Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: Jayhawk on November 10, 2006, 03:46:12 pm
-
I finally made the jump into the world of Photoshop from a co-worker who gave me his old version of PS 7. I realize I'm about 4 or 5 years and several versions behind, but my question is, what am I really missing by using this version as opposed to the CS/CS2 versions?
Thanks in advance
Jay
-
I finally made the jump into the world of Photoshop from a co-worker who gave me his old version of PS 7.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84550\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Gave you as in transfering the license to you legit? Or did he "give" you the disks and let you double up on his license? If the former, fine...if the latter then you just announced yourself as a pirate.
CS & CS2 added a ton of functionality specifically designed for photographers, you are missing a lot. And if you don't have a legit license, now would be a good time to get one.
-
Those with better knowledge can list more features, but those that I would say to be most noticeable are that Adobe Bridge was introduced on CS to effectively replace the Browser function in Photoshop, Vanishing Point from CS2 and support for newer Raw-formats for Camera Raw. The ability to 'warp' (stretching, alinear distortion) a selected canvas is also new to CS2, IIRC. I'm not sure whether the Healing Patch was introduced in PS7 also...
Personally, I could live without both Bridge (a resouce hog and, if I recall correctly, to a photographer the difference is superficial) and Vanishing Point (only used once - to try it out), but with lack of support for my D200 would be not a good thing. Naturally, with Lightroom (or any other third party raw-converter) that's not such a big of an issue, but that's one piece of additional software to maintain.
As said, more throughout listings of changes can be found at various places, but in my mind, one could use Photoshop 7 very well.
Edit: as the previous poster mentioned, Adobe aimed CS1/2 more towards photographers, but I fail to remember in what particular ways.
-
Well many people buy Photoshop to work in 16 bit and CS2 has a lot more functionality with that issue. You get a lot more post processing ability in 16 bit and that is why many spend the money. There are a few other good commands as well.
-
Gave you as in transfering the license to you legit? Or did he "give" you the disks and let you double up on his license? If the former, fine...if the latter then you just announced yourself as a pirate.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84559\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, license transfered.
-
Gave you as in transfering the license to you legit? Or did he "give" you the disks and let you double up on his license? If the former, fine...if the latter then you just announced yourself as a pirate.
Depending on jurisdiction, of course ...
BTW, please dispense with the use of the term "pirate" for this kind of behaviour; it's not piracy, it's not even half as bad as piracy.
We should all be grown-up enough to realise that it (as described here) at worst is a matter of license violation, which in most cases is petty crime, as opposed to piracy, which is a great, great deal worse, and still a danger on some seas today.
-
Jan, license violation is theft on the part of the transferee and breach of contract on the part of the transferor. I'm no lawyer, but this is pretty obvious.
As for differences between CS2 and PS7 - cumulative improvements add to a huge difference in capability. 16 bit capability as mentioned above is important, but there have also been advances in the effectiveness and user-friendliness of colour management, which is important, as well a much improved Camera Raw conversion program. Adobe adds enough new attractive features to each version that the up-grades are worthwhile - and the recent two especially so for photographers.
-
For me, the main enhacement between 7.0 and 8.0 was enhanced 16 bits support
in layers and more specifically adjustement layers.
IMHO, CS2 doesn't bring that much more to the equation.
CS3 will bring universal binary for Intel based Macs, and that will be a major plus for the Mac users.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Bernard, if you have or can get hold of a copy of Ben Wilmore's "Up to Speed" on Photoshop CS2 - focused exclusively on the new features in this version, you will observe that there is a myriad of new features some of which are a bit subtle, but all told combine to produce quite a significant up-grade.
-
Bernard, if you have or can get hold of a copy of Ben Wilmore's "Up to Speed" on Photoshop CS2 - focused exclusively on the new features in this version, you will observe that there is a myriad of new features some of which are a bit subtle, but all told combine to produce quite a significant up-grade.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84880\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark,
Thanks for the tip. As part of my migration process to the Mac, I have decided to upgrade to CS2 and will get it in a month or so. I'll have the chance to check that out for myself.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Jan, license violation is theft on the part of the transferee and breach of contract on the part of the transferor. I'm no lawyer, but this is pretty obvious.
Mark, I'm well aware of many legal repurcussions, but I repeat: this depends on the jurisdiction!
All you know is that it's license violation. But some license restrictions may be illegal in some countries (such as licenses restricting consumer rights in Norway), and in other jurisdictions breaching them may have more serious consequences than "theft" or "breach of contract", such as denying people the right to travel into or through the USA.
But even theft isn't piracy. Piracy is a far, far more serious matter, and not something that we should pretend has anything to do with software.
-
Mark, I'm well aware of many legal repurcussions, but I repeat: this depends on the jurisdiction!
All you know is that it's license violation. But some license restrictions may be illegal in some countries (such as licenses restricting consumer rights in Norway), and in other jurisdictions breaching them may have more serious consequences than "theft" or "breach of contract", such as denying people the right to travel into or through the USA.
But even theft isn't piracy. Piracy is a far, far more serious matter, and not something that we should pretend has anything to do with software.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84906\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jan,
You are being too literal! "Piracy" is a figure of speech used on the North American continent to characterize a wide range of illegal behaviours that have as their root descriptor the act of absconding with intellecdtual property you did not acquire through the front door. It is a very common figure of speech for stealing everything from software to music to videos, etc.
Yes, I know different countries have different restrictions on licenses and different kinds of penalties for breach of allowed license conditions. That doesn't change the fact that stealing intellectual property is stealing intellectual property and here is it just called "piracy" - we're a bit colorful in our use of language. As for the consequences of being able to travel in the USA - the USA imposes admittance restrictions on foreigners with criminal records. That's how it happens. Does it keep people honest? I don't know - I think honest people will be honest people anyhow, but those who use cracked software don't walk around with black eye patches and machetes - I think we're agreed on that!
Cheers.
-
I finally made the jump into the world of Photoshop from a co-worker who gave me his old version of PS 7. I realize I'm about 4 or 5 years and several versions behind, but my question is, what am I really missing by using this version as opposed to the CS/CS2 versions?
Thanks in advance
Jay
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=84550\")
Jay,
If you go to Martin Evening's website you can download two interesting pdf files:
• [a href=\"http://www.photoshopforphotographers.com/pscs/download/whatsnewinPSCS.pdf]What's new in Adobe Photoshop CS[/url]
• What's new in Adobe Photoshop CS2 (http://www.photoshopforphotographers.com/pscs2/download/whatsnewinPSCS2.pdf)
HTH
-
You are being too literal! "Piracy" is a figure of speech used on the North American continent to characterize a wide range of illegal behaviours that have as their root descriptor the act of absconding with intellecdtual property you did not acquire through the front door. It is a very common figure of speech for stealing everything from software to music to videos, etc.
But there is no such thing as "intellectual property"! It's another term invented by the same people who want you to use "piracy" for copyright violation and similar rights infringement.
I know that this popularization has been largely successful, but it doesn't mean it's the right way to address it.
"Intellectual property" is an amusing term in itself, and not particularly harmful.
"Piracy" is, because if I say that someone was a victim of piracy, I hope that I wouldn't have to specify that no, it wasn't that someone bought someone else's Photoshop CD and that the seller didn't send in an activation release form or whatever to Adobe, but rather that the person I was talking to would assume that, oh, maybe that someone was actually the victim of real piracy.
Perhaps Schewe has a suggestion for what we should call piracy. "Robbery" just doesn't cut it.
Yes, I know different countries have different restrictions on licenses and different kinds of penalties for breach of allowed license conditions. That doesn't change the fact that stealing intellectual property is stealing intellectual property and here is it just called "piracy" - we're a bit colorful in our use of language.
Thanks to RIAA, MPAA. BSA and WIPA, who have had very successful marketing campaigns, yes. Coca-Cola and Microsoft should make notes.
But try to look for these terms in your legislation (even the DMCA doesn't use it in any other context than the full name of the WIPA).
As for the consequences of being able to travel in the USA - the USA imposes admittance restrictions on foreigners with criminal records. That's how it happens.
Not quite. You don't need to have a criminal record, all it takes is that you've been charged with a crime; if so, you need to go to your local US embassy and apply for a visa, and jump through the humiliating hoops to get there.
And even then, you might not be free to leave the US, for instance because of something you did under Russian jurisdiction (the Sklyarov case).
I hope you didn't think this would appear logical to a foreigner. It doesn't, and it isn't supposed to, I guess.
Does it keep people honest? I don't know - I think honest people will be honest people anyhow, but those who use cracked software don't walk around with black eye patches and machetes - I think we're agreed on that!
They certainly don't. Especially not when it's legal.
-
You are being too literal! "Piracy" is a figure of speech used on the North American continent
FWIW, that term is widely used not only on the North American continent.
It's found use in Norway, too, and IIRC it was the Norwegian sister organization of the EFF, the EFN, who coined the term "private copying" to counter the marketing campaign of labeling any kind of copying of "intellectual property" (naturally, it wasn't more clearly defined than that ...) for "pirate copying" or "pirating", regardless of the legality.
-
Jay,
If you go to Martin Evening's website you can download two interesting pdf files:
• What's new in Adobe Photoshop CS (http://www.photoshopforphotographers.com/pscs/download/whatsnewinPSCS.pdf)
• What's new in Adobe Photoshop CS2 (http://www.photoshopforphotographers.com/pscs2/download/whatsnewinPSCS2.pdf)
HTH
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84932\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks for the links Francois, those were really helpful. I'm thinking about trying the trial version of CS2 also, might help make up my mind.
-
Thanks for the links Francois, those were really helpful. I'm thinking about trying the trial version of CS2 also, might help make up my mind.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84989\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You're welcome. Don't forget that Photoshop CS 3 is close on the horizon.
-
To be on-topic for once ...
You're welcome. Don't forget that Photoshop CS 3 is close on the horizon.
Yes, that is a very good point. I've been holding off purchasing Photoshop for my Mac until CS3, and until Lightroom is for sale. At such time, I'll probably do a trial of these two, Elements 5 (which should be available for the Mac by then) as well as Aperture and Cinepaint (http://www.cinepaint.org), before deciding what software combination I'll be using.
-
In response to all the discussion of "piracy," and using Photoshop with no license -- just exactly what are the consequences of getting caught using a major app like Photoshop or anything else with no license or using a copy of someone else's app?
ArchiesBoy
-
In response to all the discussion of "piracy," and using Photoshop with no license -- just exactly what are the consequences of getting caught using a major app like Photoshop or anything else with no license or using a copy of someone else's app?
ArchiesBoy
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86024\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't live in the USA and I don't pirate software, so I have no direct experience from which to answer this question. Nonetheless, I can make several observations about your question: (1) Software "piracy" is theft, so your question is akin to asking what happens to people in the USA when they steal something - there can be a broad range of consequences, but a criminal record is a high probability outcome; (2) the question itself may lead readers to think that the person asking it thinks it is OK to pirate software if the consequences were small enough such that the benefits of not paying for a license outweigh the probability and cost of being caught.
I think in all of this we should bear in mind two things: (1) our society and economy is based on certain principles about paying for products and services that cost others to make available, regardless of the fine points of law, and (2) it costs alot of money to develop, market and service this kind of software; the people who do it would not be in the business unless there were enough paid-up licenses to make it worthwhile. We can be reasonably assured that price we pay would be lower if everyone who uses it were to pay for it.
-
In response to all the discussion of "piracy," and using Photoshop with no license -- just exactly what are the consequences of getting caught using a major app like Photoshop or anything else with no license or using a copy of someone else's app?
ArchiesBoy
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86024\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Is it really a MAJOR application?
I got my Photoshop 7 for a meager $20.00 (at a national electronics store) about 2 years ago and got 9 for free with a media card.
Also; if the software was given away because the replacement was so much better - it could STILL fall under a part of the terms of a license that requires one copy on ONE computer.
As for CS2 compared to PS7 (or 9) - there is a LOT more to do especially if you work in RAW format.
In JPG - PS is good
[attachment=1204:attachment]
This photo is a small snake with it's head is smaller than my little finger - this was done with PS9
-
... (2) the question itself may lead readers to think that the person asking it thinks it is OK to pirate software if the consequences were small enough such that the benefits of not paying for a license outweigh the probability and cost of being caught.
Let me put your fears to rest: I do not use pirated software either, I was merely curious. And yes, no doubt all software would be probably much cheaper if piracy were not rampant. (China, as I understand it pirates all sorts of stuff like crazy. And as an aside, I am also a musician who uses the Sibelius score writer, and you should see the pains that they take to prevent piracy in the installation process.) But someone brought up the notion of transferring licenses. Is that actually possible? I thought a license belonged only to the original purchaser and couldn't be transferred.
AB
-
Let me put your fears to rest: I do not use pirated software either, I was merely curious. And yes, no doubt all software would be probably much cheaper if piracy were not rampant. (China, as I understand it pirates all sorts of stuff like crazy. And as an aside, I am also a musician who uses the Sibelius score writer, and you should see the pains that they take to prevent piracy in the installation process.) But someone brought up the notion of transferring licenses. Is that actually possible? I thought a license belonged only to the original purchaser and couldn't be transferred.
AB
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86172\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Archie - no fears (nothing for me to fear) - just observations. As far as I know, the Adobe license for home users allows us to install Photoshop on two computers for our personal use and that is it. I just did my second activation last night as I am in the process of transitioning to a new computer, and it was activated with no difficulty. (Before doing this, I tried to access the license conditions from Adobe's website and failed because their search engine doesn't find and transfer information properly, then I phoned customer support and after being held on the line listening to elevator music for ONE HOUR a "customer service" (hah) rep answered the call and told me that this is what I am allowed to do. I thanked him and suggested that if customers are being entertained on the phone for such inexcusably long periods of time the least they could do is treat us to Mahler or Beethoven. Well, all's well that ends well! Thank you Adobe.