Photoshop and Core Image

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 26
    marcukmarcuk Posts: 4,442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Nobody Special


    Any chance the next version of Photoshop will take advantage of core image to allow the creation of non-distructive filter layers? I'd love be able to add a blur layer that leaves the underlying layer intacts and that can be adjusted, or even removed, at any time.



    Canvas X - been like this since 1999



    http://www.acdamerica.com/



    It isn't a photoshop replacement if you're primarily working with large photographs, but for most uses, its about 90% of all the Adobe apps rolled into one.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 26
    Photoshop *seems like a very advanced and complex program, but there isn't really much to it. Apple could EASILY knock it off it's throne.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 26
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MarcUK


    Canvas X - been like this since 1999...



    I'm honestly surprised that's still around.



    It was clear a long time ago that Canvas' "swiss army knife" approach wasn't winning over professionals.



    When Adobe found traction with the Creative Suite idea, it represented an excellent chance for Canvas to be broken up into three separate, yet integrated pro tools for layout, imaging and illustration.



    Instead, its owners seem to have kept doing the same thing and expecting different results.



    It's a pity. I remember the days when Canvas was reviewed in the Mac mags right alongside Quark, Macromedia and Adobe products.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 26
    marcukmarcuk Posts: 4,442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frank777


    I'm honestly surprised that's still around.



    It was clear a long time ago that Canvas' "swiss army knife" approach wasn't winning over professionals.



    When Adobe found traction with the Creative Suite idea, it represented an excellent chance for Canvas to be broken up into three separate, yet integrated pro tools for layout, imaging and illustration.



    Instead, its owners seem to have kept doing the same thing and expecting different results.



    It's a pity. I remember the days when Canvas was reviewed in the Mac mags right alongside Quark, Macromedia and Adobe products.



    No pity at all, Canvas enjoys a level of integration between the discliplines that you'd have to be insane to break up. Someone was asking about non-destructive layer filters. Canvas goes better than that. - Non-destructive vector-object-based multi-filters with magnification, transparency and masking which you can animate in real time over your vector, bitmap or page layout designs.



    Turning your nose up at that, or suggesting canvas should lose that to make 3 lesser apps sounds like application snobbery to me. I can do in 2 minutes with 10 clicks and at a quarter of the price what Adobe would need 3 apps for without all the destructive editing, undo-ing and application switching.



    And a really cool thing I've recently discovered - I was working in RealBasic programming from scratch a 'printed page' in code from a datasource - there are no print-previews here - unless you program one! Do I really want to print a piece of paper every time I want to check my code? NO! Easy with Canvas. Select "Print to Canvas" from your printer choices (incidently you can print to Canvas from any app ever - i Canvas printed a vector of a 3d Autocad model last week), run your code, and it takes all your printer post script objects and turns them into vectors, text boxes, bitmaps etc and launches the app, and displays what would come out of the printer on the screen. I'd bet you cant to that in PS
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 26
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member
    With today's release of Lineform, the Adobe universe is starting to be challenged on almost all sides.



    The cost of Creative Suite Premium (InDesign, Photoshop, GoLive and Illustrator) is US$1199.



    With Quark at $749, Lineform at $79 and Rapidweaver at $40, we're at $868.00 (All full version and Universal Binary.)



    If Aperture is revved to compete with Photoshop or Greg's secret PhotoThingy appears at $349 or less, CS could find itself in serious trouble.



    Then again, for those of us who already have Photoshop, the standalone upgrade is only $169., so Photoshop + Quark + Lineform + Rapidweaver = $1037.00



    Granted, all these products are from separate vendors, so there's an 'integration' case to be made.

    But they're all really good at what they do, and conform to open import and export standards.



    If a Photoshop competitor comes out soon, things could get really interesting for the Design sector.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 26
    I don't expect Aperture to ever be a Photoshop competitor; unless you view it in the sense of "Photoshop competitor for the niche digital SLR market." To make Aperture as general purpose as Photoshop would be unthinkable.



    Marc, wouldn't you just print to PDF then rasterize in PS, or view in Illustrator? I'm missing the snazz factor.



    That said I think Photoshop's strictly cross-platform nature and just the sheer inertia of mind-set that they have will allow for some very strong competitors in the next year or two, if people choose to take the bait. We will see when CS3 comes around, though, they may surprise us. Though having seen Lightroom I'm not holding my breath.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.