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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
We know counterfeiters love it. What about others?
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
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
That's an amazingly biased summary.
Point the first: Skylarov wrote the code on behalf of his employer. Any legal liabilities should have been theirs, not his.
Point the second: Skylarov lived and worked in Russia, a place where American law doesn't apply.
Point the third: Skylarov was arrested under the DMCA, which is a bad, nasty, pointless, stupid law which effectively overthrows the balance of rights that has always existed between publishers and their customers, replacing it with a simple maxim: Publishers can limit the use of their works in whatever ways technology will allow. Further, because of the anti-circumvention portions (which make basic security research illegal) they don't even have to be terribly clever about it. DMCA kills fair use, time shifting, format shifting, etc., unless the publishers deem it in their interests to allow it. Finally, the DMCA allows publishers to protect their works in such ways as will allow them to retain complete control over their works even after the work should have reached the public domain (not that anything new will ever enter the public domain in this country).
Bad laws shouldn't exist. People shouldn't be prosecuted under bad laws. Case closed.
Point the fourth: One of your assertions is flat out wrong. After a meeting with the EFF, Adobe dropped its support for the prosecution of Dmitri Skylarov [press release]. They're still pursuing the case against Elcomsoft.
Don't care about the Skylarov case? Fine. Don't care to boycott Adobe? No problem. But don't come in here and try to misrepresent the case to a group of people who were watching when it happened.
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
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.
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