Photoshop Gurus Forum
Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Welcome CS to PSG
- Thread starter Yutosi
- Start date
MindBender
Guru
- Messages
- 611
- Likes
- 0
I think pretty much the entirety of the universe agrees with that, I know I do. The whole "we wanna be like Macromedia only with a stupider name and a super lame logo" thing has got to go. Otherwise, sounds like they've finally put some features into PS that were sorely needed. Can anyone say "text on path"? I knew you could 
Painting in 64 bit? What about vidcard drivers? What about browsers working in 8 bit? etc etc..
I suppose that for a long time to come it'll be something like LAB mode: internally the colours are calculated, but the monitor cannot display more than the monitor's rgb.
I suppose that for a long time to come it'll be something like LAB mode: internally the colours are calculated, but the monitor cannot display more than the monitor's rgb.
Captain Chickenpants
Member
- Messages
- 24
- Likes
- 0
Video cards are moving towards higher precision color.
Monitors RGB signals are analog so in theory can be as precise as you need, but are in practice are limited to accuracy of the DAC on the graphics card and the component quality of the monitor, and the transfer characteristics of the monitor phosphors.
CC
Monitors RGB signals are analog so in theory can be as precise as you need, but are in practice are limited to accuracy of the DAC on the graphics card and the component quality of the monitor, and the transfer characteristics of the monitor phosphors.
CC
Long ago, a test was published on this site. A series of images was shown, and people had to discern between 256 colour gif and jpg. If I remember well, a score of one out of four was about the best we got...
And indeed: "moving towards". 64 bit will come. But for most things it'll be in the first place a new injection of money in a saturated market, and not really be necessary. Of course, there will be high-end applications that will benefit from it, but these are mostly done on render farms.
Right now, the quality of drivers etc is getting better and better, but when we go from 16 million to thousands of millions of colours, believe me: 512MB of videoddram won't be sufficient.
Besides: a monitor can display only 50% of what a human eye can see, and we won't ever see what monitor rgb can't show us. (Print shows only 25%...)
Now that they made it a suite (like, indeed, MX...) why didn't they make Imageready a separate application?
rant, rant...I find that I have to be as critical about PS as I am about plugins for it. Plugins also can make life easier, but the question is always: will *I* do, do *I* need what *one* can do with it?
No, I haven't seen anything that knocks me off my feet in PSCS.
And indeed: "moving towards". 64 bit will come. But for most things it'll be in the first place a new injection of money in a saturated market, and not really be necessary. Of course, there will be high-end applications that will benefit from it, but these are mostly done on render farms.
Right now, the quality of drivers etc is getting better and better, but when we go from 16 million to thousands of millions of colours, believe me: 512MB of videoddram won't be sufficient.
Besides: a monitor can display only 50% of what a human eye can see, and we won't ever see what monitor rgb can't show us. (Print shows only 25%...)
Now that they made it a suite (like, indeed, MX...) why didn't they make Imageready a separate application?
rant, rant...I find that I have to be as critical about PS as I am about plugins for it. Plugins also can make life easier, but the question is always: will *I* do, do *I* need what *one* can do with it?
No, I haven't seen anything that knocks me off my feet in PSCS.
Captain Chickenpants
Member
- Messages
- 24
- Likes
- 0
The main reason for the increasing accuracy in graphics cards is to maintain accuracy when performing blending operations commonly used in 3d rendering.
The other place that it is expanding is in the gamma correction pipeline, with normal 8 bit per channel if you perform gamma correction then you will quantization where some output values are mapped to multiple input values, expanding the bitdepth reduces this.
CC
The other place that it is expanding is in the gamma correction pipeline, with normal 8 bit per channel if you perform gamma correction then you will quantization where some output values are mapped to multiple input values, expanding the bitdepth reduces this.
CC
MindBender
Guru
- Messages
- 611
- Likes
- 0
Erik said:
Well, we made the jump from thousands to millions of colors when we went from 2mb to 4mb cards... I doubth we'll needs to jump to over 512mb for just doing billions of colors. Not that it matters, seems like video cards have more ram than our computers half the time these days.
Print in process color shows only 25-35% of what we can perceive. But print has the cabability to show us a much greater range than that if used with specialty processes. So it's hard to say. We already have the capability to designate spot colors from different manufacturers that we have NO way of representing accurately on screen, so who's to say what methodology will be employed. There are some different display technologies coming out in teh next few years also, which may expedite matters.
You do have a good point though... is it something we NEED right now? Only time will tell, it's certainly not something the average ps user needs.
Just while we're on the subject of what PS can and can't do (and this may be a very dumb question - i haven't actually had a look to see if it can be answered, but i haven't stumbled across it yet), but I remember when I was using Corel years (and years) ago, that you could transition blend between two objects, eg, a square and a circle, and you could dictate the amount of transition steps in the blend etc...
So basically, can you transition blend between two objects whilst maintaining that noticable from square to circle (or whatever object) look? Like i said, probably a dumb question, but I did wonder the other day why i hadn't come across it and whether PS had it (or should as the case may be).
Cheers
So basically, can you transition blend between two objects whilst maintaining that noticable from square to circle (or whatever object) look? Like i said, probably a dumb question, but I did wonder the other day why i hadn't come across it and whether PS had it (or should as the case may be).
Cheers
MindBender
Guru
- Messages
- 611
- Likes
- 0
Bubble - You can't really do that with Photoshop since it's not a vector program per se. Illustrator has been able to do that for several versions though (look at my avatar )
)
C
Chester
Guest
photoshop cs is another commercial release...
they throw in a few things that should have been in earlier releases and everybody is happy again except me of course
the only good thing about this release is the realtime preview of the patch tool but still no 48 bit colors, filters make over or improved path tools yes they dont want to comepte with illustrator same story over and over
they throw in a few things that should have been in earlier releases and everybody is happy again except me of course
the only good thing about this release is the realtime preview of the patch tool but still no 48 bit colors, filters make over or improved path tools yes they dont want to comepte with illustrator same story over and over
Bubble,
If you're on pc and you want a real solution for that and much more, why not consider Xara X? Takes as good as no resources, is very fast and extremely handy. And what's more: at $149 (exl vat for EU) it's even cheaper than this upgrade. I use it, Mark uses it Gare uses it, and...the demo is available at www.xara.com
Really: I can recommend this little gem!
What it can do with transparancy...you won't believe your eyes!
Lots of tuts available, and it comes with an extra CD with tut movies etc etc...
Unfortunately, no mac version will be available. :{
http://www.xara.com/gallery/showimage.asp?artist=vladimir&image=vkkovsky to give you an idea of what *one* can do with it...
If you're on pc and you want a real solution for that and much more, why not consider Xara X? Takes as good as no resources, is very fast and extremely handy. And what's more: at $149 (exl vat for EU) it's even cheaper than this upgrade. I use it, Mark uses it Gare uses it, and...the demo is available at www.xara.com
Really: I can recommend this little gem!
What it can do with transparancy...you won't believe your eyes!
Lots of tuts available, and it comes with an extra CD with tut movies etc etc...
Unfortunately, no mac version will be available. :{
http://www.xara.com/gallery/showimage.asp?artist=vladimir&image=vkkovsky to give you an idea of what *one*
can do with it...Eric, thankyou very much for that info, I will definately check Xara out. :} Actually, I saw you guys talking about it once before and it had been playing on my mind, but now i will definately take a look at it. And I am PC at the moment, (and always have been ), but had been thinking of making the traitorous move toward mac ;\ Thinking long and hard....
Actually, I saw you guys talking about it once before and it had been playing on my mind, but now i will definately take a look at it. And I am PC at the moment, (and always have been ), but had been thinking of making the traitorous move toward mac ;\ Thinking long and hard....There is no treason in that as mac is far from an ennemy. It's not more different to PC than an Oxford English speaking person is from a Texan. (remember that song on tomAto, potAto,...?
Just one small note: driving a Mercedes does not make one a better driver! You cannot do anything on either system that could not be done on the other quite as well. No one can ever see on a finished product (except for gamma perhaps on monitor images) whether something is done on Mac or PC. It's a question of pure personal preference and "being used to". Both Mac and PC have now very good an reliable computers, and both have short-sighted users that see themselves as being "folks on the hill" because they happen to have a box with some electronics in it that permits them to create images on a screen. Poor sods if their self-esteem must come from such a basic banality!
Just one small note: driving a Mercedes does not make one a better driver! You cannot do anything on either system that could not be done on the other quite as well. No one can ever see on a finished product (except for gamma perhaps on monitor images) whether something is done on Mac or PC. It's a question of pure personal preference and "being used to". Both Mac and PC have now very good an reliable computers, and both have short-sighted users that see themselves as being "folks on the hill" because they happen to have a box with some electronics in it that permits them to create images on a screen. Poor sods if their self-esteem must come from such a basic banality!
MindBender
Guru
- Messages
- 611
- Likes
- 0
Erik said:
This is a good point that I think a lot of people miss. Just because you have the best of the best, does not make you a better designer. In fact, some of the best designers on these forums are using antiquated machines. I am, for one, but then, I'm not that great
Some things are easier or cheaper on certain platforms, but it doesn't mean you can't do them on the other.
Exactly. This, I think, is the largest problem and the reason that platform wars (mac vs. pc... ford vs. chevy... diet vs. regular) go on for so long. People have invested too much of themselves into their hardware.