Aperture though.
Funny that people will take that view with a $1600 software package, but when they get vastly greater productivity from a Mac which costs a couple hundred dollars more, it's 'too expensive'.
Not sure I get your point there.
I use an i7 PC at work with Photoshop CS4 (soon CS5) and 3DS Max 2010 (soon 2011). How would I be more productive on a Mac?
I'm unclear on what the minimum requirements are to run CS5. It apparently requires a "multicore" Mac? About how old a Mac can you have that CS5 will install on?
If you have a core solo, its not for you.
"Your Uncle Ned is coming to dinner tonight, and he's bringing his mother, plus their vacation slides."
"No he's not."
"How come?"
"I made him part of wall."
"Oh good."
The cost of Adobe Student and Teacher Editions is up to 80% off the fully-priced product, and you can always purchase commercial upgrades after you graduate.