adobe.photoshop.win.featurerequests
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.win.featurerequests?hl=en
adobe.photoshop.win.featurerequests@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Menus Should Disappear When PS Loses Focus - 7 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.win.featurerequests/browse_thread/thread/2ef0d7b2e39044f8?hl=en
* SMOOTH LINE DRAWING! - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.win.featurerequests/browse_thread/thread/222fe61956360dbd?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Menus Should Disappear When PS Loses Focus
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.win.featurerequests/browse_thread/thread/2ef0d7b2e39044f8?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 5 2008 8:36 pm
From: Daniel_Barker@adobeforums.com
Good point, Dave, on the issue of under certain circumstances wanting to see PS's info while in another app (like CMYK values...), so we certainly would want to be able to set preferences on panel hiding.
I was intrigued by your thought about stretching the main app window partially across the other screen, but in practice for me there are some issues when maximizing images, etc.
== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 6 2008 6:24 am
From: dave_milbut@adobeforums.com
but in practice for me there are some issues when maximizing images, etc.
use the "F" keys... i don't really like it that way either, but then my main monitor is 22" and my secondary palette monitor is only 17". i think the app stretching would work better if both monitors were the same size and positioned a little better to line up...
my ps desktop:
<http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1x10RHMjnwQJXEnSDZGc9DR2CNsL50>
== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 6 2008 8:07 am
From: Daniel_Barker@adobeforums.com
The F keys aren't the issue, rather that with the image maximized across both of my 22" monitors, not only do I have to contend with the gap between monitors and the image then being partially under panels, but also since only one monitor can be calibrated at a time, there is a very noticeable color difference.
Re your setup... Spring for that second matching 22" as soon as you can (The excellent Samsung 2253LW that I have is only $229 at newegg.com with the rebate through 11/27) as having two identical sizes lined up with each other is a definite advantage.
== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 6 2008 10:03 am
From: dave_milbut@adobeforums.com
not only do I have to contend with the gap between monitors and the image
then being partially under panels, but also since only one monitor can
be calibrated at a time, there is a very noticeable color difference.
I hear ya!
== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 6 2008 10:06 am
From: dave_milbut@adobeforums.com
i'm pretty sure there are video cards that can handle 2 color profiles danial. you might want to look into that if it's a big issue for you. i only use my 2nd monitor as a "palette well" so it doesn't matter much to me. i CAN have 2 profiles on my nvidia 7600gtx. and both can be calibrated (more or less, i'm not a real pro at calibration, and don't need to be). one monitor is plugged into the analog output (lacie electron blue iv 22") and one in the digital out (nec multisync lcd 1760vm).
== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 6 2008 11:19 am
From: harry_teasley@adobeforums.com
Yeah, get a Huey Pro, and a newer graphics card, and you can get very good calibration. It's what I use at work, and it works very well.
== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 6 2008 11:53 am
From: Daniel_Barker@adobeforums.com
I use a x-rite EyeOne calibrator, but with only my single ATI FireGL V3600 card, only one monitor can be calibrated. Actually the second monitor not being calibrated can be a benefit for web dev work as it lets you see how differently your site will look on other monitors (which drives this long-time print designer nuts).
==============================================================================
TOPIC: SMOOTH LINE DRAWING!
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.win.featurerequests/browse_thread/thread/222fe61956360dbd?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 6 2008 4:53 pm
From: rickjbsmith@adobeforums.com
Hey Guys.
For years I have been waiting for what seems to be both:
A/ One of the most IMPORTANT functional additions that PS needs and
B/ One of the EASIEST functional additions to add to PS.
And what is it: BRUSH DAMPING!!!
Just a simple variable slider like Painter has (NOT that totally ineffectual brush "smoothing" checkbox that PS currently has!).
Messy freehand line problems will become a thing of the past.
2D Illustrators will stop the migration to Corel Painter!!!
So why haven't the Adobe guys implemented it before?
Worried that we'll complain that it "slows down" the line drawing? No problem! We know that this is the nature of damping - it's a trade-off with speed, and we can always slide that variable slider back and forth between 0% and 100% damping!
Worried that we won't bother buying Ye Olde Illustrator for line work? No problem! We still need Illustrator for the more precise, technical work!
(And yes, I know that it's high time that Wacom helped-out the Adobe guys by improving their tablet technology, but they won't as long as they keep their aggressive monopoly of the tablet market.)
How many of you guys do their freehand linework either:
1/ on paper and scan-in or
2/ by using Corel Painter
How many of you guys would prefer to do it all in Photoshop?????
WHO'S WITH ME GUYS? :D
Best, Rick.
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 6 2008 5:07 pm
From: harry_teasley@adobeforums.com
I found that brush strokes got a lot better in CS3. I turn my spacing down to 0, turn smoothing on, and the stroke quality rivals Sketchbook Pro. I have no issues with it now.
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 6 2008 5:34 pm
From: rickjbsmith@adobeforums.com
Hey Harry!
Thanks for the reply. I really like SketchbookPro too when I'm doing quick concept sketches (I still think it's a little smoother than PS).
However, when it comes to when i want to do the real top-quality high-end linework, I either have to scan in pen-on-paper work or (more commonly) go into Painter to do the "inking" of final linework. I fair measure of the capabilities of the different packages for very high quality linework can be seen in the comic book industry - many comicsillustrators use PS for COLOURING between the lines, but it's almost universally recognised in the field as incapable of doing the linework (which is normally inked beofre being scanned in, or just done with something like the scratchboard tool in Painter).
What do you other guys think? Any comments from the Adobe guys? :D
Best,Rick.
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 6 2008 7:20 pm
From: dave_milbut@adobeforums.com
What do you other guys think
I think adobe should buy painter and assimilate it into photoshop! :)
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "adobe.photoshop.win.featurerequests"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.win.featurerequests?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to adobe.photoshop.win.featurerequests+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.win.featurerequests/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
0 comments:
Post a Comment