Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Adobe's Briefing slides at Adobe MAX  (Read 7970 times)
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2762


« Reply #80 on: May 24, 2013, 11:41:57 AM »
ReplyReply

So the local utility (electric and/or cable) hiccups (yesterday we were down for what was probably 5-10 minutes tho it seemed like hours) and I lose everything I just did? No thanks.

Once more, Adobe Creative Cloud FAQ --

Quote
You will need to be online when you install and license your software. If you have an annual membership, you'll be asked to connect to the web to validate your software licenses every 30 days.  However, you'll be able to use products for 3 months (99 days) even if you're offline.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7855



WWW
« Reply #81 on: May 24, 2013, 07:16:21 PM »
ReplyReply

In fact I am just realising as I type this, that PS is just so bloody good and that we have all been witness to the birth and evolution of something outstanding, yet we never realised it until this licensing debacle reared its ugly head and took us all by surprise. Yet Adobe obviously realised it and how they now had all our family jewels cupped tightly in their hands, so thought it was about time they gave them a good squeeze, just to let us know who’s in control.

That's the thing, we all like to think we are in control and that customers come first.

I have done a thorough analysis of my usage of PS these past 2 years and reached the conclusion that the only things I really need are:
- ability to work reliably on large images with good performance,
- 16 bits and color mgt,
- history,
- crop tool,
- layers and mask with luminosity mode,
- ideally adjustement curves, but I rarely apply more than 2 nowadays and pretty much only use curves so I don't really need adjustment layers in fact, a solid curve tool with accurate histogram display would do. I can think of several ways the current CS6 curve capability could be improved and never quite understood why Adobe was using ressources to deliver a sub-par pano capability instead of consolidating the basics further,
- ability to run key plug-ins
- ability to drive my Epson 9900

Nice to have would be:
- shadow/highlight correction which I only use to fine tune panos,
- ability to correct for verticals (I rarely use it though since C1 Pro and DxO have better capabilities)

The conclusion is that little of this is rocket science... what we need is simply a rock solid platform with a small number of well designed and implemented core capabilities... and we in fact already have a few of those as we speak today. They are so cheap that we don't need to bother with trial versions, I will buy all if them and donate for a year an amount equivalent to what I would pay with CC and encourage all of you to do the same!

The main gaps with a software like Pixelmator on Mac is the compatibility of key plug-ins like Silver eFex 2.0 or the Topaz line of plug-ins.

Anyway, they don't need to be ready today, we probably have 2 years, but it id key to buy these products today to fund their development.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: May 24, 2013, 10:21:24 PM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
ButchM
Full Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 181


« Reply #82 on: May 24, 2013, 08:09:57 PM »
ReplyReply


The conclusion is that little of this is rocket science...

Cheers,
Bernard

Agreed ... I have just completed an eight week test of performing my entire RAW workflow with Aperture 3 vs Lr 4.x .... and in my estimation ... I am not missing out on much with using Aperture 3. Yes, PV2012 does have some advantages over Aperture 3 ... but not so significant as to deem my work in Aperture 3 as useless or worthless ... add in the factor that the Slideshow and Book features in Aperture 3 (which are both a significant enhancement to my personal bottom line) and it is a total win over what I could accomplish working strictly within Lightroom.

No single vendor should be allowed to dictate what their users should be able to accomplish ... and from this point forward ... I will NOT allow Adobe to do so for my interests ... even if they are judged by the masses as being "superior" ....
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2739



WWW
« Reply #83 on: May 25, 2013, 12:19:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Apple Aperture limited to Apple hardware..... What were you saying about no single vendor? Wink
Logged

BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3553


« Reply #84 on: May 25, 2013, 02:11:08 AM »
ReplyReply

The main gaps with a software like Pixelmator on Mac is the compatibility of key plug-ins like Silver eFex 2.0 or the Topaz line of plug-ins.

Hi Bernard,

In case you didn't know, Topaz Labs have a plug-in called photoFXlab that also runs as a standalone application, and which allows to use their excellent plug-ins in a layer and mask enabled fashion.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7855



WWW
« Reply #85 on: May 25, 2013, 05:24:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Bernard,

In case you didn't know, Topaz Labs have a plug-in called photoFXlab that also runs as a standalone application, and which allows to use their excellent plug-ins in a layer and mask enabled fashion.

Thanks Bart, I was not aware of this.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2762


« Reply #86 on: May 25, 2013, 09:25:51 AM »
ReplyReply

... it makes me wonder just how much of the advanced functionality within PS they understand and are able to use ...

That made me wonder if you've "done a thorough analysis of [your] usage of PS" that you could share?

(Just curious).
Logged
ButchM
Full Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 181


« Reply #87 on: May 25, 2013, 07:18:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Apple Aperture limited to Apple hardware..... What were you saying about no single vendor? Wink

Well ... what I actually said was, I wouldn't allow a single vendor to "dictate" to me ...

Lot's of folks like to believe that Apple is "restrictive" and "constraining" ... in actual use of their hardware and software ... I simply haven't found that to be the case ... Just try to print a Book composed in Lr with any other vendor than Blurb ... you'll see what I mean ... even behind the fictitious "wall" that Apple is believed to impose ... In Aperture 3 I can create custom page sizes/spreads with the proper margins and bleeds to print my books anywhere I choose ... options are wonderful ... currently, I don't think Apple is holding me back ... It's Adobe's products that actually are arbitrarily restricting my workflow ... not Apple
Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #88 on: May 25, 2013, 07:19:42 PM »
ReplyReply

That made me wonder if you've "done a thorough analysis of [your] usage of PS" that you could share?

(Just curious).

Hi Isaac,

To tell you what I do with PS, would require that I write a book about it, which as it happens I am doing, in fact I tell lie, I am actually writing two books, so it would be very difficult and long winded for me to go into much detail here. Although I can say that some of the things I do with PS, don’t seem to be in any of the currently available advanced PS books – hence the book I am trying to write whenever I get a minute to spare, although I suppose the market may now dry up for this kind of thing - just my bloody luck eh?

But what the heck you’ve thrown down the gauntlet, so I will list a few of the things I do with PS off the top of my head, and I might also mention this is why I haven’t listed anything in Jeff’s thread about what Thomas would do, as I will have to use some of my own terminology for this, because I don’t really think there are any common terms for some of what I am doing - and no I don’t do everything to every image, as not all of them need it, but sometimes I must admit I do quite a lot.

In the ProPhoto-RGB colour space:

Multiple intersecting calculation masks, utilising primary complimentary and analogous channel overlays and blending modes.

Additive and subtractive alpha channel selections through multi-layered and intersecting luminosity masks.

Panoramic multiple exposure layer stack alignments and dynamic range levelling controls and stitching - no, not HDR, but more like dynamic compression and tonal curve flattening – you could perhaps better think of it more like subtracting pixel information from multiple layer stacks and then creating a sort of three dimensional flat curve that runs through the stack, which can then be reshaped according to the contrast level you require. Which also maximises image pixel quality by naturally incorporating the same principles as ETTR, without having to do, think or even understand ETTR, because you sort of get all the benefits of ETTR as a by product.

Edge and surface detection smoothing/sharpening and localised contrast enhancements or control.

Numerically accurate colour balance through complimentary primary colour per channel overlays. I have found you can actually finely tune the colour balance of all aspects of an image, without the image even being on screen (minimised), or by trying to observe the image optically to identify if there is indeed a colour cast, as you can do it quite simply by the numbers, which also means you don’t have to rely on correct monitor colour calibration etc or even optimal lighting to do this. It’s a party trick I show to my course attendees, which always seems to blow their socks off.

Automated mid tone colour identification and selection for mid point/mid tone and colour balance – I am doing this as an experiment and trying to create a perfect colour balance action by using this technique.

Distortion cropping – not cropping out distortion, but using distortion to crop within original aspect ratio and then applying history painting.

Levels based colour mapping for seamless overlays. A good technique for removing tonal shifts in large areas of colour, such as often seen in the sky etc and especially after using or should I say overusing a polariser.

And so on for LAB and CMYK etc. Then there’s the long list of other Actions that I have written for myself over the years, plus a whole other new set of things I have created/am creating for black and white images etc.

It is what I have taught myself to do over the many years (decades) I have been using PS, it is also what I teach along with how to capture a pleasing image in the first place of course, as well as all the required image data to allow you to get the most you can out of it, because its no good having the all the data and knowing how to manipulate it, if the image sucks right?

I am sure there are others out there who use similar techniques and refer to them differently, but this is some of what I do. I have picked up bits and pieces from here and there over the years, added on bits of my own or I have thought up something new for myself when I needed to get over a problem.

So yes I use PS in a fairly deep way and I am also fairly sure that I would not be able to do half of this stuff outside of PS. It is like I have self taught myself to play music on a grand piano, only now I am being told I can no longer own the piano, so if I want to continue playing I will have to rent the piano for a larger fee that is payable for rest of my life, or my only other option is to buy a different kind of piano, but one with half the keys missing  Huh

Hope this answers your question Isaac?

Dave
« Last Edit: May 25, 2013, 07:29:01 PM by Dave (Isle of Skye) » Logged

Photography Tuition holidays on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
judymcintosh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15


« Reply #89 on: May 25, 2013, 08:47:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Dave
I know but a fraction of what you do with Ps, which is one reason why I think I have no real use of any upgrades, and lots to learn to use "the existing grand piano" before wanting the latest and greatest just because its been invented.
I say this also to encourage you to do your book, or videos or whatever.

Im sure you are right about the potential of Ps (probably any version): Ive used intersecting luminosity masks (to take an example from you) and found them useful, but Im no where near mastery. Videos are a great way to learn this I have found.

What I think we "may" need in updating is:
1. newer camera profiles when those new cameras become available
2. improved raw developers (which PV2012 and COPro7 both have been recently)
and both of these are in the raw developer realm not an PS exclusive game or even where it has advantage (its even at best even with Lr at the same time, and may bootstrap Lr  backward when the two are of different versions).

Maybe a new PSx version will make tools that I might like (as a hobbyist photographer), but I suspect with better photographic technique/hardware, raw development +/- external editors (NIK/TOPAZ etc) and learning just a fraction of what you have learnt/developed (and or sharing actions) we will not be wanting for much.

So while I feel similar to you about subscription approach and wont be part of it, I think the positive will be reminding me to use the tools I already have (and paid for) better, look at alternatives, and if lots of people feel the same we may lift this to another level in our use (as apposed to what Jeff describes as largely evolutionary, as apposed to revolutionary advances within software now in another post). Put another way in not liking Adobe's move we can still appreciate what we have and learn from the discussions as I have in the few days Ive been looking. 

Now we just have to be careful that in updating anything  from Adobe, there is not a clause deep in the software licence "agreement" that removes our perpetual licence of what we already have................Scary thought!
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5453


WWW
« Reply #90 on: May 25, 2013, 11:30:53 PM »
ReplyReply

To tell you what I do with PS, would require that I write a book about it, which as it happens I am doing, in fact I tell lie, I am actually writing two books, so it would be very difficult and long winded for me to go into much detail here.

Dave, good luck being a "Photoshop Book Author" these days...Martin Evening and I have talked and he's really worried about Photoshop only books being, uh, dropping in droves (which might end up being a good thing for a few authors–we'll see).

Quote
Multiple intersecting calculation masks, utilising primary complimentary and analogous channel overlays and blending modes.

Additive and subtractive alpha channel selections through multi-layered and intersecting luminosity masks.

Yeah, the usual stuff...

Quote
Edge and surface detection smoothing/sharpening and localised contrast enhancements or control.

Yep...typical...

Quote
It’s a party trick I show to my course attendees, which always seems to blow their socks off.

Yep...something we do in PhotoKit Color...

Quote
Distortion cropping – not cropping out distortion, but using distortion to crop within original aspect ratio and then applying history painting.

Ok, ya got me there...I have no friggin' clue what you are talking about...must be your accent!

Look, Photoshop is a really deep application that most people only touch the surface of (or actually needs). But Photoshop is, at it's roots, a pro app. (I guess people I tell this to don't like me telling them that). There is nothing on the market now or in the near future that can take that away from Photoshop. For people who need 20, 30 or 40% of Photoshop, yes I suspect there will be new apps developed...but there will always be compromises and shortcomings by not offering everything Photoshop can do now, in Photoshop CS6 (and in the future with Photoshop CC).

I know some people don't like the fact that I see the whole multi-app CC as a deal (I use many but not all). I also understand if you only need Photoshop, or some % of Photoshop, the CC isn't an ideal situation. For the foreseeable future, you'll have two choices, get CS6 and sit on it...get the 1 year deal with Photoshop CC and see if you can live with it and figure out an exit strategy before you 1 year subscription expires. Otherwise start looking for an alternative...I've been looking, skimpy offerings...
Logged
Dan Berg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1520



WWW
« Reply #91 on: May 26, 2013, 03:02:05 AM »
ReplyReply

In all of our Adobe talk we hear nothing from Apple?
If they are not chomping at the bit they should be.
This is the big chance to step up Aperture (Or a new program.) as a real Photoshop competitor.
With all the past bad blood between the two you would think Tim Cook and his team would be all over this.
Get a program out that can compete with Photoshop then you have to buy an Apple computer to make it work. How sweet is that.
If Steve Jobs were still here I can only imagine his take on all this.
If anyone has the resources Apple does.
Set a couple of billion aside to get this project going,if it is not already.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2013, 03:24:09 AM by Dan Berg » Logged

jrp
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77


« Reply #92 on: May 26, 2013, 06:22:33 AM »
ReplyReply

...good luck being a "Photoshop Book Author" these days...Martin Evening and I have talked and he's really worried about Photoshop only books being, uh, dropping in droves (which might end up being a good thing for a few authors–we'll see).

It will be interesting to see how the latest example of this genre does -- http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Photoshop-Color-Workflow-Quartertone/dp/0988280809/ref=la_B001ILHHCO_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1369567049&sr=1-1.  At least the prospect of everyone sticking with CS6 means that the accompanying actions will not need constant tuning to keep up with new versions of Photoshop. Wink
Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #93 on: May 26, 2013, 07:00:35 AM »
ReplyReply

It will be interesting to see how the latest example of this genre does -- http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Photoshop-Color-Workflow-Quartertone/dp/0988280809/ref=la_B001ILHHCO_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1369567049&sr=1-1.  At least the prospect of everyone sticking with CS6 means that the accompanying actions will not need constant tuning to keep up with new versions of Photoshop. Wink

Yes I use quite a few of Dan's methods, a cut down version of the 'Man from Mars' LAB curve can sometimes form quite a large part of my B&W workflow.

Ok, ya got me there...I have no friggin' clue what you are talking about...must be your accent!

If I have managed to go over the head of the undisputed king of PS, then truly my work here is done  Grin

But your right Jeff, it is probably my accent...

Dave
« Last Edit: May 26, 2013, 07:52:31 AM by Dave (Isle of Skye) » Logged

Photography Tuition holidays on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7855



WWW
« Reply #94 on: May 26, 2013, 09:43:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Look, Photoshop is a really deep application that most people only touch the surface of (or actually needs). But Photoshop is, at it's roots, a pro app. (I guess people I tell this to don't like me telling them that). There is nothing on the market now or in the near future that can take that away from Photoshop. For people who need 20, 30 or 40% of Photoshop, yes I suspect there will be new apps developed...but there will always be compromises and shortcomings by not offering everything Photoshop can do now, in Photoshop CS6 (and in the future with Photoshop CC).

Jeff,

The thing is that not only amateur photographers are real mad at Adobe's move. You can add to that many independent professional illustrators/designers living on the edge and praying now that their Mac laptop doesn't die because they cannot afford CC and don't want to be at the mercy of a bad month when their credit card would be maxed out... which would leave them unable to open their files and deliver work for their next customers.

Those guys did pretty much bet their pro life on the continued affordability of CS.

As far as alternatives go, my educated guess is that 80% of photographers use PS the way I use it and it will not take 2 years for another competitor to deliver the goods for that scope.

On OSX Pixelmator is not there yet but the license I purchased yesterday enabled me to open large 16 bits tiffs without any problem. So the base is already there.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
JimGoshorn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173



« Reply #95 on: May 27, 2013, 10:39:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Jeff,

Are any of those masking techniques that Dave mentioned covered in your books or Martin Evening's books?

Jim
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5453


WWW
« Reply #96 on: May 27, 2013, 11:31:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Are any of those masking techniques that Dave mentioned covered in your books or Martin Evening's books?

Some...like luminosity based masked. At the moment, I can't keep the books straight (while working on a new book) so I'm not sure what is where. Must be a senior moment :~)
Logged
jrsforums
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 735


« Reply #97 on: May 27, 2013, 11:44:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Jeff,

Are any of those masking techniques that Dave mentioned covered in your books or Martin Evening's books?

Jim

A lot of detailed info from Tony Kruper on granular luminosity masks

http://goodlight.us/writing/luminositymasks/luminositymasks-1.html
Logged

John
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad