When CS5? [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

Tyler Boley

30-Jan-2010, 17:47

Gordon Moat

30-Jan-2010, 18:29

Every 18 months after the previous version, Adobe will release another.

What is it about CS4 that you think needs to be improved?

Brian Ellis

30-Jan-2010, 18:59

Eric probably said all that needs to be said, he pretty much nailed it. I suspect that Photoshop 5.5 did all I really need. For that matter Version 4, the first one I used, probably did. But I keep upgrading. Each time a new version comes out I say I won't get it but then I start reading and talking to people and I end up buying the new version right around the time the next version comes out. I debated a long time (by Photoshop standards) before upgrading to CS4 because I didn't think it would be worth the money but I have to say I'm glad I did, I like a lot of the changes they made with it.

To not answer the OP's question, I don't know. I keep hearing that it's imminent, like within the next month or two, but that's not from anyone who knows much more than I do. And since I know nothing that means they know next to nothing.

Marko

30-Jan-2010, 19:13

Jeez, What's with all the negativity lately on this board? It was a very simple question of WHEN it might be released. :rolleyes:

But since we all seem to be in a curmudgeonly mood here, let me pile on some, though from a different perspective...

For starters, Photoshop is only one of a dozen or so applications that comprise one of the Creative Suites as Adobe calls them for the past four versions. Photographers are just a miniscule portion of all Photoshop users out there. And even then, the users of the type prevalent on this forum are but a tiny portion of the general population.

Don't you think it is incredibly arrogant not to mention myopic to question the need for upgrade of the entire suite of applications based on our little needs, which are fairly rudimentary compared to some other groups? Much less the entire business model, even though I do agree that they have been growing extremely arrogant themselves lately, especially in the customer relations and marketing departments.

Another easy question that threads like this inevitably invoke, one that I just asked in another group over in the Lounge the other day:

Why on Earth do you feel the need to comment on something you are apparently and self-professedly so disinterested in?

What's wrong with the usual good old fashioned bitchfest about films and labs dropping out like flies? Preferably over at APUG, help keep them running... ;)

jim kitchen

30-Jan-2010, 19:18

Gentlemen,

CS5 will introduce sixty-four bit architecture to the Mac world removing all legacy "Carbon" code for any PPC processor, new paint brushes, new blending algorithms, new tools, et al. The code for sixty-four bit architecture will be native "Cocoa" which translates into a paradigm shift for any Mac Intel based sixty-four bit machine, compared to the older "Carbon" code remnants from Photoshop 3.0, which should not to be confused with CS3. Once the shackles of Carbon code are released, a Mac Intel based computer will illustrate the application's new found speed, and the application's ability to acquire more accessible RAM... :)

Discussions are present, which suggest that CS5 will introduce a Flash SDK for the iPhone too, but it is not noted just yet as a certainty, where a broad spectrum of developers that develop Flash software for whatever reason, should be able to produce Flash files that will run natively on the iPhone, iTouch, and the iPad. Although Apple was reluctant to introduce a Flash environment to the iPhone in previous generations, Adobe developed a separate SDK which will open a totally new developer avenue, generating revenue for both companies...

jim k

Marko

30-Jan-2010, 19:21

On the other hand, I just had a major scheduled service done on my car and it cost me more than I will have to pay to upgrade my entire CS3 suite to CS5 when it comes out.

Yes, I service my car and I upgrade my (business) software regularly. Keeps both the car and me running more smoothly and it costs me less in the long run.

CS4 was the first release I ever skipped, mainly out of protest against some of their more recent marketing practices, but even if I didn't, my scheduled car services come much more often then my software updates.

How many of software update complainers here service their cars? Do you think it is a failed business model too to require car owners to service their cars?

Ben Hopson

30-Jan-2010, 19:53

As to the OP question, I have seen late April mentioned regarding the CS5 release on a few sites (definitely rumor).

Being a new Mac Pro owner, I am anxious to see the improvements the new version will offer Intel Mac users. All the things Jim K already addressed adds up to CS 5 being a worthwhile upgrade IMHO.

Ben

Frank Petronio

30-Jan-2010, 20:19

They got one over us if you've gotten a recent digital camera -- they don't update the older versions of Adobe Camera Raw for the new cameras -- or you end up making giant 4X larger DNG files -- which means buying more backup drives or third party Raw software -- where simply upgrading solves the problem.

But I haven't found much else between CS3 to CS4 to appreciate. Granted leaner 64-bit code will be great in CS5 but it harks back a question I've had about software since I started playing with Macs (Photoshop 1.0 on a single floppy) -- why can't we take a leaner, earlier version that ran fine on our older slower computers -- and run a modified version on today's faster processors... so that it FLEW?

(I know you can't do it out of the box, but I just mean the concept ... I want Photoshop Basic, Turbo Edition.)

Nathan Potter

30-Jan-2010, 20:27

Look for CS5 around Jun or Jul - a guesstimate. For those aggravated by frequent Photoshop releases maybe a new scheme is on the way. I have a hunch that a "cloud computing" approach may be coming. In the case of Adobe, this will involve their keeping the latest Photoshop version on a set of massive servers run by them. You will rent Photoshop on their servers for a monthly fee, or perhaps a use fee. Hey it may be that every time you want to make a print on your home computer there will be a charge imposed by Adobe. :confused: Of course toggling between your computer and the software on the distant server will require a high speed, fully optical connection so the whole scheme may be a ways into the future. But if I see $$$ signs then they will also. It is already a historic trend in business and industrial licensing of software packages, some of which are maintained at remote sites. :cool: :cool:

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

John T

30-Jan-2010, 20:28

I don't know what camera you are using, but .dng files are smaller than proprietary raw files-and don't need sidecars.

Frank Petronio

30-Jan-2010, 20:32

Yeah in the ideal world, but not for the Panasonic G1 with ACR 4.x, it needs 5.x and the G1 dng file size drops from 44 to 11mb.

Kirk Gittings

30-Jan-2010, 21:02

There are rumors the new LR has much better noise reduction. If PS CS5 has that in ACR, it will be enough for me to purchase it.

Bruce M. Herman

31-Jan-2010, 01:46

In answer to why I am interested in CS5, it is mostly to get the 64 bit version and speed. I have a Mac Pro and would love to see the speed boost. Being able to handle larger files (> 2GB) hasn't been much of an issue yet, but who knows?

For those who don't like to upgrade, please consider the licensing model used by other industries where no updates of any sort are available 90 days after purchase unless an annual maintenance contract is purchased for 15-30% of the license cost. Even with this, software is declared to be end-of-life after 4-5 years, meaning no more bug/security fixes unless the update is purchased. Adobe is a publicly traded company that has to make a profit in order to pay its employes and to raise capital to develop products that meet new needs of folks other than B&W photographers. If companies ultimately adopt Google's model for software and then begin to charge for the software on a per use basis, we won't have the option to use an older version at no cost.

Anyway, thanks for sharing the rumors.

Scott Knowles

31-Jan-2010, 06:27

Has anyone heard any rumors about when PS CS5 will be released?

Probably not long after I replace my G5 PPC with a new Mac Pro, which is scheduled for late spring. I don't look forward to transporting all the purchased software over and then get updates or upgrades, especially CS4 (CS2 and CS3 will die a happy death on the old machine minus a few applications). Anyone does something like this on Mac's?

Bill_1856

31-Jan-2010, 08:11

All this digital photography stuff has gotten 'way too expensive.
There's very little that I can't do with PS Elements 2, and a couple of (cheap/free) stand-alone or plug-in programs. PS7 sits unused on my old MAC, and I have no plans (or funds) for "upgrading."

Marko

31-Jan-2010, 09:51

Probably not long after I replace my G5 PPC with a new Mac Pro, which is scheduled for late spring. I don't look forward to transporting all the purchased software over and then get updates or upgrades, especially CS4 (CS2 and CS3 will die a happy death on the old machine minus a few applications). Anyone does something like this on Mac's?

I do it every time a new version of OS X comes out.

I call it "Spring Cleaning" because instead of simply installing an upgrade, I make full backup of everything, deactivate all the licenses, wipe the system disk clean, install the OSX, reinstall the software, reactivate the licenses and then migrate the data back again.

Essentially a habit I carried over from my old DOS/Windows days. On a Mac, it typically takes me a day to do all of it and I actually am looking forward to it every time because I end up with a clean, freshly optimized system running at its best. It is also a good opportunity to clean out all the detritus that would otherwise keep accumulating.

Gordon Moat

31-Jan-2010, 11:03

In answer to why I am interested in CS5, it is mostly to get the 64 bit version and speed. I have a Mac Pro and would love to see the speed boost. Being able to handle larger files (> 2GB) hasn't been much of an issue yet, but who knows?.........

I am running CS4 Design Standard on a barely one year old MacBook Pro with 4GB RAM, and with my usual Photoshop actions never has lack of speed been an issue. About the only software that taxes the computer is doing video renders in Final Cut, though I do have the faster internal harddrive. Anything really heavy gets rendered through a Seagate FireWire drive, which also becomes the scratch drive for Photoshop and Illustrator.

What I have noticed is that the speed and latency of hard drives has more bearing on performance than any other issue. Next is having lots of RAM in a machine. Last is the processor speed. What I mean by this is observable differences, and not some test measuring milliseconds, because I cannot count in milliseconds. It reminds me of friends of mine buying one motorcycle over another because a test rider went 0.01 seconds faster in the 1/4 mile, not considering that they would be lucky to get within 1/2 second of the test rider's time.

Upgrading for speed makes sense when you are not getting your work done, or when you are having trouble meeting deadlines. I am sure some will disagree with that. I really do think productivity goes down with each upgrade, because there will be enough changes needing to learn, to negate any minor change in performance. Also, the interface often has a greater affect on productivity than the software enhancements.

I have used every version of Photoshop since 2.5, starting in college and progressing through to my work. I have not purchased every upgrade, and the biggest reason for me to pick up CS4 was that the interface changes allowing me to interact faster with the applications. If all CS5 does is switch to 64 bit, then I think it would be a waste of money, but I think Adobe will do more. Their 3D handling will likely improve, allowing more editing of image maps, and I suspect they will dumb down some tools to allow less experienced users to better use Photoshop.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

Henry Ambrose

31-Jan-2010, 13:09

I started with PS in 1989. The machine and software combination was so slow compared to today's machines that it is almost impossible to describe. You could start simple operations on files smaller than 1 MB, go make lunch and come back to see if it finished - sometimes it wasn't. I do not exaggerate.

Over the years machines and software have gotten much, much better and faster. I bought lots of them as they came out, the fastest and latest versions always. I spent lots of money doing this so I could do other people's work faster. I made more money.

Somewhere around the last 4-5-6 years I hit a point where the latest and fastest didn't matter so much, if at all. To do what I consider normal photo imaging work the latest and fastest is only slightly faster and the results are no better than a older machine and older software version.

We're on a plateau right now and that's part of why the latest upgrades are distasteful to many. There is no glowing beacon of wonderfulness to grasp for. We have cheap machines and two or three generation old versions that are almost as fast as we can work. There's not much waiting on a process to complete like there was "back in the day".

I find it amusing that this is hard to grasp - but truly, there isn't much need for improvement in speed in machines or software for typical photo work - not even most atypical, high-end work. Adobe and others who are experiencing this plateau now depend on selling us "features" the way the car people used to do. Power windows, cup holders, individually heated seats. The car doesn't run any better or faster but its got "features". After while this game will wear out but until then expect to see them churn a new version to keep the bottom-line strong. Or so they think.

Bruce M. Herman

31-Jan-2010, 13:51

Gordon,

Sharpening and using Viveza all take more than milliseconds on my system with my files. Any speed increases brought about by 64 bit processing would be appreciated. I agree that reading and writing files may still be a bottleneck until/unless the data buses in the Mac Pro are configured for 64 bit wide data. When Sun workstations moved to 64 bit with their hardware, we noticed an improvement in I/O.

Bruce

paulr

31-Jan-2010, 14:33

I
I call it "Spring Cleaning" because instead of simply installing an upgrade, I make full backup of everything, deactivate all the licenses, wipe the system disk clean, install the OSX, reinstall the software, reactivate the licenses and then migrate the data back again ... and I actually am looking forward to it every time ...

Back before computers, people did the equivalent by putting on a hair shirt and crown of thorns, and dragging a full-sized crucifix up a mountain. I forget what the ritual was called ... something a little different from 'spring cleaning.' :p

paulr

31-Jan-2010, 14:45

In answer to why I am interested in CS5, it is mostly to get the 64 bit version and speed. I have a Mac Pro and would love to see the speed boost.

That's the big reason. I don't have a machine that could take advantage, but if I did, I'd be chomping at the bit.

Greg Miller

31-Jan-2010, 14:45

Anything really heavy gets rendered through a Seagate FireWire drive, which also becomes the scratch drive for Photoshop and Illustrator.
Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

Have you tried pointing your PS scratch disk to an internal drive? A Firewire drive is so much slower than an internal drive that using a Firewire drive as a scratch disk sounds scary to me.

Not that you could do this with a laptop, but on my primary PS computer I have an internal 80GB hard drive dedicated to the PS scratch disk. This way it is a fast disk that has no competition for read/write. And it it doesn't pollute other drives by causing them to fragment files all over the place when the PS scratch file gets enormous.

For performance, I think priority #1 is maxing out RAM so that use of the PS scratch disk is kept to a minimum. Then a fast dedicated internal hard drive so that when the scratch disk is necessary, the swapping is as fast as possible and doesn't impact other drives or the OS swap file.

Gordon Moat

31-Jan-2010, 16:43

Have you tried pointing your PS scratch disk to an internal drive? A Firewire drive is so much slower than an internal drive that using a Firewire drive as a scratch disk sounds scary to me.

Not that you could do this with a laptop, but on my primary PS computer I have an internal 80GB hard drive dedicated to the PS scratch disk. This way it is a fast disk that has no competition for read/write. And it it doesn't pollute other drives by causing them to fragment files all over the place when the PS scratch file gets enormous.

For performance, I think priority #1 is maxing out RAM so that use of the PS scratch disk is kept to a minimum. Then a fast dedicated internal hard drive so that when the scratch disk is necessary, the swapping is as fast as possible and doesn't impact other drives or the OS swap file.

I should clarify that I am only using a MacBook Pro. I gave up on desktop systems five years ago, though my 4 years old PowerBook G4 was not really a speed demon. I have the 7200rpm drive on my MacBook Pro and 4GB RAM, which is a good combination with the 15" screen.

Someone else mentioned waiting for sharpening to happen. On my current set-up, sharpening renders as soon as I click okay. The only slow thing I can cause in Photoshop is a 1º rotation, which takes just over 2 seconds. I am not so behind on work that 2 seconds would make a difference.

The Seagate FireWire drive works faster when doing video renders, but the speed difference is nearly unnoticeable with Photoshop. Until the file size creeps above 1.5GB, there is not much speed advantage to having the external drive. Mostly it helps with moving through various history states. On a laptop, even with a 7200rpm internal drive, an external FireWire drive helps, though I doubt there is much improvement on desktop systems.

There are speed improvements within OS X, like turning off menu animation. Other things are Flash eating up processor cycles, so turning off your web browser can speed up everything. I would not mind going beyond 4GB RAM, but the cost to benefit is not yet there, since I am not really complaining about speed.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

Ben Hopson

31-Jan-2010, 17:22

Perhaps of interest to Mac users, macperformanceguide.com has some good articles on setting up MacPro, Macbook Pro, and Photoshop CS3/CS4 for best performance. Includes raid configuration, scratch disks etc.

http://macperformanceguide.com/

http://macperformanceguide.com/OptimizingPhotoshop-Intro.html

Ben

Greg Miller

31-Jan-2010, 20:45

The Seagate FireWire drive works faster when doing video renders, but the speed difference is nearly unnoticeable with Photoshop. Until the file size creeps above 1.5GB, there is not much speed advantage to having the external drive. Mostly it helps with moving through various history states. On a laptop, even with a 7200rpm internal drive, an external FireWire drive helps, though I doubt there is much improvement on desktop systems.
Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

For people with a desktop, or a laptop with eSATA port or with a really big primary drive:

Internal SATA drive data transfer speed = 1.6 Gbit/s
Internal SATA II or eSATA drive = 3 Gbit/s

Firewire 800 = 800 Mbit/s
Firewire 400 = 400 MBit/s

Firewire always is slower than internal drives and does not make the best PS scratch disk if space is available on an internal drive or eSATA drive. SATA II is 8x faster than Firewire 400.

Gordon Moat

1-Feb-2010, 23:30

My Seagate external has an eSATA port out, but to connect to my MacBook Pro I would need to run through an express card adapter. The MacBook Pro came with a FireWire 800 port. Anyway, with 4GB RAM, I rarely am stuck waiting for any action.

tbirke

3-Feb-2010, 21:54

I am using CS3 and it is so slow when I work on large files. My 8x10 scans at 16 bit with around 10 adjustment layers are more than 10GB - I work with only one history state - but still the mac is paging and swapping like nothing. I have a separate RAID 0 Array just for swapping, doesn't help.
Unfortunatly CS3 only uses 3GB of the available 16GB of RAM natively...that alone would be a reason for me to upgrade.

But since CS4 didn't adress this, lets wait for CS5...

Ken Lee

10-Feb-2010, 15:24

Most users want to process and browse many small files concurrently.

We want to process huge files, one at a time.

My guess is that Adobe will consistently address performance issues which affect most users, first and foremost.

Lightroom already (http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshoplightroom/features/) supports 64-bit processing.

It wouldn't surprise me if they do all new development within Lightroom, and later "back-port" features into Photoshop as needed. Perhaps Photoshop is looked upon as a Legacy product: one they can't live with, but can't live without. (Just a guess, based on a few decades in the software industry.)

r.e.

10-Feb-2010, 16:57

Most users want to process and browse many small files concurrently.

We want to process huge files, one at a time.

My guess is that Adobe will consistently address performance issues which affect most users, first and foremost.

I wonder whether you are ignoring the fact that CS is a suite of programmes and that there are a lot of users, apart from large format photographers, who need to process large amounts of data.

Ken Lee

10-Feb-2010, 17:05

You're probably right. I wasn't aware that Create Suite users deal with large files.

JohnnyV

19-Feb-2010, 12:18

There are rumors the new LR has much better noise reduction. If PS CS5 has that in ACR, it will be enough for me to purchase it.

Yes Lightroom 3 has a whole new imaging pipeline... noise has improved greatly. ACR CS5 will have the same new pipeline.

Here's what I wrote on my flickr page:

Hey... trying out the new Lightroom 3 Beta... really cleans up the 50D banding pattern and color noise. The image (1/5th crop of image) was under-exposed by about 1.85 stops due to flash not recycling in time. Settings are identical in both apps LR2 and LR3Beta.

LR2:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2576/4046698431_c9c1c02030_o.png

LR3:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2692/4047442752_636d8e709b_o.png

PViapiano

19-Feb-2010, 13:26

I think they are out of touch...
A business model that requires it's customer base to repurchase every year or so, particularly a community hard hit by economic and technical evolution of the past decade or so, is foolhardy. Also, it's not working, friends of mine there have been laid off.
We know what we need, and they don't approach us, but instead parcel out little changes we never needed, while moving menu items around and changing interface unnecessarily.
I'm on 3 still, I've yet to see a reason to change that will pay for itself. ACR is it, particularly if you need support for a new camera...
But hey, it's the large format list.

I say all this totally acknowledging the huge contribution Photoshop has made to the realization of my work... I hear 5 may actually be worth something, but I'll take some convincing.
Tyler

The continual consumer "upgrade" cycle in re: to technology is an extremely disheartening byproduct, as it affects our needs, wants and expectations. I fear it has turned more people into "magic bullet" seekers who wait for the "grass is always greener" upgrade, rather than concentrating on honing their skills and putting the time in to do the work they need to do in respect to their craft.

Ken Lee

19-Feb-2010, 13:29

Here's an example of the need for digital photographers to process lots of photos.

See A Lightroom Ouch (http://technology.lenswork.com/2010/02/a-lightroom-ouch.html) on the LensWork Blog:

"When I returned from Asia this last December, I had 12,000+ exposures to upload, organize, and start weeding my way through. Lightroom is the perfect tool for this daunting task..."

PViapiano

19-Feb-2010, 18:09

12,000 exposures...WTF? How long was he there?

I came home from a 3 week trip to Europe in 2002 with my first dSLR and had 1,200 images; that's about 57 per day. I thought I overshot...Sometimes when I go out on a weekend business trip and I know I'll have time, I shoot a roll or two...of 120 and get 3-4 images I'm happy to work with. At a Per Volquartz Joshua Tree weekend a few years ago, I shot 6 or 7 4x5 images and was able to use 6 of them as palladium prints.

Some people don't want to experience the moment, they want to experience the LCD screen...I hate to comment about someone else's style and of course it's their prerogative, but c'mon...just because you can doesn't mean you should.