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

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

adobe.photoshop.macintosh@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Question about Layer Sets
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/e97f9a6a566d862a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:06 am
From: Ann_Shelbourne@adobeforums.com

I would go even further than Neil and say that, UNLESS a college uses the most recent version of software, your tuition fees would be better spent on buying the software for yourself —plus a selection of the best books on the subject and/or membership at Lynda.com.

== 2 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:17 am
From: Mark_Reynolds@adobeforums.com

- I think I'll band my head against the wall

== 3 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:33 am
From: Neil_Keller@adobeforums.com

Mark,

… and you might find you prefer driving it.

And although automatic transmissions have been around since WWII, I've only bought cars with stickshift since 1973. But it's by choice. And I still know how to drive an automatic when I have to. <g>

No-one at college level is going to have anything to do with anything
as sophisticated as "workflows"

No strong argument from me there. But a lot of folks take computer software courses not just to learn how to retouch Aunt Minnie's old wedding photos or design business cards (!), but as a way to add as valuable job skills to their résumés. Sure, learning Photoshop v7 is far better than nothing; but not as good as learning CS4...or CS3. If my tuition could buy either course, why start with v7?

Please note, the only good that comes out of banging your head against the wall is how it feels when you stop! <g>

Neil

== 4 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:43 am
From: Mark_Reynolds@adobeforums.com

I still profoundly disagree with suggesting to Kent Harris, that his college is in some ways failing him by not have the most recent (buggy on Windows) version of Photoshop. I still think that the chances of anyone from scratch, being able to benefit from, learn and make use of the few changes in CS,2,3 and 4 are fairly slim.

When I went to college there was one very slow old computer with photoshop 2 on it, didn't stop me.

== 5 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:49 am
From: Ann_Shelbourne@adobeforums.com

You are teaching people to edit digital images … and you are prepared to forego the use of ACR 5.3?

I would want my tuition fees back for that reason alone!

== 6 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:53 am
From: Mark_Reynolds@adobeforums.com

"and you are prepared to forego the use of ACR 5.3? " yep they learn to use Curves, selective colour and Channel mixer. Thats the manual gear shift way - they will learn it better. Finer points of quality are of no value for learning

== 7 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:56 am
From: Neil_Keller@adobeforums.com

Mark,

I appreciate your Photoshop response, but let's just agree to disagree on this issue.

Now, as for sticking automatics into Formula 1 cars, I agree.

Next week: the pros and cons of paddle shifters in the slick and pricey M-B Mclaren...

Neil

== 8 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 11:08 am
From: Ann_Shelbourne@adobeforums.com

Mark:

If you look at ACR more closely, you will see that Curves and white and black points retain all of their importance and a student is STILL going to learn about those things in addition to learning about both the basic and advanced tools and features in Photoshop CS4 itself.

I have always believed that students, in any discipline, should be provided with the best possible tools or how can they begin to explore the possibilities?

One exception: I don't recommend a Ferrari for a learner-driver.

== 9 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 11:21 am
From: Mark_Reynolds@adobeforums.com

I think your forgetting exactly how advanced Photoshop was at 7. If you look at ACR more closely, you will see that Curves and white and black points retain all of their importance attempting to patronise your opponent to retrieve a losing argument, is a strategy of yours that's losing its appeal for me. I can assure you I know the full range of options in RAW, and would bet I use most of them a lot more frequently than you do Anne.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Set Foreground and Background Color Options?
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/dd67f7b9fb4dd5d6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:17 am
From: "Mark B Anstendig"

I know that. That is the first thing to know about the topic.

Still, unsharp masking is unsharp masking.

I have seen no gain and often losses.

Mark

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:26 am
From: Ann_Shelbourne@adobeforums.com

Explore ACR 5.3's "Detail" panel a bit more thoroughly — the tools in there have nothing to do with USM.

But FIRST, you do need to read the relevant sections of the two books that I mentioned previously.

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 11:13 am
From: "Mark B Anstendig"

The books are long since ordered, from Amazon, where I have free 2cnd day shipping.

And it seems time to do some more of the tutorials.

Thanks,

Mark

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Soft Brush Problem in Photoshop CS3 - edges of brush show pink banding
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/7d661a3f6ef25ddd?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:37 am
From: Kenneth_McIntyre@adobeforums.com

I honestly think that this is an issue with photoshop somehow because I see the same results in print not just on the monitor. I have tried re-installing but it hasn't helped.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:48 am
From: Neil_Keller@adobeforums.com

There are a few good ones out there. I'd stay away from the inexpensive Huey. Personally, I use and like the Spyder3. Others are very satisfied with the Eye-One (I believe the Display 2 model).

Neil

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 11:01 am
From: Kenneth_McIntyre@adobeforums.com

Thanks neil. This must be a photoshop problem though. When I use my gradient tool from solid black to transparent, the results are hideous! Nowhere close to transparent!

<http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=10C9yEuH54ISJWaOV6Y95WziTeCTA0>

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Larger mousepointer - Brush cursorsize issue CS4
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/8092cca96ba9ce78?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:40 am
From: Jim_Poor@adobeforums.com

Oh I'm soooo glad to hear of this. I've been trying for months to get the cursor mismatch thing solved. Mike Shaw saw this post and alerted me to possible solution for my issues. Resetting the cursor size back to normal in Universal Access solved the issue for me.

Of course, now I have to squint to see the cursor on my monitors . . .

Take the good with the bad I suppose.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 11:16 am
From: MikeShaw_PSQE@adobeforums.com

This is an expected behavior with CS4. In CS4 we are using a cursor api to display the cursor. So if you increase the size of the cursor in Universal Access it will also affect the painting cursors in Photoshop. In CS3 we drew our own cursor, but that was not feasible with the GPU changes that went into CS4.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Why do some actions have 2 keyboard shortcuts?
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/64762da391aaba84?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:41 am
From: v6v6v6@adobeforums.com

Thanks Chris and Ann, I went back and read Apple's UI guidelines <http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/XHIGUserInput/chapter_12_section_3.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP30000361-TPXREF54> and it gave me a little better understanding of their keyboard shortcut standards. For example, I noticed the lack of shortcuts in Photoshop which made use of the Control key, but this may be partially explained by this guideline:

Because the Control key is already used by some of the universal access
features as well as in Cocoa text fields where Emacs-style key bindings
are often used, it should be used as a modifier key only when necessary.

Also, I imagine Adobe may want to keep similar shortcuts across multiple platforms and since Command and Control are swapped between Windows and Mac, you may not want to use that combination since there's no equivalent for both on the PC. (Just thinking outloud, I might be completely off here.)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: CS4 layer masks driving me nuts!
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/c042de49966c7f2c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:45 am
From: Ann_Shelbourne@adobeforums.com

Cmd back-slash does work still in CS4 to select the mask … or it does for me under OSX 10.4.11 anyway.

Check System Pand photoshop shortcuts to see if you have a conflict.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: CS4 Space bar doesn't work to reposition a marquee
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/794549e8f73d1ca3?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:55 am
From: v6v6v6@adobeforums.com

Make sure that your keyboard shortcuts are set so that Spotlight isn't
activated with spacebar. You now have to remove or reassign most of the
OS shortcuts to get Photoshop to behave properly.

I found that on my system (MacBook Pro, OS 10.5.6) that the Spotlight shortcut is Command-Space and even if I were to press this and make Spotlight appear, I'm still able to reposition the marquee as normal.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Photoshop performance on new Mac Pro "Nehalem"
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/51c1421c634f2c2f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 10:57 am
From: John_Danek@adobeforums.com

I've always kept the future in mind looking at the performance and capabilities of Hardware and software. That said, I would invest in the dual quad and max out the HD and RAM slots. I feel for Adobe writers who are constantly trying to catch up with Apple or vice versa, like a dog chasing its tail.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: correcting exposure in Photoshop/Bridge
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/2c73d2c889bfb104?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 11:03 am
From: Buko

Camera RAW is embedded into Bridge. Which does allow you to alter (non
destructively) the perceived exposure of RAW files.

Not sure if you have noticed but if you open a RAW file from Bridge and Photoshop is not running, Photoshop must be launched before you can use ACR. So ACR is not part of Bridge.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: New Mac Pros, iMacs and Minis introduced
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/14ab36a13b239952?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 11:07 am
From: Allen_Wicks@adobeforums.com

Awfully expensive IMO. US$2500 for a box that allows a max of 8 GB RAM makes the low end an unacceptable graphics investment, and $3300 as the next step up is a lot of money.

My guess is that Apple is just following its normal for new products skim-the-cream pricing model. Few desktop computers will be sold during 2009 so Apple figures to charge the folks who really need the kind of power the dual-CPU MPs represent. Then with economic improvement and new chip prices Apple can later reconfigure the line, adjust prices, etc. There certainly is room for all kinds of speed bump performance improvements, including new models.

IMO the product mix is changing. Part of this is the logical consequence of the large amount of power available in desktop computers today - even at the C2D levels of 2006. All of today's Macs perform graphics work in milliseconds that used to take many minutes, if not hours (remember running PS on PPC 8500 boxes?).

The new Mini IMO is the sleeper of the new Macs. iMacs are hamstrung by their glossy displays intolerable to many (not all) graphics pros but the Minis are not. Running OS 10.6 with FW 800 connectivity, 9400M graphics, 4 GB DDR3 RAM and third-party displays a Mini will be able to actually drive a desktop Aperture or Photoshop workflow (although obviously not like a 4x-the-price MP would drive such apps) at a very cheap price.

However for tech evolution reasons the Mini will live a much shorter life cycle than the top MPs. The 4 GB RAM will soon prove limiting in the future, as will the maximum 8 GB RAM of the low end MP. In fact that 8 GB RAM limitation probably makes investing in a new low end MP appropriate only for certain very specialized usages (not Photoshop) that do not evolve to benefit from additional RAM.

-Allen Wicks

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 11:10 am
From: g_ballard@adobeforums.com

crikey, the old stuff don't even work yet

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Opposite of Bird's Eye View feature?
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/8eef3cd206f23543?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Mar 3 2009 11:26 am
From: v6v6v6@adobeforums.com

Is there an opposite feature that would allow you to zoom in really quick, like a magnifying loop or something? I just want to confirm that it's not already built in. Also want to gauge it's usefulness as a feature before making a feature request.

(BTW, the Bird's Eye View feataure is great!)

Thanks!

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

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

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

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

0 comments:

Live Traffic

Photoshop How To Use

Categories

Blog Archive

About Me

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

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

0 comments:

Search

Live Traffic