This is the feature set (although not complete) that will WILL see in the new PRO application.
It is really a no brainer as the features have long been listed right on the Apple website, but we have not expected them to be used in an APPLE application separate from the OS.
the needs of the Core Image abilities built right into the OS do demand a very capable graphics card and no doubt this is something that would be expected in a PRO application.
The exact way that Apple integrates the CoreImage features into the new PRO app I guess will have to wait until tomorrow.
Parousia
Yes, those are a very good selection of filters and effects. But it isn't that simple.
Just look at sharpen and unsharp mask for example. Can you tell me that Apple's version is as good as Adobe's? Adobe just added to the unsharp mask set in CS2, which makes it much more versatile, higher quality, and useful.
The same questions can be asked for all of the other filters and effects. Just because Apple offers them doesn't mean that they will be the best.
I don't see in any of those filters an editing program in the making. Photoshop is far more than filters and effects.
While Apple could write a program and then allow access to these filters, that won't automatically make it competitive.
I really don't want to see Apple make an attempt to compete with PS. PS is the standard. It's an incredibly complex program that has evolved over 16 years to get to where it is today. I would hate to see Adobe feel that it was going to be blindsided the way it was with FCP.
At least Premier was not as good as it should be, and so FCP was able to overshadow it. The same is not true with PS. If Apple comes out with a program that seems to be challenging PS, and enough Mac loyalists buy it, Adobe just might respond in a way that would not be good for the platform.
Adobe's pro apps are more important for the continued success of the Mac than Office is. The are viable alternatives to Office if Apple wants to support them. Apple can't come out with one to PS.
Adobe's apps are part of a publishing ecosystem that has taken 20 years to ecolve. Apple will have none.
It's better that they don't try.
If they come out with an Expressions 4 challenger that would be different, but why would they choose to show that at what is essentially a Pro photo expo?
Adobe like any Company can compete.... something they are not right now with PS.
notice that I did not say that the Pro App would compete with PS just that the functions already within our OS from CI would be used in the new App.
If some of those functions work exceptionally well for the PHOTO focus applications, great hopefully that will impel Adobe to innovate....
look what Quark and Macromedia caused Adobe to create.
Its good for all of us when Apple comes to the table with applications.
Adobe is not going to stop selling applications for the Mac that is absurd.
They love making the 10's of millions they make from there products that have and continue to have the larger share (well I design using PS and Ill and the rest anyway on my mac.) on the Mac platform.
With the Intel switch this is only going to increase not decrease even if Apple did intro a product that caused Adobe to say (ohh SH__T)
Compulsive.
EDIT:
Core Image dynamically optimizes for the CPU, automatically tuning for Velocity Engine and <b>multiple processors</b> as appropriate.
I agree with melgross here; while I'm sure Apple will find uses for CI in their Pro Photo app, I suspect it will be similar to Motion/FCP; Speeding up general operations and allowing more flexibility. I know of very few graphics or photography professionals that really are very excited about canned filters. But again, it's much more likely Apple will target the market vacuum (asset management/workflow) as opposed to Adobe's entrenched position. Just makes more business sense, and if Apple cares to expand that presence later on, well then they will have a market foothold.
Just as you don't apply Solarize (insert favorite canned filter as desired) to every photo you take, Apple's not going to be pimping CI to every "photo" oriented app. I'm sorry, but canned CI filters just scream cheesy to the professional photographer, and I'm sure Apple knows that. It would be as if the Wired art team used canned Pages templates for their layout.
"Speeding up general operations and allowing more flexibility"
This is exactly what I am talking about here.. of course the abilities of CI exceed the bounds of the (prospective) new App.
Of course the most used items will benfit the most for CI, but currently CI is not implemented in CS2 and most likely will not be fully even in CS3.
Noise Reduction
Color Adjustment Filters
Color Controls
Color Matrix
Exposure Adjust
Gamma Adjust
Hue Adjust
White Point Adjust
Color Cube
There are MANY accelerated abilities that CI supports that currently need to be coded into apps. IE. velocity acceleration, or multiple processors etc.
agreed, I can't believe thinksecret posted that the 12" powerbook was "dying". It's being replaced with either 13" or 12widescreen, or smaller screen. Apple's not going to kill off something that is wildly successful.
I believe they will do just that... for now, to make the announcement in the beginning of '06 of the Intel based 13" or 14" widescreen PB more spectacular.
Right now the differences between the 12" iBook and the 12" PB are to negligible (for most consumers, not those with special A/V needs) to justify the existence of the latter.
countdown time as usual, please ensure your seatbelts are fastened, tray tables secured, turn ON all computers, cellphones and other devices, and make sure you have a fresh pair of underwear.
"Speeding up general operations and allowing more flexibility"
This is exactly what I am talking about here.. of course the abilities of CI exceed the bounds of the (prospective) new App.
Of course the most used items will benfit the most for CI, but currently CI is not implemented in CS2 and most likely will not be fully even in CS3.
Noise Reduction
Color Adjustment Filters
Color Controls
Color Matrix
Exposure Adjust
Gamma Adjust
Hue Adjust
White Point Adjust
Color Cube
There are MANY accelerated abilities that CI supports that currently need to be coded into apps. IE. velocity acceleration, or multiple processors etc.
that CI supports straight as it is in the OS.
Compulsive.
I could see these things being useful under the following conditions: The application does not actually write the effects to the original file (be it RAW or JPEG), the filters and their settings are saved within file metadata (DNG? hopefully), all effects are calculated in 16 bit per channel precision and in user specified order, ditch gamma in favor of curves. precision live histogram for image.
If Core Image can provide these features, in realtime, and with production quality output, then I think it would indeed be a viable addition to Apple's Asset Management software.
I suspect Automator will play a role in this release as well.
I could see these things being useful under the following conditions: The application does not actually write the effects to the original file (be it RAW or JPEG), the filters and their settings are saved within file metadata (DNG? hopefully), all effects are calculated in 16 bit per channel precision and in user specified order, ditch gamma in favor of curves. precision live histogram for image.
If Core Image can provide these features, in realtime, and with production quality output, then I think it would indeed be a viable addition to Apple's Asset Management software.
I suspect Automator will play a role in this release as well.
i am going slightly off topic but.... am i way behind the curve or in photoshop CS2 can you do all effects and processing (not just certain ones) in 16bit? CS1 AFAIK still only certain things can be done in 16bit.
yes, yes and yes chevy my main man.
1. non destructive. this is a potentially huge feature for any multimedia manipulation device. for example, effects and filters and routing in the reason/protools/ableton live sound and music software scene. realtime non-destructive processing opens up the creative process like you wouldn't believe.
2. metadata. certainly colorspace information is one important component, other areas would be OMFG! SPOTLIGHT! DIGITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT! *DING* light bulb just lit up....! YEAHHHHH...
3. 16bit per channel precision accelerated via GPU hardware so that CPU is offloaded and better calculations can be done. now, this is a pure guess by myself but i would imagine core image could even handle 32bits per channel in theory... but i could be talking out of my ass. but certainly 16bit per any channel (R,G,B, multiple masks, etc) is certainly possible now or in the near future. there is a lot of complex masking, texture processing, antialiasing etc done in the latest 3D games so at this stage it is probably a matter of figuring out, okay, how do we make photoshop really kick ass with this 3d game technology but as applied to photoshop 2(.5?)D workflow... anyway again with the music example if you get a breakout box that does full 24bit 96khz or better processing your music productions start to sound a whole lot better compared to 44khz 16bit.
5 hours to go. in 2 hours time matrix reloaded is on HBO (www.astro.com.my satellite tv) so that will kill a few hours while i wait.
my prediction, powerbook and powermac updates of course, and software is some sort of digital asset management thingy i agree, that leverages spotlight. it may use core image to do simple quick tweaks at a pro level that somehow simplifies the workflow without working against, but instead working with, photoshop and the like. hmmm
i'm cutting myself of from the forums soon, i'm starting to get delirious and its 1 or 2 hours before its time for my evening medication
I find this sidegrade hard to believe... granted I have no vested interest as I don't plan on buying a tower, but if I were Steve I'd not parade this off on a stage.
I find this sidegrade hard to believe... granted I have no vested interest as I don't plan on buying a tower, but if I were Steve I'd not parade this off on a stage.
so (1) aperture, and then maybe engadget missed the mark on the top of the line powermac? might the top of the line be a (2) dual-dualcore (hence QUAD) 2.3ghz g5 ?? this would make more sense with the lower spec models single-cpu-dualcores at 2.3ghz and 2ghz.
The same argument could have been said about Video. And the conumser apps. Yet we have them. The same about a low-cost Mac...or X-Serves. Or a Unix OS Mac...an iPod...OS on Intel.
Yet all these things have come to pass.
Pages is ahead of Word in everything apart from bloatware and it's only a matter of time before Apple cuts its dependence on M$ bloatware.
Same with Adobe. They're hardly rocking the boat with Photoshop releases. The program seems to get slower. And where's the Core Image support?
If Apple releases an indirect competitor to Photoshop, I will be pleased. Asset management and some real time filters...will establisha 'pull your finger out' foot hold. Apple are not to under-estimated. When they decide to go into a market they usually saw the legs off the opposition.
I see no reason why they can't compete if they see the need. Nobody says that M$ shouldn't compete?
If Apple didn't 'try' they'd have been on the ropes to dead by now.
There's plenty of places Photoshop could be improved. I wouldn't mind Apple 'trying' at all.
I'm just choosing to believe Engadget's source is very confused. I could be right, I could be wrong. Note, CompUSA employees if they know how to use the greenscreen inventory computers can likely find the line item description for the new machines today (if not earlier. I found out about one PowerBook upgrade early a few years ago that way).
If Apple didn't 'try' they'd have been on the ropes to dead by now.
There's plenty of places Photoshop could be improved. I wouldn't mind Apple 'trying' at all.
I've certainly been known to complain from time to time about Photoshop; but there's a huge amount of market momentum in high inertia places for Photoshop; this is a market Apple needs to ease into.
Some quarry, you pounce. Some, you hunt for days to wear them down.
Comments
Originally posted by MacRonin
But there is that 'one more thing'...
A high-def Apple tablet w/dual-core G4...!
[asbestos suit on]
A helmet too would not harm.
Originally posted by parousia
This is the feature set (although not complete) that will WILL see in the new PRO application.
It is really a no brainer as the features have long been listed right on the Apple website, but we have not expected them to be used in an APPLE application separate from the OS.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/coreimage/
the needs of the Core Image abilities built right into the OS do demand a very capable graphics card and no doubt this is something that would be expected in a PRO application.
The exact way that Apple integrates the CoreImage features into the new PRO app I guess will have to wait until tomorrow.
Parousia
Yes, those are a very good selection of filters and effects. But it isn't that simple.
Just look at sharpen and unsharp mask for example. Can you tell me that Apple's version is as good as Adobe's? Adobe just added to the unsharp mask set in CS2, which makes it much more versatile, higher quality, and useful.
The same questions can be asked for all of the other filters and effects. Just because Apple offers them doesn't mean that they will be the best.
I don't see in any of those filters an editing program in the making. Photoshop is far more than filters and effects.
While Apple could write a program and then allow access to these filters, that won't automatically make it competitive.
I really don't want to see Apple make an attempt to compete with PS. PS is the standard. It's an incredibly complex program that has evolved over 16 years to get to where it is today. I would hate to see Adobe feel that it was going to be blindsided the way it was with FCP.
At least Premier was not as good as it should be, and so FCP was able to overshadow it. The same is not true with PS. If Apple comes out with a program that seems to be challenging PS, and enough Mac loyalists buy it, Adobe just might respond in a way that would not be good for the platform.
Adobe's pro apps are more important for the continued success of the Mac than Office is. The are viable alternatives to Office if Apple wants to support them. Apple can't come out with one to PS.
Adobe's apps are part of a publishing ecosystem that has taken 20 years to ecolve. Apple will have none.
It's better that they don't try.
If they come out with an Expressions 4 challenger that would be different, but why would they choose to show that at what is essentially a Pro photo expo?
Well, we'll see tomorrow 12 noon EST.
Adobe like any Company can compete.... something they are not right now with PS.
notice that I did not say that the Pro App would compete with PS just that the functions already within our OS from CI would be used in the new App.
If some of those functions work exceptionally well for the PHOTO focus applications, great hopefully that will impel Adobe to innovate....
look what Quark and Macromedia caused Adobe to create.
Its good for all of us when Apple comes to the table with applications.
Adobe is not going to stop selling applications for the Mac that is absurd.
They love making the 10's of millions they make from there products that have and continue to have the larger share (well I design using PS and Ill and the rest anyway on my mac.) on the Mac platform.
With the Intel switch this is only going to increase not decrease even if Apple did intro a product that caused Adobe to say (ohh SH__T)
Compulsive.
EDIT:
Core Image dynamically optimizes for the CPU, automatically tuning for Velocity Engine and <b>multiple processors</b> as appropriate.
Just as you don't apply Solarize (insert favorite canned filter as desired) to every photo you take, Apple's not going to be pimping CI to every "photo" oriented app. I'm sorry, but canned CI filters just scream cheesy to the professional photographer, and I'm sure Apple knows that. It would be as if the Wired art team used canned Pages templates for their layout.
This is exactly what I am talking about here.. of course the abilities of CI exceed the bounds of the (prospective) new App.
Of course the most used items will benfit the most for CI, but currently CI is not implemented in CS2 and most likely will not be fully even in CS3.
Noise Reduction
Color Adjustment Filters
Color Controls
Color Matrix
Exposure Adjust
Gamma Adjust
Hue Adjust
White Point Adjust
Color Cube
There are MANY accelerated abilities that CI supports that currently need to be coded into apps. IE. velocity acceleration, or multiple processors etc.
that CI supports straight as it is in the OS.
Compulsive.
agreed, I can't believe thinksecret posted that the 12" powerbook was "dying". It's being replaced with either 13" or 12widescreen, or smaller screen. Apple's not going to kill off something that is wildly successful.
I believe they will do just that... for now, to make the announcement in the beginning of '06 of the Intel based 13" or 14" widescreen PB more spectacular.
Right now the differences between the 12" iBook and the 12" PB are to negligible (for most consumers, not those with special A/V needs) to justify the existence of the latter.
less than 7 hours to go
Originally posted by sunilraman
and make sure you have a fresh pair of underwear.
Who doesn't carry around a fresh pair of skivvies...?!?
Originally posted by parousia
"Speeding up general operations and allowing more flexibility"
This is exactly what I am talking about here.. of course the abilities of CI exceed the bounds of the (prospective) new App.
Of course the most used items will benfit the most for CI, but currently CI is not implemented in CS2 and most likely will not be fully even in CS3.
Noise Reduction
Color Adjustment Filters
Color Controls
Color Matrix
Exposure Adjust
Gamma Adjust
Hue Adjust
White Point Adjust
Color Cube
There are MANY accelerated abilities that CI supports that currently need to be coded into apps. IE. velocity acceleration, or multiple processors etc.
that CI supports straight as it is in the OS.
Compulsive.
I could see these things being useful under the following conditions: The application does not actually write the effects to the original file (be it RAW or JPEG), the filters and their settings are saved within file metadata (DNG? hopefully), all effects are calculated in 16 bit per channel precision and in user specified order, ditch gamma in favor of curves. precision live histogram for image.
If Core Image can provide these features, in realtime, and with production quality output, then I think it would indeed be a viable addition to Apple's Asset Management software.
I suspect Automator will play a role in this release as well.
I could see these things being useful under the following conditions: The application does not actually write the effects to the original file (be it RAW or JPEG), the filters and their settings are saved within file metadata (DNG? hopefully), all effects are calculated in 16 bit per channel precision and in user specified order, ditch gamma in favor of curves. precision live histogram for image.
If Core Image can provide these features, in realtime, and with production quality output, then I think it would indeed be a viable addition to Apple's Asset Management software.
I suspect Automator will play a role in this release as well.
i am going slightly off topic but.... am i way behind the curve or in photoshop CS2 can you do all effects and processing (not just certain ones) in 16bit? CS1 AFAIK still only certain things can be done in 16bit.
yes, yes and yes chevy my main man.
1. non destructive. this is a potentially huge feature for any multimedia manipulation device. for example, effects and filters and routing in the reason/protools/ableton live sound and music software scene. realtime non-destructive processing opens up the creative process like you wouldn't believe.
2. metadata. certainly colorspace information is one important component, other areas would be OMFG! SPOTLIGHT! DIGITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT!
3. 16bit per channel precision accelerated via GPU hardware so that CPU is offloaded and better calculations can be done. now, this is a pure guess by myself but i would imagine core image could even handle 32bits per channel in theory... but i could be talking out of my ass. but certainly 16bit per any channel (R,G,B, multiple masks, etc) is certainly possible now or in the near future. there is a lot of complex masking, texture processing, antialiasing etc done in the latest 3D games so at this stage it is probably a matter of figuring out, okay, how do we make photoshop really kick ass with this 3d game technology but as applied to photoshop 2(.5?)D workflow... anyway again with the music example if you get a breakout box that does full 24bit 96khz or better processing your music productions start to sound a whole lot better compared to 44khz 16bit.
5 hours to go. in 2 hours time matrix reloaded is on HBO (www.astro.com.my satellite tv) so that will kill a few hours while i wait.
my prediction, powerbook and powermac updates of course, and software is some sort of digital asset management thingy i agree, that leverages spotlight. it may use core image to do simple quick tweaks at a pro level that somehow simplifies the workflow without working against, but instead working with, photoshop and the like. hmmm
i'm cutting myself of from the forums soon, i'm starting to get delirious and its 1 or 2 hours before its time for my evening medication
APERTURE
coolness. i like the sound of that pro software
because most consumer photo kids wouldn't know WTF aperture is.... heh.
Originally posted by sunilraman
oh, looks like engadget just "confirmed" dualcore single-cpu powermacs. http://engadget.com/entry/1234000340064022/
I find this sidegrade hard to believe... granted I have no vested interest as I don't plan on buying a tower, but if I were Steve I'd not parade this off on a stage.
Originally posted by ChevalierMalFet
I find this sidegrade hard to believe... granted I have no vested interest as I don't plan on buying a tower, but if I were Steve I'd not parade this off on a stage.
so (1) aperture, and then maybe engadget missed the mark on the top of the line powermac? might the top of the line be a (2) dual-dualcore (hence QUAD) 2.3ghz g5 ?? this would make more sense with the lower spec models single-cpu-dualcores at 2.3ghz and 2ghz.
Ridiculous. Nonsense.
The same argument could have been said about Video. And the conumser apps. Yet we have them. The same about a low-cost Mac...or X-Serves. Or a Unix OS Mac...an iPod...OS on Intel.
Yet all these things have come to pass.
Pages is ahead of Word in everything apart from bloatware and it's only a matter of time before Apple cuts its dependence on M$ bloatware.
Same with Adobe. They're hardly rocking the boat with Photoshop releases. The program seems to get slower. And where's the Core Image support?
If Apple releases an indirect competitor to Photoshop, I will be pleased. Asset management and some real time filters...will establisha 'pull your finger out' foot hold. Apple are not to under-estimated. When they decide to go into a market they usually saw the legs off the opposition.
I see no reason why they can't compete if they see the need. Nobody says that M$ shouldn't compete?
If Apple didn't 'try' they'd have been on the ropes to dead by now.
There's plenty of places Photoshop could be improved. I wouldn't mind Apple 'trying' at all.
Lemon Bon Bon
2.7 still at the top?
I don't mind as long as it's Dual Dual 2.7.
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
If Apple didn't 'try' they'd have been on the ropes to dead by now.
There's plenty of places Photoshop could be improved. I wouldn't mind Apple 'trying' at all.
I've certainly been known to complain from time to time about Photoshop; but there's a huge amount of market momentum in high inertia places for Photoshop; this is a market Apple needs to ease into.
Some quarry, you pounce. Some, you hunt for days to wear them down.
http://www.photoplusexpo.com/ppe/exh...ailKey=2795570