Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: still haven't upgraded to CS3  (Read 6716 times)

awofinden

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 173
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« on: July 19, 2007, 09:15:46 am »

I'm still on CS, should I bother upgrading to CS3? whats the general consensus, are the improvements significant? (I'm not on and intel mac so there won't be a speed increase I guess). Does it integrate with Lightroom in any significantly improved way (which I have recently become addicted to.)
Logged

Alaska

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 100
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2007, 04:20:01 pm »

Have CS2 and do not intend to upgrade to CS3 at this point.  Seems that CS3 is not yet quite ready for prime time.  Some say it is a little buggy but may depend on what parts of the application that are used.  Check out some of the forums that deal with CS3 and get a feel for what users are saying.

In my case, I am happy with CS2, so there is no compelling reason to upgrade at this point.

Jim
Logged

paulbk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 528
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2007, 04:40:36 pm »

I’m a non-pro Canon shooter, 1D mark II. Mostly landscapes, some portraits. I’d say I’m a competent Photoshop user, not expert. I’m comfortable with layers, masks, gradients, and most all the tools.

That said: I have DPP, CS2, CS3, and Lightroom.

Canon’s DPP is best converting RAW.

Lightroom is really really good for converting RAW files, and great for bulk processing big shoots (hundreds of files).

CS2 works for everything else: refinement of individual files and printing.

IMHO, CS3 is an expensive, unnecessary toy, with an infuriating print dialog/function when printing to an Epson 4000. Maybe the next update will take some of the CLUNK out of it.

ymmv,
p
« Last Edit: July 19, 2007, 05:02:35 pm by paulbk »
Logged
paul b.k.
New England, USA

DiaAzul

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 777
    • http://photo.tanzo.org/
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #3 on: July 19, 2007, 04:52:18 pm »

Quote
I'm still on CS, should I bother upgrading to CS3? whats the general consensus, are the improvements significant? (I'm not on and intel mac so there won't be a speed increase I guess). Does it integrate with Lightroom in any significantly improved way (which I have recently become addicted to.)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=128993\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It really depends on how much you use photoshop. Features that I find useful in CS3 compared with CS:

1...Significantly improved functionality in Adobe Camera RAW - though if you have lightroom you get access to these features and more at a fraction of the cost.
2...Adobe Bridge works a lot better than the file browser provided with CS there is a great deal more flexibility in positioning panes, tools for rating images and adding metadata. The slide show functionality is useful for reviewing pictures whilst having a cup of coffee.
3...Selection tools in CS3 are a significant leap forward. If you need to do masking then this is a big improvement.
4...Memory management seems to be better. I can now handle stitched and high dynamic range documents that were not possible in versions of CS or CS2. I can't make this a quantifiable statement but I have a 24,188 x 6,133 (approx 150Mpix) x 16-bit stitched image created by CS3 which I am sure would have caused CS or CS2 to choke. The only thing limiting the size of the file at the moment is scratch disk space.
5...There are other photographer oriented tools such as Black & White conversion adjustment layers, lens correction, spot healing, perspective cloning, exposure adjustment layers which I use from time to time.

From a functional point of view there are good reasons to upgrade to CS3 from CS.

But....


....the software is a stinking pile of crap and often bombs out in the middle of editing images or when using bridge. There have been some changes to the print dialogue box that make printing from CS3 a real pain in Windows, there are features that don't seem to work correctly and bugs hiding in several places.

I would at this stage strongly recommend that you wait until 2008 and see if Adobe can actually make the software stable. If your income depends on CS3 then I would not risk the loss of work and time caused when Photoshop bums out - and yes, I have lost a reasonable number of images/ hours of work due to Photoshop quitting on me.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2007, 05:09:42 pm by DiaAzul »
Logged
David Plummer    http://photo.tanzo.org/

awofinden

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 173
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #4 on: July 19, 2007, 05:25:03 pm »

Quote
It really depends on how much you use photoshop. Features that I find useful in CS3 compared with CS:

1...Significantly improved functionality in Adobe Camera RAW - though if you have lightroom you get access to these features and more at a fraction of the cost.
2...Adobe Bridge works a lot better than the file browser provided with CS there is a great deal more flexibility in positioning panes, tools for rating images and adding metadata. The slide show functionality is useful for reviewing pictures whilst having a cup of coffee.
3...Selection tools in CS3 are a significant leap forward. If you need to do masking then this is a big improvement.
4...Memory management seems to be better. I can now handle stitched and high dynamic range documents that were not possible in versions of CS or CS2. I can't make this a quantifiable statement but I have a 24,188 x 6,133 (approx 150Mpix) x 16-bit stitched image created by CS3 which I am sure would have caused CS or CS2 to choke. The only thing limiting the size of the file at the moment is scratch disk space.
5...There are other photographer oriented tools such as Black & White conversion adjustment layers, lens correction, spot healing, perspective cloning, exposure adjustment layers which I use from time to time.

From a functional point of view there are good reasons to upgrade to CS3 from CS.

But....
....the software is a stinking pile of crap and often bombs out in the middle of editing images or when using bridge. There have been some changes to the print dialogue box that make printing from CS3 a real pain in Windows, there are features that don't seem to work correctly and bugs hiding in several places.

I would at this stage strongly recommend that you wait until 2008 and see if Adobe can actually make the software stable. If your income depends on CS3 then I would not risk the loss of work and time caused when Photoshop bums out - and yes, I have lost a reasonable number of images/ hours of work due to Photoshop quitting on me.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129068\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Eik, I use photoshop fairly constantly but non of the features you list really interest me. I think I'll stick with CS for now, it's pretty much rock solid.
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #5 on: July 19, 2007, 08:26:45 pm »

Personally I think up-grading from CS to CS3 is a no-brainer because of all the new features, a number of which I really like. There are so many new and improved features in CS2 and CS3 obvious and less obvious ones - some of them are bound to tweak your interest. But if they don't, well then of course why bother?

To say that CS3 is an "expensive, unnecessary toy" I think is a bit over the top, Paul. Really! Up-grades are not all that expensive, and what's "necessary" depends on the user. Nothing is "necessary" until it becomes available and people like us start enjoying its advantages! Whole economic systems operate on the principle of creating "needs" - let's face it. And I really do NEED Camera Raw 4 (bundled in CS3) now that it was created - what a fabulous piece of software that is.

The printing hang-up in CS3 - yes a MAJOR PITA. There are threads of discussion about this on L-L. I retain my position that it needs to be fixed. But you know what - there's a work-around. Don't uninstall CS2 (or if it's CS, CS) - keep it for printing. That's what I'm doing and it works like a charm.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

paulbk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 528
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #6 on: July 20, 2007, 01:28:15 am »

Mark,
It's an unnecessary toy for me.. at my user level. That's why I prefaced my remarks with a short description of my user level. I almost never make detailed pixel level selections. Sometimes I do, but it's rare. And yes, CS3 does this better and a few other things (HDR) that I can live without for now.

When someone asks if they should upgrade, I assume they're 'asking' because cost is a consideration. Else why ask, just upgrade. Use it if it works for you, or let it sit on your hard drive 'til the next upgrade. (me)

Peter Myers (a fine art pro) makes stunning B&W prints after "weeks and weeks and weeks" of post processing. That ain't me. I shoot documentary: I was here, this is what I saw, here's a pretty picture.

p
« Last Edit: July 20, 2007, 01:46:07 am by paulbk »
Logged
paul b.k.
New England, USA

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2007, 07:15:08 am »

OK, Paul, as they say, each person's "mileage" varies, so the decision really depends on the user's requirements and operational context. Hence, it means doing some homework and thinking through one's own situation!

Cheers,

Mark
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

mistybreeze

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #8 on: July 20, 2007, 09:33:11 am »

Quote
Personally I think up-grading from CS to CS3 is a no-brainer
And, personally, I say to each his own.

Chances are, upgrading to any "new" software, especially a program as robust as Photoshop and, depending on OS, Mac/PC model, printer, etc., you're likely to encounter a kink or two, if not a couple of bugs. Kinks and bugs can seriously slow down a workflow and if you depend on income from photography sales, a slow down WILL COST YOU MONEY.

So, for me, the no-brainer means "give it a year," and for goodness sake don't be a fool and upgrade during busy season or in the middle of a job.

I LOVE CS2 and I'm sure I will love CS3 Extended...in 2008. Patience can deliver virtuous results. (Just don't tell Adobe they'll have to wait for your money.)
Logged

awofinden

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 173
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #9 on: July 20, 2007, 09:39:32 am »

Quote
And, personally, I say to each his own.

Chances are, upgrading to any "new" software, especially a program as robust as Photoshop and, depending on OS, Mac/PC model, printer, etc., you're likely to encounter a kink or two, if not a couple of bugs. Kinks and bugs can seriously slow down a workflow and if you depend on income from photography sales, a slow down WILL COST YOU MONEY.

So, for me, the no-brainer means "give it a year," and for goodness sake don't be a fool and upgrade during busy season or in the middle of a job.

I LOVE CS2 and I'm sure I will love CS3 Extended...in 2008. Patience can deliver virtuous results. (Just don't tell Adobe they'll have to wait for your money.)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129137\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If there was a new feature I felt I really needed I'd upgrade and put up with the bugs but there doesnt seem to be so I'll wait till it's bug free I think. Money is not a consideration, it's more of a time/hassle thing.
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #10 on: July 20, 2007, 08:57:24 pm »

Quote
If there was a new feature I felt I really needed I'd upgrade and put up with the bugs but there doesnt seem to be so I'll wait till it's bug free I think. Money is not a consideration, it's more of a time/hassle thing.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129139\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you shoot RAW, the real big feature you're missing is Camera Raw 4.1. If you use Lightroom and ship images back and forth between Lightroom and CS2, you've got the same functionality but with additional steps.

So far the only truly annoying issue I have with CS3 is the Print module - there is a specific issue which I think deserves to be improved. It is arguably not a bug (see other threads in this Discussion Forum), but it sure buzzes and bites like one.

Other than that I have had zero problems with CS3, and I've been using it ALOT.

So why up-grade? It has a much improved Curves dialog, a new Black and White converter which is good, better HDR support, and useful improvements to a number of selection tools. There are also new features for blending. If you think all of this together doesn't warrant and up-grade decision, so be it - each to his/her own of course. For me - and I'm not inferring that my taste in workflow and features needs to be anyone elses' - having used the Beta, that decision was an easy one - especially on account of the new Camera Raw and its seemless integration with Photoshop proper.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #11 on: July 22, 2007, 11:36:52 pm »

I have been using CS3 Extended on an Intel Mac Pro for a few weeks now and am overall happy compared to CS2 on a PC.

- Bridge is much better, although still unstable in some cases,
- PS itself appears to be stable on my system, hardly any crash so far,
- out of the new capabilities, the most important one is obviously Mac Universal Binary support,
- Besides, I end up using auto-align a lot for DoF stacking applications, this alone saved me tons of time.

Regards,
Bernard
« Last Edit: July 23, 2007, 12:46:06 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #12 on: July 23, 2007, 04:34:57 am »

Quote
- Besides, I end up using auto-align a lot for DoF stacking applications, this alone saved me tons of time.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129462\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Bernard,
That sounds interesting. Can you expand upon that process a bit? How does it work? Do you just takes a series of shots on a tripod with different focussing and then merge the images in a manner which combines the sharpest sections of each image?

I'm also wondering if it's time to upgrade to CS3 from CS2. I don't need the much improved 'Photomerge' feature of CS3 because I have Autopano Pro which is (cough! cough!) better   .

I vaguely recall that my beta version of CS3 would only accept RAW images in HDR mode, whereas CS2 accepts either RAW or TIF images for blending. But maybe I'm confused here.

What I have noticed in HDR (with CS2) is that it doesn't appear to do a good job in recovering the highlights from a correctly 'exposed to the right' image. It needs an underexposed image. In what way is HDR better in CS3?
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #13 on: July 23, 2007, 10:56:05 pm »

Fairly easy in fact.

You can do DoF stacking without it, but the problem is that with most lenses, a change of focus distance results in a slight change of actual focal lenght.

Because of this, the features in the different images are typically not correctly aligned when you superpose the images.

The idea is to use AutoAlign to correct for this first, and then to proceed with the normal method, which is indeed to create PS Masks and to reveal the sharpest portion of each image.

It does obviously take some trial and error to find the best combination of f stop, focus distance in order to minimize the amount of images to be taken while remaining able to assemble a fully focused final image.

Regards,
Bernard

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #14 on: July 24, 2007, 01:08:01 am »

Quote
The idea is to use AutoAlign to correct for this first, and then to proceed with the normal method, which is indeed to create PS Masks and to reveal the sharpest portion of each image.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129641\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks. I started downloading the trial version of CS3 extended about 15 hours ago and I'm 64% of the way through. This auto-align feature does indeed seem to be a breakthrough. How does it work with hand-held shots for merging to HDR?
Logged

DiaAzul

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 777
    • http://photo.tanzo.org/
still haven't upgraded to CS3
« Reply #15 on: July 24, 2007, 03:56:00 am »

Quote
Thanks. I started downloading the trial version of CS3 extended about 15 hours ago and I'm 64% of the way through. This auto-align feature does indeed seem to be a breakthrough. How does it work with hand-held shots for merging to HDR?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=129646\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It is all image dependent - if you have a regular repeating pattern, low contrast or nothing in focus/blurred then it is difficult for the software to determine correct alignment. As an example, I had a brightly lit exterior church wall made from light yellow stone and the alignment algorithm had some trouble first time round to align the images (perhaps because I also doubled the size of the image in RAW first). However, with all other images there has been little to no difficulty in the software aligning images - though it does take some time, be prepared for a long wait.

For hand held HDR images your greatest risk is motion blur in images with slower shutter speeds. If one of the images is blurred and the others are sharp then the software will have difficulty aligning the blurred image with the others in the sequence. The auto-align feature is no excuse for not using a tripod.
Logged
David Plummer    http://photo.tanzo.org/
Pages: [1]   Go Up