Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20]   Go Down

Author Topic: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...  (Read 96930 times)

Torbjörn Tapani

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 277
Re:
« Reply #380 on: December 24, 2013, 10:52:30 AM »

Beating Adobe on their own turf might not be possible. But if you change the game...
Logged

Stephane Desnault

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
Re: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...
« Reply #381 on: January 06, 2014, 07:34:20 AM »

For photographers, I imagine more something like a "Lightroom Super Plus"... Specifically I'd love to have Lightroom PLUS the following that are in Photoshop:

- Layers
- Advanced selections
- Advanced pixel editing (liquify...)
- Advanced HDR creation (REAL HDR, not tonemapped images)
- Advanced 32bit and HDR manipulations, ie. being able to manage colors and light outside the tonemapped universe (cf. the HDRI Handbook 2.0)

And on top of that, I'd also want:

- Facial recognition (à la Google/Picasa) for easy keywording
- The color management and grading controls available in SpeedGrade CC - they are way above what PS and LR offer
Logged

Stephane Desnault

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
Re: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...
« Reply #382 on: January 06, 2014, 08:21:45 AM »

I forgot two things in the list above:

- Intelligent skin editing controls: Advanced color rendering and selection across skin colors, maybe even linked to facial recognition.
- White balance and tonality controls centered around skin color, for easy, fast and essential color grading.

(can you tell I'm often shooting events and portraits in available light  :) ?)

« Last Edit: January 06, 2014, 08:23:21 AM by Stephane Desnault »
Logged

StephaneB

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 97
    • http://www.lumieredargent.com
Re: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...
« Reply #383 on: January 08, 2014, 04:24:50 PM »

Gimp3

For example:

-- Smart filters versus dumb filters


First time I read Gimp 3 was to be released soon was around 2001...

It is funny to see people criticizing Photoshop for having both "dumb" adjustment layers and smart filters and then promoting a program that has neither :)
Logged

Stéphane

My Webpage

LKaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1059
Re: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...
« Reply #384 on: January 08, 2014, 07:22:26 PM »

First time I read Gimp 3 was to be released soon was around 2001...

It is funny to see people criticizing Photoshop for having both "dumb" adjustment layers and smart filters and then promoting a program that has neither :)

1) Nice try.
2) Reminder about thread topic again, about designing something new.
3) The technology exists and is proven in production.  Nuke. 
4) Whether you'll ever get it is partly up to you.

KatManDEW

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
Re: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...
« Reply #385 on: January 20, 2014, 08:23:19 AM »

While talking about commercials there’s another area which needs to change in New PS. It's time to decouple raw support from the main program. It’s a ridiculous situation when ACR is made deliberately incompatible with old versions of LR & PS so that you have to buy a new version of LR or PS just because you bought a new camera. It should be possible to upgrade just the ACR module for a small price (compared to the price for full LR), with everything else being compatible.  For Adobe there will be an income stream from selling new Raw modules and photographers will be happier as their old software will still be usable (for a small fee) with a new camera.

Late to the party myself... I'm in 100% agreement with you here, and "obik" in reply #11 in this thread. I find this very infurating.

Without some radical new FUNCTIONAL, photography specific additions to LR/PS (not just bells and whistles), I can't imagine me ever needing anything more than what is provided in LR and PS now. I will not upgrade to CC just to get raw capability for my next new camera. I positively will move to something else. I am willing to pay for ACR upgrades, but will not pay monthly extortion simply to maintain raw capability with new cameras.

I'm still using LR 4.4 because with the exception of improved spot removal in LR 5, I see no FUNCTIONAL improvments in LR5. Just bells and whistles. For the few times I need to "straighten" an image, I can do that just fine in LR 4.4. I don't need a dumbed down automatic feature for that, and an upgrade price to go with it.

In my opinion, and that of many folks I know personally, most all software, including operating systems, have hit a functional improvement dead end. Except for compatability with new hardware (cameras, more system memory, larger hard discs, higher resolution displays), what more can new software packages really provide, except bells and whistles? Pretty animated icons, Aero desktops? Touch screen capability for my large expensive calibrated workstation display?

Developers have hit a functional dead end, so they are looking at a rental model to provide future revenue.
Logged

LKaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1059
Re: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...
« Reply #386 on: January 20, 2014, 11:41:32 AM »

In my opinion, and that of many folks I know personally, most all software, including operating systems, have hit a functional improvement dead end. Except for compatability with new hardware (cameras, more system memory, larger hard discs, higher resolution displays), what more can new software packages really provide, except bells and whistles? Pretty animated icons, Aero desktops? Touch screen capability for my large expensive calibrated workstation display?

Developers have hit a functional dead end, so they are looking at a rental model to provide future revenue.

You're right when it comes to Adobe.  Adobe has always favored putting its resources into aggressive business strategies to squeeze continued royalties out of their aging designs, over new technical innovation. 

But I would not say that most all software has hit a functional improvement dead end.  Many new things are possible, as we've discussed earlier in this thread.  But economic barriers to entry are high, especially in so-called "mature" product categories. 

Selling deeply entrenched but obsolete products is made easier by the fact that users have the least understanding of the scope of possibilities for their tools.

Lightsmith

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
Re: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...
« Reply #387 on: February 04, 2014, 07:24:54 PM »

The software industry has escaped the attention of the FTC. Adobe has bought out its primary competitors on three occasions with the last being Macromedia with its Freehand and Flash products. Adobe kills the product and customers have no choice but to go with Adobe. I have been left in the lurch three times and each time my old work product is not longer compatible with the Adobe replacement so my libraries become worthless for future work.

I also have to work with companies overseas and they are often two or three rev levels back on Illustrator and Indesign and so increasingly I farm work out so I don't have to maintain multiple versions as Adobe has stopped making it possible to do a save as and have the work compatible with a prior release of the application.

Where I live in Monterey, CA I cannot get DSL much less broadband so the Cloud is not an option. Even if it was I know after 25 years of working with computer technology not to have all my work dependent upon both a wired connection and to having a companies servers operational 24x7. When Adobe has glitches with new code and people cannot bring up applications then the work being done for clients comes to a screeching halt.

Check the Adobe forums and read the many comments where people cannot access their Cloud subscription and are unable to work.

I have the latest Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign for my company's computers but that will be the end of it. We are not moving to the Cloud to further enrich the greedy buggers at Adobe and this is all about the money. Fortunately with Nikon I have their image processing tools and RAW converter to fall back on so worst case I can save files as TIFF and open them in CS6. There was nothing really all that valuable in terms of new releases of Photoshop after CS4 that is not done better with third party applications.
Logged

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 723
    • advantica blog
Re: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...
« Reply #388 on: February 05, 2014, 03:53:52 AM »

Quote
Check the Adobe forums and read the many comments where people cannot access their Cloud subscription and are unable to work.

This is frightening.
Is it possible to have on the same computer PS CS5 / CS6 alongside PS CC, and run one or the other?
Or would there be a conflict having both PS versions on the same computer?

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5885
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...
« Reply #389 on: February 05, 2014, 04:05:45 AM »

This is frightening.
Is it possible to have on the same computer PS CS5 / CS6 alongside PS CC, and run one or the other?
Or would there be a conflict having both PS versions on the same computer?

I have CS 5.5, CS6 and CC all installed and running on Mac OS 10.7.5. (can't say that CS 5.x works the same way but I suspect it does).
Logged

sniper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 650
Re: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...
« Reply #390 on: February 05, 2014, 05:33:24 AM »

Who said? Adobe. And why would they build a new PS like product without a subscription? To dilute these who they want to suscribe to CC? Makes no sense.
In what way does making another slimed down version of photoshop thats not elements or lightoom make sense? If the full photoshop is selling so well on CC why is there a need for another version?  Lets face it between photoshop/lightroom/elements it's already pretty well covered.
Logged

Rick Popham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 169
    • http://
Re: If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now...
« Reply #391 on: February 05, 2014, 08:38:17 AM »

This is frightening.
Is it possible to have on the same computer PS CS5 / CS6 alongside PS CC, and run one or the other?
Or would there be a conflict having both PS versions on the same computer?



Yes, I have PS CS6 running with PS CC (trying the Photography Bundle) on my Windows machine (8.1). If you use Lightroom, it will default to using CC as the editor, and you'll have to set CS6 as a secondary editor.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20]   Go Up