Wasn't there 64-bit plug-in for PS CS?

[Frank Petronio]

A moot point for me, since I am still using a G4, but the computer horsepower thread caught me - I didn't realize there was still a 2gb RAM limit to CS - wasn't there supposed to be an update to take advantage of the G5's 64-bit processing, and wouldn't that kick out the 2 gb limit?

I don't make 1 gb Photoshop files... so it's an academic question for me - but from the looks of it, many of you are making these huge files (is it worth it? ;-))

[Bruce Watson]

I haven't heard of it, and I haven't seen it on Adobe's website. But if it's out there, I'd buy a Mac tommorrow! But I don't think it's there. I'm not even sure that MacOS X.x has enough 64 bit parts to let a 64 bit Photoshop run anyway. Anyone know more about it want to contribute something here???

The reason to scan that big is the scan-once-use-many idea. I do it because I do my own drum scans, and drum scanning is slow and painful. You only want to scan the thing the one time, trust me. So I scan it as big as I ever think I'll make a print (about 1.0 x 1.25 m, or 10-11x enlargement). This gives me files about 550MB, 16 bit grayscale. Then I do cropping, spotting, major and minor corrections, etc. on this huge file, and store it on DVD. When I want to make a print, I pull the DVD, copy the fully corrected version to disk, shrink it, sharpen it, and print it. Or, if I decide to change it, I can pull the version before the changes I want to redo, and start from there. I can go all the way back to the original scan if I want.

And yes, I've made a few huge prints at customer request, so it's worth it to me to work this way. I'm just glad I'm not doing 8x10 color film!

[Eduardo Aigner]

The G5 is a 64 bit processor, and the next generation of the Apple OS (Mac os 10.4, code TIGER) will take full avantage of that.
I don't know about the 2Gb limit.

[Keith S. Walklet]

My bad, Frank. What Eduardo says is what I was thinking of. The bottleneck is with the current OS. It will be gone next go-round, at which point I might actually upgrade.

[julian_4860]

Adobe have already said that the next version of PS will still have the 2gig limit for both Mac and PC and it won't be until the version after that that the 2gig limit will be taken away. All the tests I've seen show if you use these big files, a PC with a 10,000rpm access speed raid 0 array and a third disk for scratch, with the faster FSB is the way to go. Don't mean to start a platform war!

[Frank Petronio]

As a long time Mac user, I will conceed that a fast PC will out perform a fast Mac at this point.

As for your overall productivity and output, that would be a much more interesting test...!

[julian_4860]

"As for your overall productivity and output, that would be a much more interesting test...!"

I was talking with a local lab about this., They've just gone to PCs after years of Macs, and I wanted to know what caused the swcith. partly it was cost/performance ratio. the other reason was that dealing with the big drum scans he was saving between 30mins and an hour per image. PS works much or less the same in both OS, colour management works equally well for what he was doing too. The rip he uses works better in PC (Studio print - not even sure there is a Mac version). However for his own use (Internet and video/music) he's just bought a g5!

[Frank Petronio]

Oh, I'm fighting my urge to purge here - them are fighting words!

[julian_4860]

"Oh, I'm fighting my urge to purge here - them are fighting words!"

<g> wasn't meant to be! Its a real problem for those people working with large negative, and/or large print sizes using digital output.
I was talking to Chris Jordan about this last year. His workflow is pretty impressive, but, if I remember right, he was going out for a jog whilst his hardware ran his sharpening routine!
I'd been using an Imacon 848 with a g5 until yesterday when the lab got the PC installed. Dunno what the trick was , I'm guessing the faster access speed of the hds, the raid 0 and the extra scratch disk, but it flew. I don't care which 'brand' does it, but whoever gets a true 64 bit implementation of PS working will have cracked a real deadlock. I was looking at Picture Window yesterday, but couldn't workout if it would stop at the 2gig barrier. It seems to have a lot going for it as an application.

[Mark Muse]

The current dual G5 running 10.3.x supports up to 8GB RAM. I do not know how much of that PS is capable of using. Adobe is working on some interesting things for digital capture that involve very high bit rates, I think well in excess of what has been mentioned in this thread. As has also been mentioned OS X 10.4, due soon, will support the 64 bit processing capability of all current pro level desktop Macs, but don't confuse that with the bit depth of images. You might wish you had 64 bit processing (x2 or x4) to crunch one of these high bit suckers, but it is not necessary.