New Photoshop Details Leaked
Posted by
CowboyNeal
on Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:50 AM
from the sneaking-a-peek dept.
from the sneaking-a-peek dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
New Photoshop Details Leaked
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 511 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
New PhotoShop Details Leaked (Score:5, Funny)
Re:New PhotoShop Details Leaked (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.forp.net/)
You meant to say "I bet they've all been enhanced using Adobe Photoshop software."
You are lucky I was here. Next time I might not be around!
Re:New PhotoShop Details Leaked (Score:5, Interesting)
It's clear that Adobe is trying to protect their trademark from becoming public. But...
Can Adobe do anything to a non-user (i.e. someone who hasn't agreed to their license) for using "photoshop" as a verb or adjective?
Re:New PhotoShop Details Leaked (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://nmx.fromtheshadows.net/)
Re:New PhotoShop Details Leaked (Score:5, Funny)
Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://datadrivendesign.com/)
Re:Linux (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://flintbowmen.com/)
Before you say it, yes I have actually joined the dev-mailing list for both gimp and gegl. I would like it to be better and I am going to try and do what I can to make it better.
Andrew Spangler
Wrong product name. (Score:4, Informative)
Let me be the first to correct the editor and say it's Photoshop [adobe.com], not PhotoShop.
This can be important: publishit happens (Score:5, Funny)
This can be important. There was a very old desktop publishing package called "PublishIt". Many did call it "PubliShit".
[OT] This can be important: publishit happens (Score:5, Funny)
(http://altgrendel.exit0.us/)
I know it's off-topic, but it's still funny.
Re:[OT] This can be important: publishit happens (Score:5, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/~Mononoke/journal | Last Journal: Friday April 11 2003, @02:45PM)
Speaking of Duplicating (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Speaking of Duplicating (Score:5, Funny)
Note to self... "syntap" userid 242090
damned
Vanishing Point (Score:5, Funny)
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?
Other features (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.sadistech.com/ | Last Journal: Monday June 05 2006, @11:55AM)
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).
Talent? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Talent? (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://haltingpoint.blogspot.com/)
Just on time (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Saturday May 21 2005, @12:23AM)
Re:Just on time (Score:5, Informative)
Definitely, absolutely, upgrade to 7.
Re:Just on time (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Just on time (Score:5, Informative)
(http://blog.atlgeek.com/)
Re:It ain't cheap (Score:5, Interesting)
Making money (Score:5, Funny)
We know counterfeiters love it. What about others?
Re:It ain't cheap (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://cyphertube.com/ | Last Journal: Sunday May 21 2006, @11:10AM)
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.)
Re:It ain't cheap (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.intechhosting.com/)
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.
Re:It ain't cheap (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://google.com/)
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?
Re:It ain't cheap (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Saturday November 17, @09:11PM)
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.)
Re:It ain't cheap (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It ain't cheap (Score:4, Insightful)
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 [adobe.com]. 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.
Never again -- product activation and Sklyarov (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.halley.cc/ed/)
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.
Re:Never again -- product activation and Sklyarov (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.cs.utah.edu/~andersbr/)
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] [adobe.com]. 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.
What different product? (Score:5, Interesting)
misleading (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.tylerc.net/)
I am confused (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://skorgrimm.blogspot.com/)
So, wait. Is the new version due on Friday, or is it due in May? I'm seriously confused by this poorly worded sentence.
Will someone remind me what it is the Slashdot editors do?
Accidentally ? (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Sunday October 28, @11:25AM)
Press link (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.loconet.ca/)
am i the only one (Score:5, Informative)
(http://thedailybackground.com/)
Re:am i the only one (Score:5, Informative)
Most pro-users like myself use external font management software for which we can preview and select fonts for a project. (as well as activating and deactivating them). I'd hate to think of how slow that WYSIWYG font editor would work with my 500+ fonts.
Text of press release (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.zocalo.uk.com/)
very Creative. (Score:4, Funny)
Still no flexible compositing system (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.inio.org/)
More spoilers here (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Wednesday June 23 2004, @04:53PM)
CS2, that makes it... (Score:3, Funny)
New features? (Score:5, Insightful)
Photoshop CSI (Score:5, Funny)
Just as long as. . . (Score:3)
Man, that drives me crazy! STOP trying to think FOR me, dammit! I don't want ANY auto features if I can't switch them off. I know how big I want my work window, so stop changing it according to some ill-inspired whim of whatever chief Adobe designer happened to be sprouting 'decisions' that week.
If I wanted my machine to treat me like a child, I'd use safety-scissors, mittens would dangle on strings from the sleeves of my winter coat, my Mom would still dress me and I'd have bought an Apple.
-FL
STILL not 64-bit! (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.ausoleil.org/)
1. 64-bit for performance and file size
2. To add your camera if you have a new one.
The first, 64-bit, is noticably missing from PS CS 2. Adobe is saying that CS2 will "prepare for 64-bit" -- whatever that means -- but that it is still a 32-bit app.
The second, is to add support for new cameras that have come out that were not included in the last RAW plug-in. The new Nikon D2X is notably in the list.
Re:Already??? File Browser (Score:3, Insightful)
I do use the File Browser, find it useful, and don't like you thinking that just because it isn't important to you that no one else should have it either.
Re:so.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:so.. (Score:4, Funny)
(http://hydrogenproject.com/ | Last Journal: Saturday March 11 2006, @09:19PM)
Re:so.. (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.mindchild.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday November 29 2005, @10:16AM)
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
Re:so.. (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Tuesday September 23 2003, @04:07PM)
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.
Ugh (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.pixelstatic.com/)
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.
Re:Ugh (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes. I think he would have loved today's digital photography too, now that sensor resolutions on high-end equipment are approaching his demanding requirements.
Adams wasn't a stick-in-the-mud or a fanatical purist. Many purists of the time sniffed at his use of filters, and his 'Zone System'.
He just wanted to devise a process where he could (more or less) guarantee to produce the image in print, that he envisaged when he looked at a scene.
Digital capture and the use of post-processing programs like Photoshop and the superb printing technology available now, make Adam's goal more attainable.
I think Adams would have embraced these technologies wholeheartedly.
Not Just For Photos (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
$149 isn't a lot for its market (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:So expensive (Score:5, Informative)
Re:so.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe if you live under a rock called the Web thats true.
Show me something else that does CMYK and seperation as well out there in the PRINT world ?
I hate PS, but in that market its the only game in town, all those patents and work they put into it.
In case you dont know CMYK is what all 4 color process is done with, 4 color process being whats used to PRINT paper thingies....