Slashdot Mirror
New Photoshop Details Leaked
Odie writes "Oops. Looks like Adobe accidentally let slip the details of the next Photoshop version due on Friday. According to BetaNews, the next version, dubbed Photoshop CS2, is supposed to add several new features such as Image Warp and Vanishing Point, as well as changing around the file browser to allow users access to royalty-free images from five providers for use in their work.
The new version is due in May according to the press release which BetaNews saw."
I don't believe the screenshots, I bet they've all been photoshop'ed...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
What are the chances they'll make a linux version. I haven't gotten any versions past 6 to run with wine.
GETPKG - Package Management for Slackware
Oops. Looks like Adobe accidentally let slip the details of the next PhotoShop version due on Friday. According to BetaNews, the next version, dubbed PhotoShop CS2,
Let me be the first to correct the editor and say it's Photoshop, not PhotoShop.
3D Printing Tips and Tricks at Zheng3.com
I hope the new version is out before a change to the $1 bill happens.
A tool known as Vanishing Point will allow the user to recolor and transform objects in an image without altering its perspective.
Maybe its just me, but I've never had a problem with the perspective on an object while I was modifying the color. Now, if I'm using the transform function, I probably do want to alter the perspective.
What does this tool do again?
Know what I like about atheists? I've yet to meet one that believes God is on their side.
I went to a Pro Photoshop conference a couple months back where Burt Monroy had a talk. He's an alpha tester for Adobe and people were asking about whether adobe was working on certain features.
One feature he mentioned that was a big one for the next version of photoshop, and something they were having a lot of trouble with, was Layer Filters. Much like the Adjustment Layer, you can apply a filter on a layer and turn the effects of the filter on and off. It's more than the LayerEffects because those are limited to drop shadows and glows and the like, where LayerFilters let you apply a blur or noise or even KPT and third-party filters.
I'm psyched about that. although, I feel that Photoshop is getting quite bloated. My favourite version of photoshop is still 5.5. Too bad it doesn't work in OSX. CS does have some nice features, though...
IllustratorCS is getting a bit bloated lately, too. Runs like crap on lower-end machines. Illustrator used to be the one adobe product that ran well even on older hardware (until version 9 with those Raster Effects).
...spike
Ewwwwww, coconut...
The only thing this program can't do is make me a talented photographer.
My sigs offend the max # of people all over the world, regardless of race, religion, color, sex or creed. It's a gift.
Considering the time it takes to start the program (from clicking the icon to scanning plugins to open the window with picture), I think 5 days starting time for the next version isn't that bad.
It's depressing to see how many people will cough up half a grand on the next release of Photoshop every year or two, even though the new features are very small improvements. They complain constantly about product activation problems, but they don't even consider the idea of using a different product.
And how many photographers and artists heard about the Sklyarov case? Virtually zero. A vanishingly small number of people have even heard about it, nevermind formed an opinion, nevermind see it as a cause for avoiding the company.
Use something else. Anything else. I've purchased no Adobe software in the past five years (except I discarded an OEM bundled thing that came with my camera). Unfortunately, companies like Microsoft and Adobe has reached a critical mass where they're immensely insulated from consumer backlash: consumers with apathy and ignorance far outspends the consumers with objections.
[
the announcement is this friday, not the actual new version of photoshop. that is due in may.
Photoshop is designed for professionals, like myself, who make a shitload of money using it. $599 is a drop in the bucket, not even a full day's billing for me. As long as Adobe keeps creating applications like Photoshop thatlet me be creative with little fuss and hassle, I'll keep upgrading my copy.
I think it is called marketing and its goal is to create buzz...and /. bought it, hoook, line and sinker
Here is the original press link as linked by one of the comments on the article's page.
[alk]
Actually, it's a sad statement if you expect the OS to cost more than the applications. Either you expect everything to be included in the OS, you're used to high-price OS through virtual monopoly, or you're suffering from both, via a Microsoft mentality.
Given the profit potential for someone using this software professionally, I think the price tag is actually quite reasonable.
(Now, if only they'd make their products run on Linux.)
Linux - because it doesn't leave that Steve Ballmer aftertaste.
Nobody uses Photoshop? To me thats like saying nobody uses Microsoft Word. Yes, there are alternatives, but I wouldn't ignore almost every design shop in the world... Photoshop is the standard.
I'd imagine that Photoshop's target market is not limited to those in the SA/Fark.com Photoshop arena.
-mkb
am i the only one who's excited about finally (after how many versions of the premier general purpose graphics program) getting a WYSIWYG font selector?
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
PhotoShop CS2? Not a very creative name for this Creative Suite.
If you are implying like... GIMP being a "simplier" design, then I will simply point and laugh at you.
Photoshop is good. I may have a biasedness toward it, because I learned how to use it with Photoshop 2.0 in Computer Graphics/Advanced Comp Graphics AP in highschool, on a Mac.
Saying that, Photoshop could certainly draw a parallel in the same way that I play Quake with just the keyboard... in the beginning there was Wolf3d and the keyboard... then Doom. Doom just added a couple of keys.. Doom 2 added a couple more. Quake added a few. Quake 2 added a few. Sure, it would be hard to learn to play well with the keyboard in Quake 2 if you are just starting out, but creaping in features every iteration is easy to adapt to.
When it comes down to it, if you do professional graphics, you use photoshop whether you like it or not. And with that, you will know how to use it. Most people on the "intarweb" with bad photoshop opinions simply warez'd some version, and cant figure out how all of those artists make such pretty pictures
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
They have a total monopoly in the professional image editing marketspace. There are no other products. Gimp (which I prefer in many cases) can't do half of the things a professional graphic artist needs, plus the UI is too different to efficiently switch. And when looking at photo editing, I havent' seen ANY product that has good RAW support other than Photoshop (and its support is mediocre at best).
Photoshop is a professional tool aimed at a professional market. $149 is nothing, and even the full retail price is a pittance compared to what professional users get out of it. Photoshop's a hell of a lot cheaper than assembling and maintaining a darkroom.
You can make $149 back in no time, not to mention it's chump change compared to printing equipment. For that matter, the Photoshop CS upgrade was $169, so CS2 is cheaper.
You may well be very few. The OS should not cost more than applications software, because applications are what people actually use to work/play/communicate and the OS is just what abstracts hardware. How much do ypu pay for a TV and how much you pay for cable? How much for a telephone and how much for actually phoning? How much for sitting at a restaurant and how much for food? The OS should be free (no money) and in practical terms it is, even 99% of legal windows copies are cheap (oem versions add very little to the PC cost, even when nobody knows how much).
Usually the better deal is to upgrade the whole suite at once. The retail version of all the products together is $1,000, but you can get the upgrade for $550. That's a hell of a bargain for three world-class apps. (Acrobat is fine too, I suppose, but it's hardly in the same class.)
I'm sure they'd love to have their products run on Linux, but it's quite frankly near impossible for big commercial developers to make anything but high end specialised 3D apps or web apps on Linux.
Something like Photoshop would be an absolute nightmare to port.
Would it be done in Qt, GTK1, GTK2 or raw X widgets? Which printer dialogs would it use -- KDE or GNOME? Which file selectors would it use? How would they keep up, test and fix bugs for GNOME on a 6 month cycle or KDE on a ?? month cycle? How would you have it look nice with the default theme of the desktop?
I can tell you if Adobe ported it the 'slashdoters' would hate it. It would be bloated, slow, buggy and wouldn't fit well into any desktop enviroment. It'd also only be out for x86 and tested on 3 distros max.
The trouble is that at the moment the Linux desktop is moving too fast (with no effort put on old releases of libs or software) at the moment for major software vendors to put out anything but huge 3D apps that are basically their own desktop enviroment, sandboxed from the rest of the system. Personally, I don't think it's a bad thing that Linux is moving really fast, because it's getting closer and closer to Windows or Mac calibre usability with every release, but expecting Adobe to port photoshop, a fairly substainal app with tools that move and break every 6 months is not going to happen.
IntechHosting - Free domain, 2GB, PHP, £4.95/$8.95
This can be important. There was a very old desktop publishing package called "PublishIt". Many did call it "PubliShit".
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
If you call up SGI and ask to buy a copy of IRIX, I think it costs about $200, if I remember right.
If you call up Discreet and ask to buy a copy of Inferno, it'll cost you $650,000.
It is entirely appropriate for the application to cost more than the OS. The application does more.
Would it be done in Qt, GTK1, GTK2 or raw X widgets? Which printer dialogs would it use -- KDE or GNOME? Which file selectors would it use?
Sounds like programming on Windows. Would it be done with Win32, MFC, WinForms, Avalon, Adobe's on UI kit? Which of the Windows printer and file dialogs would it use -- the old old ones, the old ones, the new old ones, the Office ones, Adobe's own?
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
You know, this "let's steal everything that's not fucking nailed down" attitude is driving this once-interesting web site into the ground.
We know counterfeiters love it. What about others?
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Photoshop Source!
Are these compelling features to anybody? It seems to me like Photoshop is a product that's just reached the limit of being able to produce worthwhile upgrades. I'm sure a lot of these features are nice, but come on. Photoshop 6 does the job just fine. Version 7 is better, but a couple hundred dollars better? The same goes for CS and now CS2. I applaud adobe for making what is, to my mind, one of the most usable pieces of software ever given complexity of the job it does, but you've got to let your customers off the hamster wheel upgrade cycle at some point... don't you?
I know it's off-topic, but it's still funny.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
But you're right - developing for Windows sucks. I would know. (Plus, in your list, you forgot to add ATL/COM, to take advantage of a bunch of crappy .ocx controls.)
This is the version I've been waiting for. You know, the one where you can take a grainy picture of a person standing two blocks away and zoom in to create an 11x14 enlargement of the person's index fingerprint. Come on Adobe!
Unless I need to subtract the values of one channel from the values of another channel, save the results of that as a third channel and apply that as a feathered mask to an image. Or if I need to work in CMYK. Or if I need to save an image as a DCS with two spot and one varnish channels. Or if I need to do all three to the same 500 megabyte image. . .
Nothing else does what Photoshop does as well as it does it. Despite my growing anger towards Adobe (can the next version be twice as bloated, please?) Photoshop is one of the few programs for which there is no substitute.
I am a believer of momentum and curves.
Will someone remind me what it is the Slashdot editors do?
;)
Who do you think greenlights all the dupes? You can't automate that kind of quality inattention.
I just want to take over the world...Why does that automatically make me EVIL?
Amen to this. I mean, Photoshop is not bad at all - but it's not the only package around either. And it's gotten bloated as hell. The analogy with Windows is interesting. Its success comes from an agressive marketing strategy *and* the fact that many people use cracked versions. Yeppers guys: I'm pretty convinced neither Windows nor Photoshop would be as successful as it is today it they had not been cracked for years. And you'd be surprised how many professional users use cracked software as well. At the very least, it has helped building a solid user base.
That being said, it all depends on what you call "professional users". Photoshop may be intensively used in the journalism world, but is that professional graphics or mere "image tweaking"?... As for people who really make images for images themselves, as in the movies industry, or photography, they use many other software packages. Some of them are not even Windows- nor MacOS-based...
Most people who think that good photographs are created in Photoshop are simply lousy photographers. If you know your craft, you'll need to do very little work in a photo editor.
God, I get so sick of this line of thinking. Why was it valid for a photographer like Ansel Adams to use extensive darkroom manipulation to get a great print, yet somehow unacceptable for a modern photographer to use Photoshop in much the same way? I hate to break it to you, but I think Ansel Adams would have LOVED Photoshop.
-G
www.pixelstatic.com
Adobe is pretty lax about piracy, as long as you're not reselling copies. Most people who aren't using it for commercial purposes buy it for $0. Think of it this way: are you going to pay $599 for software you have never used before? No. So, if one pirates it and THEN learns to use it, they may eventually go professional, and then have the money (and feel legally obligated, should a client question them) to buy it.
The turning-a-blind-eye-to-piracy approach allows people the opportunity to learn the software without a big investment, and once you have learned it, you're pretty much hooked. Then, when a new version of Photoshop comes out (and perhaps you aren't a broke script kiddie anymore), you consider actually buying it for the new features instead of waiting around for it to be cracked. You also know that your money won't go to software you will never use.
And even if you don't buy that argument, Adobe does have a cheaper version, called Photoshop Elements. It has features the casual user would need, and allows someone to grow familiar with the Photoshop interface before diving into the murky waters of $600 software.
Despite the name, Photoshop is not only used for photo manipulation. I don't even own a digital camera and I use Photoshop extensively in the creation of textures for video games, abstract art, graphic design (as in logos and banners and such), interface design, and so forth. For all of these things, Photoshop is wonderful, and what you probably consider "gimmicks" in the realm of photo manipulation are indisposable tools for some of the things that I do.
All that said, I could certainly think up ways to redesign the interface from scratch a lot better, since I generally don't like monolithic apps like this on principle; but given that that's the paradigm we're working in, with an app-centric monolithic world, I think Photoshop does a pretty decent job of what it does.
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
Don't worry, there will be a new "Enhance" menu. It will have sub-items "zoom in on that", "Can you see what's behind that", "What is that a reflection?" and "Clear that up". These commands only work if someone is looking over your shoulder, never alone. It has been rumored that there will be a "run through APHIS" command, but this may be disabled in the consumer edition. Myself, I would rather add "Undo stupid changes" to Edit, but that's just me.
Rule of the open mind
People who are resistant to change cannot resist change for the worst.