Photoshop How To Use: adobe.photoshop.windows - 25 new messages in 11 topics

adobe.photoshop.windows
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows?hl=en

adobe.photoshop.windows@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Using Crop Tool in an Action with varying size images
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/t/1a94c79305d84964?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 5:41 am
From: Martin_Coleman@adobeforums.com

Thank you so much Paul for putting this up but I am really sorry to say that I am not so sure what to do with it!

I guess it's a script but that sort of thing is way beyond me. I'll look at the help files and see if I can sort it out but if anyone can offer a few pointers - what's the minimum I nee to know - it would be great.

I offer this as an explanation for the delay in coming back to say thanks rather than a request to save me the bother of learning new stuff!

Kind regards

Martin

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Help with processing images of paintings for web output
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/t/98a09aab575e6119?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 5:59 am
From: Martin_Coleman@adobeforums.com

Could someone please help me with saving images for web.

What's the optimum size (px) these days for web viewing of images where the image is the only thing you want visible - not sharing screen with other stuff.

What's the best way/most efficient to process a RAW file to a thumb and a viewable JPEG?

I know a bit about sRGB and resolution but what about say, saturation and sharpening? Should you compensate for anything if output is to web only?

Thanks for your help and by the way, the camera is a 1Ds MkII

Martin

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 6:45 am
From: Gernot_Hoffmann@adobeforums.com

Martin,

below is the short description for a workflow (CS2).
As a result one can see a row of thumbnails and
one (selected) image with height 450 pixels.
One needs the thumb library, and showing the image
larger isn't necessarily more esthetical.

Much is a matter of opinion, but there is no doubt,
that the images should be improved as good as possible
in the original pixel size (also for other publications).
In a practical example (which is here not available)
I found that downsampling from 4000 x 3000 pixels to
height 450 pixels delivered good results for (globally
chosen) Bicubic Interpolation (not B.Sharper).

----
Preparations: edit all images as good as possible, whatever
pixel size, any color space sRGB or AdobeRGB.

Step 1 - Create a set of downsampled and JPEG compressed images

Put all your images in one folder, for instance 'ImSource'

File > Scripts > Image Processor
Select Folder > ImageSource
Save in Same Location (in subfolder JPEG, automatically)
Save as JPEG (converts automatically to sRGB)
Resize to Fit
W 900 px
H 450 px
Include ICC Profile (important for conversion tests)

All images (common formats, portrait or landscape) will be
shown undistorted with height 450 px.
Width 900 px is a dummy.

Step 2 - Create an HTML doc

File > Automate > Web Photo Gallery
Styles > Simple - Horizontal Thumbnails (one of several modes)
Source Images > Folder ImSource\JPEG
Options > Banner ...some Text
Select Folder > ImDest (for instance)

Clicking in this folder on index.htm starts the HTML doc.
Some improvements are required in the HTML text for the
text 'banner': larger font, equal font size and no double colon.
A somewhat reddish tinted background should be replaced
by white.
These changes are made in the folder 'Simple Horizontal
Thumbnails'. Can be explained later.
---

Best regards --Gernot Hoffmann

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 6:47 am
From: Buko

what version are you using?

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 7:21 am
From: Martin_Coleman@adobeforums.com

cs4

Thanks for your help

Martin

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Preparing same-size images of varying size subjects.
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/t/0394ed2ad79378f8?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 6:06 am
From: Martin_Coleman@adobeforums.com

I originally put this with a post on saving for web but I think this is a bit different.

If I shoot a big painting, the resolution of detail - brushstrokes, canvas, imperfections adds to the overall feel of the image. If I shoot a tiny/small image with the same lens/camera and it fills the screen those details look like a relief map of the Himalayas! Can I get around that? I notice that sharpening can make a difference but what are the principles here?

There's something going on when you photograph a painting that's say 2 meters wide and then next one is 20 cm. What sort of things should I be aware of when absolute accuracy in reproduction is the ideal?

I know also that lighting is important but I struggle with limitations of equipment. I just have three flashes and my best attempt has been to put the two off camera at sort of 45 degrees with one in the middle bouncing up. Sorry if that last part is more about photography that PS but I'm guessing there might be a few photographers out there ;-)

Thanks

Martin

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 9:41 am
From: Donald_Reese@adobeforums.com

If your original painting and your camera are of a higher quality, i would not expect you would see much difference in reproduction. use a macro and get as tight as you can for small stuff.your camera only has so many pixels available for any given subject,so fill the frame and maximize the pixels available.I often times will shoot artwork outside on a very overcast,even light day,but strobes are fine as well. I usually go for softer light doing artwork,but that can be done using flash. also shoot raw to get the most data you can.you could post samples here showing your results and dilemna using pixentral.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: CS4 x64 16GB RAM
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/t/8b9c9326cb0caaf7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 6:18 am
From: Freeagent@adobeforums.com

Assuming of course that you haven't by accident launched the 32-bit version, I can think of two things:

With a given number of images open and the history palette full for each of them, RAM usage will level out as history states drop off the horizon. You'll reach a threshold level, and you will have to keep pouring in images (or increase their size) to go higher.

Second - if CS4 x64 behaves like CS3, then it always writes to scratch from the moment you open the file. With enough RAM this is purely a background activity that won't slow you down, but you'll notice the disk activity and there will be plenty of stuff in the scratch file. But it does not necessarily mean that RAM is up to saturation.

Another thing I noticed with CS3 is that RAM would hardly ever saturate fully at all, except in very short bursts. Then it would immediately back down, disks spinning. I took this as very effective memory management, and it was reassuring to always have some spare RAM in case of a hungry filter.

Try "Reliability and Performance Monitor" to keep tabs on RAM usage in real-time.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 7:13 am
From: chris_farrell@adobeforums.com

So Photoshop sees the 16gb...and you allocate 12gb - which it sees and utilises. How big are the files you are using? I reckon it doesn't need all 12gb ram so wont use it.

I have 16gb and CS4 will only use all the ram when I am using mega massive files.

Try pushing up the image size /complexity so that they are around 6gb (saved file size) and see what happens....

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 9:09 am
From: "D Lirious"

First of all, even in 64 bits with overkill RAM like you have most users are
not going to see massive increases in speed compared to the 32 bit version
of the OS and CS4 and less RAM.
Part of the problem is CS4: you may have 2, 4 8 or more CPUs but for the
most part all that data, regardless of how much RAM it is pegged to, is
getting squeezed through one core at a time. The number of scratch disks
makes no difference in that regard. The processes that are multi-threaded do
not run all that much faster than on an efficient single core CPU.
This is a difficult thing to evaluate but is largely true. You can
experiment by setting CS4 to run on only one processor but much of the
slowdown you will see is because Vista will coopt CPU time to run itself.
The real advantage of multi-core CPUs remains off loading the OS to another
core more than running multi-threaded program operations for the vast
majority of programs, CS4 included.
Also those processes that are multi-threaded are not being run in a more
efficient parallel mode. I would think that processing a static image, which
can be broken down into sections to have the same operation applied on them
simultaneously, should be the ideal task for parallel processing but
apparently this is very difficult to do outside of the simple resizing
chores that CS4 applies to the GPU. Multithreaded CPU processes do not run
in parallel.
To begin with regardless of RAM Vista will insist on using a paging file. In
this regard Vista 64 is no different than Win 3.x. You can experiment by
turning off the paging file completely and seeing if your machine operates
stably. It may not. Vista has a plethora of background operations that will
access your hard drive the instant you stop using your keyboard or mouse,
which it sees as idle time. The massive amount of background processing that
Vista requires may be what is causing your hard drive to thrash more than
CS4.
All of that background noise is not just due to Vista.
You can speed up your 64 bit OS in the same way you do with a 32 bit OS:
stop unneeded background programs/processes. AS an example: I love Itunes
but you will find if you uninstall it or kill its background operations your
computer may noticeably speed up. Also, shut off Vista's indexing service,
which may also be a big contributor to the disk thrashing you describe.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Student upgrade to PS CS4 Extended
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/t/079d00a88e831131?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 6:49 am
From: Buko

and the price of $199 is for the Standard version

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 6:55 am
From: Don_McCahill@adobeforums.com

Are you sure Buko? It is my understanding that they only offer the Extended version as a student edition.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 7:39 am
From: Bob_Rutan@adobeforums.com

Thanks to all that replied.
It appears from what all of you are saying that the student upgrade from CS3 Ext is $199 and it will not get any less expensive.
Appreciate your replies.

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 8:02 am
From: Don_McCahill@adobeforums.com

You might save a dollar or two from a reseller over the Adobe Education store price, but that's about it. Or maybe not. My reseller www.creationengine.com, lists it at 199, same as Adobe store.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: HELP DESK
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/t/bb23d19826cd00da?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 7:04 am
From: SAMANTHA

[ http://internetstocktradings.blogspot.com ]
[ http://creditcarddealsnews.blogspot.com ]
[ http://helpdesksoftwaredesk.blogspot.com ]

==============================================================================
TOPIC: import jpeg in CS4
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/t/1796ab9b1a90787c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 7:59 am
From: Ian_Edwards@adobeforums.com

Just goes to show how complacent we become, I never noticed that before ;-)

Silly me

thanks

Ian

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 8:51 am
From: "Ed Hannigan"

When I get a new piece of software I always click on everything to get an idea of what's where. Photoshop always has many ways to do anything. Duplicate Layer appears in at least three different places, for instance.

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 9:04 am
From: "John Joslin"

I'm still clicking in CS4!

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 9:16 am
From: "Phos±four dots"

"When I get a new piece of software I always click on everything to get
an idea of what's where."

That's the only thing that makes sense to me.

I just can't fathom the personal character attribute that would deter a person from exploring the UI thoroughly, and trying stuff out.

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 9:35 am
From: Ian_Edwards@adobeforums.com

yeah but when you have Dreamweaver, Firefox, Photoshop, Bridge etc etc

And you have to earn a living you have to prioritise ;-) in my case It was Dreamweaver as thats my core software.

cheers

Ian

==============================================================================
TOPIC: custom poster i whant to make with photoshop
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/t/2a7c58fb7ac1540b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 8:13 am
From: mitchell_model@adobeforums.com

hi everybody well the poster is almost done but i didnt use photoshop i used picasa but now the quality sucks so do you know of any program to use to get the quality alot better?

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 8:27 am
From: Don_McCahill@adobeforums.com

Well, Photoshop, but as we have mentioned, there is a steep learning curve, and you might not be able to produce a work of art as your first project.

As for "the quality sucks" you might find the same thing happening in Photoshop. I know that I've turned out many things that suck and I've been using it for 15 years now. But I have also see more artistic people turn out works of art with it.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Easiest way to remove background from an image
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/t/a75bed2cafce4a27?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 8:51 am
From: PeterK.@adobeforums.com

One instance of why you might want to delete pixels... if you've masked something out and want to blur the pixels or soften the edges, deleting the background keeps those background colours from bleeding into the colour of your main subject's edges.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: slow response in CS 4 (brush, zoom etc)
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/t/c90bfb1c999c3a31?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 9:20 am
From: callecal@adobeforums.com

I was excited to install the trial of CS4 to see if it is what it promises to be...turns out its not (?)
I use Photoshop mostly for drawing, and when I draw using my tablet (or the mouse) the brush stroke is very unresponsive! and zooming, rotating etc is very slow as well... making it impossible to paint, even on a 500*500 100dpi canvas and a 20pixel brush size.

Im running it on a laptop,
core 2 duo 2ghz, 4mb cache
2 gig ram
geforce 8600m gt graphics
7200rpm hard drive

Ive tried different setting in pref -> performance -> advanced, such as turning vertical sync on and off, also forcing it on and of in the nvidia control panel.

There seems to be so many new features in cs 4 so I really want to run it, but if there is no solution....
Hope anyone has an idea!

PS, I have no problem in CS3!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Quick Mask not Working.
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/t/242c1c8c1aa73024?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 28 2008 9:50 am
From: Anthony.Ralph@adobeforums.com

I find that if I use my Wacom mouse, I cannot see the quick mask ruby lith if 'shape dynamics' is ticked in the brush dynamics panel. My pen works fine though. Could this be your problem or something like it?

Anthony.

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "adobe.photoshop.windows"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to adobe.photoshop.windows+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.windows/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Friday, November 28, 2008

adobe.photoshop.windows - 25 new messages in 11 topics - digest

0 comments:

Live Traffic

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Friday, November 28, 2008

adobe.photoshop.windows - 25 new messages in 11 topics - digest

0 comments:

Search

Live Traffic