adobe.photoshop.macintosh
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh?hl=en
adobe.photoshop.macintosh@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Export XMP metadata to comma or tab delimited text? - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/dad4afd10aee7074?hl=en
* Anyone else having a Problem with Leopard and Photoshop CS3? - 5 messages, 5
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/2448effaa20ec500?hl=en
* Change in EXR open from CS2 to CS3 can this be fixed? - 2 messages, 2
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/8948fc2c826ed062?hl=en
* Bridge->ImageProcessor->jpeg or Tiff or PSD, the color fades - 3 messages, 2
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/cb0cd7a848b34ed6?hl=en
* 2009 Macs and Peripherals :: General Discussion :: Chapter III - 5 messages,
3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/c2f0ebcc850b85d0?hl=en
* Photoshop trapping: fast way to clone edge of CMYK elements OUT to create
trap - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/311c3de2687414d2?hl=en
* How do I export an image as transparent in CS4? - 5 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/fb16ce267757553d?hl=en
* Any way to disable the Rotate View feature in CS4? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/b4ae10fb7371dbff?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Export XMP metadata to comma or tab delimited text?
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/dad4afd10aee7074?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 4 2009 11:56 pm
From: Paul_R@adobeforums.com
This version is now tab delimited.
<http://www.aoow34.dsl.pipex.com/Download/CSVdcTAB.zip>
Boy you were posh a TRS80, I still had the Vic 20 only 23 characters accross the screen. Still managed to run Radio Teletype RX/TX with it.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 6:44 am
From: J_Maloney@adobeforums.com
10 print "j is awesome"
20 goto 10
hahahah!
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Anyone else having a Problem with Leopard and Photoshop CS3?
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/2448effaa20ec500?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 1:30 am
From: Kev_Chamberlain@adobeforums.com
What is PEBCAK? Problem Exists Between Chair And Keyboard.
The variation of that which I know is to describe a situation as a picnic -
Problem In Chair Not In Computer
== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 5:46 am
From: PShock@adobeforums.com
Just because it doesn't happen to Phil (who may not use all of the same
features of the Suite that others do anyway) does NOT mean that these
problems are not real and are not mere PEBCAK.
Right. If someone is having a problem associated with Tiger, it's PEBAK. If Leopard is involved, it's automatically because of Leopard. Apparently, with Apple's latest OS, trouble shooting problems are no longer necessary - just blame it on Leopard and call it a day. FUD
I find the dynamics here really interesting. This thread would have been very different if Vincent had posted with problems involving Tiger. Would have gone something like this:
After admonishing him for not providing more information about his setup by posting the obnoxious big blue link on how to ask questions (ahem - we know NOTHING about his machine or configuration, such as which machine, how much RAM, scratch disk or attached peripherals), there'd be all kinds of trouble shooting advice given - "try a new user", "repair permissions", "run DiskWarrior, and on and on ...
But no, since he mentions Leopard, none of that is apparently necessary and the completely, utterly irresponsible advice is given ... "that's just the way Leopard is".
Those are some serious problems he's reporting that have nothing to do with Leopard. Something is obviously hosed!
As for discounting my experience because I don't use every app in the suite as extensively as I do Photoshop, I'm FAR more qualified to discuss Leopard and CS issues than Ann or Neil who do not use Leopard at all (and have never used it as far as I know.)
"Others have problems with it", is their battle cry but it's extremely weak. Do I really need to remind you all that these forum are ALWAYS filled with people who have problems, regardless of version or OS? You act as if this forum was a ghost town when Tiger and CS3 were current!
Gee, Ann ... people are STILL reporting problems with 10.5 and CS3? How shocking! Guess what - people are STILL reporting problems with 10.4 and CS3 too! Let me make a prediction - people will have problems with 10.8 and CS9!
Vincent-
I don't really deal with fonts anyway ...
Yes. You do. Even if you never type a single line of text, every application uses fonts to create menus and other GUI items. If one of those fonts are bad, it can create all kinds of problems, including the very problems you mention.
The fact that you don't seem aware of this and you're still using 10.5.4 leads me to believe you're not familiar with the basic practices of maintaining a healthy system. Again, how did you install Leopard on that machine?
Look, if you're simply trying to justify using CS4, go right ahead. It's a worthwhile upgrade in it's own right. However, if you install it on that machine in it's current state, CS4 will NOT fix your problems because you do NOT have a healthy system.
You asked for experiences with Leopard - I can launch every application in both CS3 and CS4 suites simultaneously, and STILL not have your issues. I haven't experienced anything like your CS3 problems in Leopard - on both a 2006 Mac Pro and a 2008 Macbook.
If you'd like help to try and figure out the real problem, I'm more than happy to help. If not, Adobe will gladly take your money ...
-phil
== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 6:10 am
From: Kevin_Rabito@adobeforums.com
Don't go to 10.5.6. Oops I made the mistake. Issues with time machine, printing and others. Now trying to figure out why my images look faded when going from NEF to jpg or tiff or psd through imageprocessor in CS3.
== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 7:27 am
From: Jim_Jordan@adobeforums.com
Phil seems to find it impossible to accept that multitudes of users (but
not him apparently?!) have run into endless problems trying to run the
CS3 SUITE on Leopard.
And some seem to find it impossible to accept the multitude of users that successfully use CS3 in Leopard. Count me as another user that does use CS3 in Leopard. And count me as another FUD-fighter.
Running at 10.5.4, I wonder why 10.5.5 and 10.5.6 updates were not attempted as the most basic troubleshooting step.
Kevin, Adobe alleges that the 10.5.6 specifically addresses printing with CS3 <http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3194>. Perhaps you had something configured prior to the update to compensate for whatever problem existed previously.
== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 7:36 am
From: Allen_Wicks@adobeforums.com
I am with Phil: something is hosed, the symptoms you describe are probably not an OS/app conflict. Start by upgrading your OS to current after backing up important data. If that does not resolve the issue then re-install PS.
Routine usage of Disk Warrior also is a good preventative protocol IMO, but if you buy DW be sure to get the correct version for the OS that you are using.
Repair Permissions via Disk Utility immediately before and immediately after every installation. Although repairing Permissions is not a fix for poor performance, many folks do find that religiously repairing Permissions immediately before and immediately after every installation of any kind helps keep a graphics box running more smoothly. Routine usage of Disk Warrior also is a good preventative protocol IMO, but if you buy DW be sure to get the correct version for the OS that you are using.
Good luck!
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Change in EXR open from CS2 to CS3 can this be fixed?
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/8948fc2c826ed062?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 4:57 am
From: Zap_Andersson@adobeforums.com
Somehow the quote "I reject your reality and substitute my own" comes to mind here. :)
No, my explanation of alpha channels is not "wrong" in any way, shape, or form. If it is, please point out my error, and back it up with documentation that it is in error. And the incorrect TGA format documentation that tends to accompany some Adobe products most *certainly* do not count.
The reason Adobe is very stubbornly turning a blind eye to proper premultiplied behaviour, is because they use a straight alpha pipeline internally. This pipeline is *incapable* of representing a color such as premultiplied (1,1,0,0) (the "additive yellow" I mentioned in last post). Due to this complete inability to even represent this, they have a vested interest in defining it out of existence and claiming it "wrong", while it is not. Which I bet accouts for 90% of the stubbornness preceived in this thread.
Adobe products use a "straight" alpha (where alpha is considered more as a "mask" than opacity) because they stem from a paint tool background, where a "mask" is something you create out of pixels that are already there.
With that mindset, saying you have "multiplied with the alpha" in a premultiplied file makes sense.
But from the context of a renderer, this makes no sense. In a renderer, it's about taking samples off some geometry. In the simple case of opaque objects, lets say we take 16 samples in a pixel. 12 of these hit an opaque yellow (1,1,0,1) object, and 4 of these hit the background (0,0,0,0).
When summing up these samples, we get a color that is (0.75,0.75,0,0.75). This is not because we have "multiplied with alpha", it is simply because there was a *coverage* of an entity with an alpha of one in 75% of the pixel.
Now assume instead that the background was red (1,0,0,0), which is quite legal. The downsampled pixel would have a color of (1,0.75,0,0.75). And pixels where NO samples hit would have a color of (1,0,0,0).
While this may not be so useful for traditional compositing, it can be useful for all sorts of other reasons. For example, a 3ds Max render always sets the alpha to 0 in pixels that are "background", even if they are filled with, say, a sky, or anything else. So there is completely legal RGB data there, but with an alpha of zero.
If this is put into an EXR, and loaded by Photoshop, this sky is now lost forever. So data is clearly destroyed in the process.
We furthermore have these luminiscent pixels. Go back to our object-against-a-background issue, but instead of making the object just yellow, lets make it luminiscent yellow, i.e. (1,1,0,0). When this object covers 75% of the pixel, and the background is transparent black (0,0,0,0), the final pixel will be 0.75,0.75,0,0.
This means that when this color is comped on top of the underlying layer, the premultiplied "over" operation, which is...
r = fg + bg * (1 - fg.a)
...will work out to an add, since the alpha is zero, and hence (1-alpha) is (1-0), e.g. 1, so the math boils down to
r = fg + bg
The fact is that photoshop simply cannot do this, because it is "straight alpha" internally.
After Effects is kind of limping along here with the "Luminiscent Premultiplied" mode, but it is still a hack and breaks down any time you add even the slightest effect, since the AE effects pipeline is also, unfortunately, straight alpha.
Straight alpha has a few merits (notably with multiplicative post math and in color correction), but ends up being needlessly complex (compared to the premultiplied math) for lots of other operations like blurs, filtering, etc. The math in the premultiplied case can simply treat the alpha as another channel, and apply the exact same operations to it as it does to RGB, for things like blurs, convolutions, whatnot. A "straight alpha" system has a much much harder time here.
But hey. What do I know? Apparently I've been "defined wrong" in this discussion, even though I have the inventor of the alpha channel on my side.
/Z
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 5:33 am
From: Dragos_H_Stefan@adobeforums.com
Personally, I don't give a damn about EXR, Open EXR, "the VFX community"
or anything related to video or the film industry.
You're in the wrong thread and off-topic, troll.
If there is one hostile person in this thread, it's Chris Cox.
Mr. Cox, I still want to see some *clear* statement about industries which are bigger users of OpenEXR and would be negatively affected by the inclusion of an option or even of a preference.
You were very specific that changes in the workflow would greatly affect a much larger number of users than the VFX industries yet in the post were you were supposed to clarify this the information was very vague: "some market segments are experimenting", "I don't have hard numbers", "some studios, of which some use it as in the spec and some not","texture artists". And photographers interested in HDR, this being indeed probably a significant community (I'm talking about numbers).
I fail to see how a preference or dialog box on open (and with a checkbox "Don't show again") can affect in a bad way the workflow of anyone you mentioned.
Dragos
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bridge->ImageProcessor->jpeg or Tiff or PSD, the color fades
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/cb0cd7a848b34ed6?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 6:05 am
From: Kevin_Rabito@adobeforums.com
Processing some NEFs last night and noticed when I run through
imageprocessor in CS3, the resulting image looks faded.
Color space is Adobe RGB 1998. System is a iMac 2.8GHz,4GB ram, and
OS X 10.5.6. Just recently with much headaches, upgraded from 10.5.5.
Monitor is calibrated. Used OS X color sampler with the images side by
side, picked the same point and there is definite difference mostly in
the Red channel.
When I open the image through Camera RAW, into photoshop, do any changes
if needed and save through photoshop, color no longer looks faded.
I went back and tried imageprocessor again, this time converting to sRGB and
the result was not faded.
In the past I have not had any problems with imageprocessor, but have had
problems with prints looking faded/greenish gray cast which I have not resolved. Any thoughts, suggests on these problems would be appreciated.
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 8:40 am
From: Ann_Shelbourne@adobeforums.com
When I open the image through Camera RAW, into photoshop, do any changes
if needed and save through photoshop, color no longer looks faded.
That is because ACR is applying the ACR-edits and opening your camera images in the Color Space that you have selected in the Blue Text at the bottom of the ACR window.
When you use Image Processor, you are opening either sRGB or untagged images in Adobe RGB — hence the faded look that you are seeing.
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 9:11 am
From: Kevin_Rabito@adobeforums.com
Ann,
Thanks for responding.
The camera is set for Adobe RGB,I checked the blue text and it set for Adobe RGB. So when I've done my work in the past, I would use ACR for what I needed to do on the NEF files. I see them updated in Bridge, then ran them all through imageprocessor to the file format I needed. Have not had this issue before.
I'm assuming that when making changes in ACR, there is an associated xml file created for the changes. So I would assume that imageprocessor would read the nef and xml and do what it was set up to do. Since I keep everything in the workflow Adobe RGB unless I specify the change on output. I'm not sure why I would see a difference. I do not get this when I go from ACR into photoshop to continue work on it then save it.
Basically something has changed.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: 2009 Macs and Peripherals :: General Discussion :: Chapter III
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/c2f0ebcc850b85d0?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 6:22 am
From: LRK@adobeforums.com
I'm getting ready to redo my G5. I backed up my client jobs to an external 1T RAID drive for now. I thought about wiping the current internal drive clean and then reinstalling. But then I remembered that the G5 is going on three years old. So why would I go to this much trouble reformatting an older drive when the newer bigger drives are so cheap.
So my thinking is to order a new internal TB drive and just remove the current drive to keep with all files as they are, order an external casing for it, and pull client jobs onto the new drive as needed.
After a little research on internal drives it appears that some users might be having trouble with the newer Seagate being recognized by the G5. My next choice would be Hitachi. I am looking at this one from Other World Computing. <http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Hitachi/0A38016/> I don't see any specs regarding compatibility issues with the G5 one way or the other, so I thought I'd run it by this forum to see if any of you see any reason why it would not be a good choice.
== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 7:23 am
From: LRK@adobeforums.com
I may be okay on previous question. I think I found the area where I can determine compatibility for the Seagate with G5 Quad. I've also sent an email inquiry to make sure.
== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 8:02 am
From: LRK@adobeforums.com
Have you all seen the price of Memory? It's amazing!
I'm about ready to replace mine in the G5 Quad 2.5 with some of THESE. <http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Computing/42DDR2PAIR4G/>
== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 9:11 am
From: Ann_Shelbourne@adobeforums.com
Linda:
I don't know which Seagate HD you are considering, but I have a Seagate 1TB Model: ST31000340AS/ Revision: SD15 installed in my G5 and it has been fine.
== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 9:17 am
From: Neil_Keller@adobeforums.com
Linda,
trouble with the newer Seagate being recognized by the G5
Seagate told me about some Barracuda 7200.11 drives failing to be consistently recognized (data remains intact) and requiring a firmware update (Windows machine required for this). See: <http://seagate.custkb.com/seagate/crm/selfservice/search.jsp?DocId=207931&Hilite=> Their newest generation 7200.12 drives, I've been assured, have no such problem.
Also, their drives come Windows formated (NTFS, a read-only format with a Mac). You must use Disk Utility to reformat the drive for the Mac (a good idea for almost any hard drive or USB flash memory to be used only on the Mac). This, of course, would mean booting off the Mac System disc if you are creating the only startup drive.
Neil
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Photoshop trapping: fast way to clone edge of CMYK elements OUT to
create trap
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/311c3de2687414d2?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 6:26 am
From: J_Maloney@adobeforums.com
Make the spot channel a very dark color (Pantone process K would be good). Then the CMYk elements should spread. Once trapped, revert the spot channel back to spot x.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 8:27 am
From: Buko
You can set the trap to any pixel amount you want.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: How do I export an image as transparent in CS4?
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/fb16ce267757553d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 7:07 am
From: "Ed Hannigan"
What that "Wizard" used to do was make a Clipping Path. You can do the same thing quickly by making a selection of the object and in the Paths palette turn the selection into a path, then name the path, then choose Clipping Path from the dropdown menu and export (Save As) EPS.
The better, proper way is to make the Path manually using the Pen tool.
BTW, you could always just continue to use CS for this purpose.
BUT, are you sure you need an EPS? EPS is somewhat obsolete. What exactly is the destination of this file?
== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 7:45 am
From: Aude-Noelle_Nevius@adobeforums.com
Thanks Ed! The file is to be placed into an InDesign document. I suppose I could use a TIFF? And why is EPS obsolete ?
== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 7:54 am
From: Jim_Jordan@adobeforums.com
If you already have a transparent image in Photoshop and it is heading for InDesign, just save the file as PSD, TIF, PDF, or PDP. This is much easier (and much better) than using that lame wizard. No clipping path is needed.
EPS only offers 1-bit transparency. The pixel is either there or it is not. That is the nature of a clipping path.
PSD, TIF, PDF, and PDP allow 8-bit graduated levels of transparency. This allows semi transparent pixels (feathering) if you want it.
== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 7:57 am
From: "Ed Hannigan"
For InDesign a PSD should work. EPS is just not used that much any more. One reason may be the need to use Clipping Paths to simulate transparency.
== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 8:58 am
From: Aude-Noelle_Nevius@adobeforums.com
Thanks a lot to both of you for the info!
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Any way to disable the Rotate View feature in CS4?
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/b4ae10fb7371dbff?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Feb 5 2009 8:36 am
From: Buko
Pllllleeeaaassssse let us turn it off.
you can turn it off by disabling Open GL in the prefs.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "adobe.photoshop.macintosh"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to adobe.photoshop.macintosh+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/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