CS4: What annoys you?

A
Posted By
adobepollster
May 29, 2009
Views
502
Replies
7
Status
Closed
During decades Photoshop has been accreting all level users to accomplish multiple tasks, from the simplest to the very sophisticated. Along the way, the application has included new ways of integrating new functionalities for different uses that made the application grow bigger in such a way that even the most power users only use 50% of it, and regular users only 10 %.

With each new version, we find dialogs increasing in size and amount of components and styles for doing new things, however this fact causes the application to be monolithic, making the user pay the price of complexity.

However Adobe is not making anything by chance, and nor to harm users at all. Adobe is currently melting technologies together to provide new interface for controlling their applications. In the near future scene we will see Flash interfaces designed to tackle such cumulative complexity.

New tools like PatchPanel and SwitchBoard for example allow Flex and AIR applications to communicate with Adobe Suit programs to provide simple user interfaces for achieving simple tasks at the suit programs.

Now the question is:

If Adobe has decided to change the course of its interfaces while the programs grow monolithically, which things you think that Photoshop and other suit programs are going to be first controlled by flash technology?

And more specifically; If you had the chance to change things, what things annoy you about Photoshop that would worth change?
Related Tags

MacBook Pro 16” Mockups 🔥

– in 4 materials (clay versions included)

– 12 scenes

– 48 MacBook Pro 16″ mockups

– 6000 x 4500 px

I
ivanatwork
May 29, 2009
ha scritto:

With each new version, we find dialogs increasing in size and amount of components and styles for doing new things, however this fact causes the application to be monolithic, making the user pay the price of complexity.
I usually find Photoshop a little too much "command-centric". It’s like the Autocad of photoretouching: powerfull but only if you know how to do what you have to.

What about something more centered on what you are doing? Example: an interface for web, an interface for photomanipulation … Yes I know I can do it myself but if I don’t need all these filters and effects why can’t I simply deselect them from the menus, for example? You know: I spent a lot of time trying to understand the interface and the commands and it’s a good thing since I also learn retouching.

What I’m trying to say is: give the right tools for making the right things. So we have not to work on commands and scripts instead of maximize our preciuos time 😉

Even a version dedicated to certain operations will be apreciated (example, a low cost version for web only etc…).

My two cents

Ivan – Italy.
S
SDA
May 29, 2009
On Fri, 29 May 2009 16:37:30 +0200, ivanatwork in alt.graphics.photoshop wrote:

[ …]

What about something more centered on what you are doing? Example: an interface for web, an interface for photomanipulation … Yes I know I can do it myself but if I don’t need all these filters and effects why can’t I simply deselect them from the menus, for example? You know: I spent a lot of time trying to understand the interface and the commands and it’s a good thing since I also learn retouching.

If you wish leaner; The product you want is called Adobe Fireworks.

—
Regards,
S. Fishpaste
G
gowanoh
May 29, 2009
What annoys me most is the useless duplication of functions in the separate raw converter and desktop.
In fact, what annoys me the most is that the converter, originally a kludge patch tacked on when dSLR raw formats became the norm, persists as a zombie/bizarro and pointless separate entity.
I would like to see one desktop/workspace with all tools available. Many tools perform the same mathematical functions on image data but use separate and poorly documented user interfaces. Hence you can watch demos from any number of "experts" explaining tool functions and uses that are inconsistent, subjective and since they are incompatible some of them are technically dead wrong.
And it would be nice if after all these versions the many bugs in Bridges could be exterminated and if PS behaved the same on 64 bits oses as on 32 bit –not the 64 bit version of the program: there are many small things in the 32 bit version that just don’t work right in Vista 64 or Win 7 64. Wonderful as PS is it really is not worth the $500 plus retail price of entry in its current state.
I
ivanatwork
May 29, 2009

S. Fishpaste ha scritto:

If you wish leaner; The product you want is called Adobe Fireworks.
Yes. Fireworks! Argh… the price is a bit not affordable for someone as myself but in the end, I agree.

P.S: I just watched a tutorial. Web = HTML + Firework + Photoshop (when needed) + Flash … for a good start.
S
SDA
Jun 4, 2009
On Fri, 29 May 2009 18:20:18 +0200, ivanatwork in alt.graphics.photoshop wrote:
S. Fishpaste ha scritto:

If you wish leaner; The product you want is called Adobe Fireworks.
Yes. Fireworks! Argh… the price is a bit not affordable for someone as myself but in the end, I agree.

Well one way is to take an evening course in basic Web Design to qualify for the student discount. The savings might be worthwhile — Something to think about.

—
Regards,
S. Fishpaste
S
SDA
Jun 4, 2009
On Fri, 29 May 2009 18:20:18 +0200, ivanatwork in alt.graphics.photoshop wrote:
S. Fishpaste ha scritto:

If you wish leaner; The product you want is called Adobe Fireworks.
Yes. Fireworks! Argh… the price is a bit not affordable for someone as myself but in the end, I agree.

Well one way is to take an evening course in basic Web Design to qualify for the student discount. The savings might be worthwhile — Something to think about.

—
Regards,
S. Fishpaste
JP
Jane P
Jun 21, 2009
"ivanatwork" wrote in message
ha scritto:

With each new version, we find dialogs increasing in size and amount of components and styles for doing new things, however this fact causes the application to be monolithic, making the user pay the price of complexity.
I usually find Photoshop a little too much "command-centric". It’s like the Autocad of photoretouching: powerfull but only if you know how to do what you have to.

What about something more centered on what you are doing? Example: an interface for web, an interface for photomanipulation … Yes I know I can do it myself but if I don’t need all these filters and effects why can’t I simply deselect them from the menus, for example? You know: I spent a lot of time trying to understand the interface and the commands and it’s a good thing since I also learn retouching.
What I’m trying to say is: give the right tools for making the right things. So we have not to work on commands and scripts instead of maximize our preciuos time 😉

Even a version dedicated to certain operations will be apreciated (example, a low cost version for web only etc…).

You can tell it what panels to show, and what commands to show on the menus. It’s called the workspace, and you can customise what stays and what goes from the menus, and save it as your own options. You can easily get all the commands back by loading the original workspace as well.

Just go into Window, Workspace, Keyboard Shortcuts & Menus. From there you can choose what commands to show/hide, and you’ll have your cut down version of photoshop.

MacBook Pro 16” Mockups 🔥

– in 4 materials (clay versions included)

– 12 scenes

– 48 MacBook Pro 16″ mockups

– 6000 x 4500 px

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections