Should I Bother to Migrate to CS2

Hard Nut wrote:

I am using Photoshop 7, mostly to create some graphics for my website.
I have tried a version of Photoshop CS (8) given to me by a friend, but it did not work, because apparently I couldn’t go through the ACTIVATION procedure.

My question is do you recommend that I move to use version CS2 (9).

I recommend that you *buy* your software. Don’t use software that friends ‘give’ to you, because that’s illegal.

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

Probably not given your usage. Its not that much better

Bobby E
"Hard Nut" wrote in message

Hello all,

I am using Photoshop 7, mostly to create some graphics for my website.
I have tried a version of Photoshop CS (8) given to me by a friend, but it did not work, because apparently I couldn’t go through the ACTIVATION procedure.

My question is do you recommend that I move to use version CS2 (9).
Thanks,

Hard Nut

I am not going to say anything on the "Got it from a friend" comment, it isn’t any of my business. However, I have to say that many of the "new features" in CS2 are a bit of a disappointment. The noise, fringe and lens distortion features suck. HDR for merging several exposures of the same image together feels, runs and has the features of an Alpha release. And, there are other disappointments.

I would suggest you take a look instead of Corel PaintShop Pro X. While it isn’t quite as professional grade as Photoshop or at least that Photoshop users want other to believe. It has some very impressive features and work well, and don’t act and work like Alpha releases. Including noise reduction, fringe reduction, lens distortion correction and more.

It maybe a better upgrade for you unless you are in to prepress work. For photographers it is much better than Photoshop. my 2 cents.

http://www.corel.com

Robert

On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 23:06:07 +0200, "Hard Nut" wrote:

Hello all,

I am using Photoshop 7, mostly to create some graphics for my website.
I have tried a version of Photoshop CS (8) given to me by a friend, but it did not work, because apparently I couldn’t go through the ACTIVATION procedure.

My question is do you recommend that I move to use version CS2 (9).
Thanks,

Hard Nut

No! Because you do not know what you want and what you are doing. There are many other cheaper ways to produce graphic if you are mainly doing that.

On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 23:06:07 +0200, "Hard Nut"

I have tried a version of Photoshop CS (8) given to me by a friend, but it did not work, because apparently I couldn’t go through the ACTIVATION procedure.

Why do that when Adobe will GIVE you a free, fully functional download of CS2 that works for 30 days? No activation required. Hint: http://adobe.com

Dnia Wed, 7 Sep 2005 23:06:07 +0200, Hard Nut napisał(a):

My question is do you recommend that I move to use version CS2 (9).

CS2 has some nice features, but it’s so damn slow, that I decided to stay on CS. …maybe not really slow, but work just isn’t fluent. I have P4 3,4HT with 2GB RAM.

Michał Krakowiak wrote:

Dnia Wed, 7 Sep 2005 23:06:07 +0200, Hard Nut napisał(a):

My question is do you recommend that I move to use version CS2 (9).

CS2 has some nice features, but it’s so damn slow, that I decided to stay on CS. …maybe not really slow, but work just isn’t fluent. I have P4 3,4HT with 2GB RAM.

My CS2 is faster than CS. If you spend some time in Adobe’s User Forums you will see some solutions to the speed issue in CS2.

These involve not leaving the File Info tab activated, turning off font preview, turning off video hardware acceleration, and others. The big solution that Adobe recommends is to have a video card with 128 MB of RAM or more.

Once I got the new video card, CS2 move right along.

————————

I moved up to CS2 from CS mostly because of Bridge. I know some hate Bridge and say it’s slow, but not mine. Bridge adds functionality that helps my workflow and speeds up batch processing of hundreds of pictures. It isn’t a huge increase over CS File Browser, but every little bit can help.

I guess it depends on how many images you are editing for the Web and what editing you are doing. If you do or can do a lot of batch processing, I would seriously look at CS2.

Clyde

"Clyde" wrote in

Micha

"Hard Nut" wrote in
news::

Hello all,

I am using Photoshop 7, mostly to create some graphics for my website.
I have tried a version of Photoshop CS (8) given to me by a friend, but it did not work, because apparently I couldn’t go through the ACTIVATION procedure.

My question is do you recommend that I move to use version CS2 (9).
Thanks,

Hard Nut

Doubt you need it for web graphics, try the trial and find out for your self

—
f=Ma well, nearly…

The big
solution that Adobe recommends is to have a video card with 128 MB of RAM or more.

Er, why? It’s always been the case that that graphics card memory and power have been pretty much irrelevant – they are for 3D stuff that PS doesn’t use. What changed? Is the latest PS starting to make use of GPU power at last?

ggull wrote:

"Clyde" wrote in

Micha³ Krakowiak wrote:

CS2 has some nice features, but it’s so damn slow, that I decided to stay on CS. …maybe not really slow, but work just isn’t fluent. I have P4 3,4HT with 2GB RAM.

My CS2 is faster than CS. If you spend some time in Adobe’s User Forums you will see some solutions to the speed issue in CS2.

These involve not leaving the File Info tab activated, turning off font preview, turning off video hardware acceleration, and others. The big solution that Adobe recommends is to have a video card with 128 MB of RAM or more.

Once I got the new video card, CS2 move right along.

Crikey! So that $149 upgrade really turns into $300 or so? I had to upgrade HW to move to CS already.
But thanks for the speedup tips if I decide to move to CS2.

I dashed off to my local TigerDirect store and bought an ATI 9550 card with 256 MB. They don’t have mine any more, but 9550 cards are going from $50 to $75. I didn’t look, but Newegg is usually cheaper, but without as big of selection.

There are plenty of video cards that were state-of-the-art a version or three ago that are selling for not many bucks.

Clyde

Derek Fountain wrote:

The big

solution that Adobe recommends is to have a video card with 128 MB of RAM or more.

Er, why? It’s always been the case that that graphics card memory and power have been pretty much irrelevant – they are for 3D stuff that PS doesn’t use. What changed? Is the latest PS starting to make use of GPU power at last?

Well, they didn’t say why. I don’t have any way of testing it, but I think they are just using the memory. Since there are no 3D objects in Photoshop, it can’t very well be using the 3D specific processes.

Then again, 3D graphics cards do display 2D images. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be able to see most things on our monitors. How much 2D processing and what kind they do, I don’t know.

I’m guessing that they changed something in the way it handles to start using some of the GPU. I think I’d need to sign a whole bunch of forms before Adobe would let me into the details of that.

Clyde

In article , Clyde wrote:

Then again, 3D graphics cards do display 2D images. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be able to see most things on our monitors.

*All* images on our monitors are 2D. 😎

—

Roger

Roger Whitehead wrote:

In article , Clyde wrote:

Then again, 3D graphics cards do display 2D images. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be able to see most things on our monitors.

*All* images on our monitors are 2D. 😎

Yes, but not all graphic processing is 2D.

Clyde

Hate to be thick but how do I turn off video hardware acceleration. Don’t see it in preferences. And the File Info Tab. where’s that? I did find font preview however.

many thanks

Bobby E

"Kingdom" wrote in message

"Hard Nut" wrote in
news::

Hello all,

I am using Photoshop 7, mostly to create some graphics for my website.
I have tried a version of Photoshop CS (8) given to me by a friend, but it did not work, because apparently I couldn’t go through the ACTIVATION procedure.

My question is do you recommend that I move to use version CS2 (9).
Thanks,

Hard Nut

Doubt you need it for web graphics, try the trial and find out for your self

—
f=Ma well, nearly…

Bobby Edwards wrote:

Hate to be thick but how do I turn off video hardware acceleration. Don’t see it in preferences. And the File Info Tab. where’s that? I did find font preview however.

many thanks

Bobby E

"Kingdom" wrote in message

"Hard Nut" wrote in
news::

Hello all,

I am using Photoshop 7, mostly to create some graphics for my website.
I have tried a version of Photoshop CS (8) given to me by a friend, but it did not work, because apparently I couldn’t go through the ACTIVATION procedure.

My question is do you recommend that I move to use version CS2 (9).
Thanks,

Hard Nut

Doubt you need it for web graphics, try the trial and find out for your self

—
f=Ma well, nearly…

The top palette along the right side of your screen normally has three choices of tabs. Don’t leave it in "File Info". You can go there, but get out when you don’t need to be there.

Hardware Acceleration isn’t in Photoshop. It’s in your operating system. Well, the video driver. If you have Windows XP it would be:

Right click on the Desktop background and select "Properties".

Select the "Settings" tab and then the "Advanced" button.

Under the "Troubleshoot" tab you should see a slider for the Hardware Acceleration. Move that all the way to the left.

BTW, I have all those set wrong and have no problems. I do have a video card with 256 MB of memory though. I guess Adobe’s recommendation really does work.

Clyde

Robert,

I’m wondering if PSP 10 has incorporated one of my most used image adjustments in PS: Hight/Shadow. It is invaluable when evening out shadows of scanned transparencies.

Thanks in advance,

jim h

On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 00:52:15 GMT, "Ultra-Sharpen" wrote:

I am not going to say anything on the "Got it from a friend" comment, it isn’t any of my business. However, I have to say that many of the "new features" in CS2 are a bit of a disappointment. The noise, fringe and lens distortion features suck. HDR for merging several exposures of the same image together feels, runs and has the features of an Alpha release. And, there are other disappointments.

I would suggest you take a look instead of Corel PaintShop Pro X. While it isn’t quite as professional grade as Photoshop or at least that Photoshop users want other to believe. It has some very impressive features and work well, and don’t act and work like Alpha releases. Including noise reduction, fringe reduction, lens distortion correction and more.

It maybe a better upgrade for you unless you are in to prepress work. For photographers it is much better than Photoshop. my 2 cents.
http://www.corel.com

Robert