Photoshop to fork into 2 programs

Adobe has clearly decided that Photoshop CS3 is just too much program for
one application and forked it into two different applications. We can only
wonder at this point how much extra the "Extended" version is going to cost
to keep abreast of multi-media photography needs.

May be they are intent on controlling your workflow today - tomorrow... ZE
VORLD!
http://www.adobe.com/products/photos...sext_info.html for anyone
interested.

Douglas

"D-Mac" wrote in message
...
Adobe has clearly decided that Photoshop CS3 is just too much program for
one application and forked it into two different applications. We can only
wonder at this point how much extra the "Extended" version is going to
cost
to keep abreast of multi-media photography needs.

May be they are intent on controlling your workflow today - tomorrow... ZE
VORLD!

I think they are intent on making as much money as possible.....Most
software people try to upgrade their programs as often as possible to keep
their sales up....The problem is, (for the consumer) "Is the new version
enough different from the old to be worth the upgrade money?" I have found
that in many cases it isn't, but then in many cases, I am not a
sophisticated enough user to really be able to appreciate the differences.

William Graham wrote:
"D-Mac" wrote in message
...
Adobe has clearly decided that Photoshop CS3 is just too much
program for one application and forked it into two different
applications. We can only wonder at this point how much extra the
"Extended" version is going to cost to keep abreast of multi-media
photography needs.

May be they are intent on controlling your workflow today -
tomorrow... ZE VORLD!

I think they are intent on making as much money as possible.....Most
software people try to upgrade their programs as often as possible to
keep their sales up....The problem is, (for the consumer) "Is the new
version enough different from the old to be worth the upgrade money?"
I have found that in many cases it isn't, but then in many cases, I
am not a sophisticated enough user to really be able to appreciate
the differences.

I'm in a quandary right now. I have and use Elements 4, and am
considering purchasing full-blown CS. CS2 is out now, but CS3 will be
out "soon", whatever that means, and I have held back a purchase
because of that. Now, if the OP's post is accurate, maybe I should go
ahead and buy CS2.

I keep getting the feeling there is no 'right' answer.

William Graham wrote:

I think they are intent on making as much money as possible.....Most
software people try to upgrade their programs as often as possible to keep
their sales up....The problem is, (for the consumer) "Is the new version
enough different from the old to be worth the upgrade money?" I have found
that in many cases it isn't, but then in many cases, I am not a
sophisticated enough user to really be able to appreciate the differences.

What is this in reference to? I don't see the OP's posts :-)

Because Bridge is separate? That's the file browser organizer used for
launching batch processing and it came with CS3 beta. It is indeed a
separate program now, designed to also work with illustrator, etc and
I'd guess substitutable with Lightroom. Are they planning to charge
separately for Bridge? If so, that sucks because it's necessary for
batch processing!

"TheDave©" wrote in message ...
William Graham wrote:
"D-Mac" wrote in message
...
Adobe has clearly decided that Photoshop CS3 is just too much
program for one application and forked it into two different
applications. We can only wonder at this point how much extra the
"Extended" version is going to cost to keep abreast of multi-media
photography needs.

May be they are intent on controlling your workflow today -
tomorrow... ZE VORLD!

I think they are intent on making as much money as possible.....Most
software people try to upgrade their programs as often as possible to
keep their sales up....The problem is, (for the consumer) "Is the new
version enough different from the old to be worth the upgrade money?"
I have found that in many cases it isn't, but then in many cases, I
am not a sophisticated enough user to really be able to appreciate
the differences.

I'm in a quandary right now. I have and use Elements 4, and am
considering purchasing full-blown CS. CS2 is out now, but CS3 will be
out "soon", whatever that means, and I have held back a purchase
because of that. Now, if the OP's post is accurate, maybe I should go
ahead and buy CS2.

I keep getting the feeling there is no 'right' answer.

This is true. It depends on what you need, what it has to offer, and how
much/fast you are willing to learn anything new that it contains.....there
must be a different answer for everybody. As a hobbyist, I don't really
"need" any of it, so I only should upgrade if I feel that I will do the work
necessary to learn the new stuff, or if I have a bunch of pictures that I
feel need to be worked on with some tools that I don't own already......

"Paul Furman" wrote in message
t...
William Graham wrote:

I think they are intent on making as much money as possible.....Most
software people try to upgrade their programs as often as possible to
keep their sales up....The problem is, (for the consumer) "Is the new
version enough different from the old to be worth the upgrade money?" I
have found that in many cases it isn't, but then in many cases, I am not
a sophisticated enough user to really be able to appreciate the
differences.

What is this in reference to? I don't see the OP's posts :-)

Well, I was talking about newer versions of Photoshop. - I upgraded a few
months ago from Ph. 7 to CS2, and am now thinking about CS3. But I don't
think the newer stuff in CS3 would make it worth while for me.....I could be
wrong, however......

On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 19:24:11 +0000, TheDave© wrote:

William Graham wrote:
"D-Mac" wrote in message
...
Adobe has clearly decided that Photoshop CS3 is just too much program
for one application and forked it into two different applications. We
can only wonder at this point how much extra the "Extended" version
is going to cost to keep abreast of multi-media photography needs.

May be they are intent on controlling your workflow today -
tomorrow... ZE VORLD!


I'm in a quandary right now. I have and use Elements 4, and am
considering purchasing full-blown CS. CS2 is out now, but CS3 will be
out "soon", whatever that means, and I have held back a purchase because
of that. Now, if the OP's post is accurate, maybe I should go ahead and
buy CS2.

I keep getting the feeling there is no 'right' answer.
--------------

It seems pretty clear at the moment. If you are just doing Photography,
the basic Photoshop (even version 7) will be the state of the art for
some time to come.

If you shoot RAW all the time, Adobe Light Room is a definite 'bulk'
processing tool. I use it and it cuts my workload in half. It does have
some quirks in version 1.0 but it is a developing product. I used to use
RAw Shooter Pro until Adobe gave me a copy of Light-room for being a
loyal client.

I will probably buy CS3 extended when it's released because more and more
of my work involves DVDs with movie segments included in a "wedding story"
presentation.

One thing I have noticed is that traditional photographers - those coming
from a film background to digital, tend to need PS a lot less than those
who started life with digital.

Programs like Light-room which is quite cheap in comparison to PS, may be
all they ever need. I could get by quite nicely with just this program
because I still rely on getting the shot in the camera, not making a
Photoshoped creation. I can process 500 shots in a day with LR but using
PS alone, I spend at least 2 days doing the same thing.

On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 19:43:37 +0000, Paul Furman wrote:

William Graham wrote:

I think they are intent on making as much money as possible.....Most
software people try to upgrade their programs as often as possible to
keep their sales up....The problem is, (for the consumer) "Is the new
version enough different from the old to be worth the upgrade money?" I
have found that in many cases it isn't, but then in many cases, I am
not a sophisticated enough user to really be able to appreciate the
differences.

What is this in reference to? I don't see the OP's posts :-)

Because Bridge is separate? That's the file browser organizer used for
launching batch processing and it came with CS3 beta. It is indeed a
separate program now, designed to also work with illustrator, etc and
I'd guess substitutable with Lightroom. Are they planning to charge
separately for Bridge? If so, that sucks because it's necessary for
batch processing!

----------
Errr Paul. If you emptied you might killfile you'd be surprised to learn
this group has a lot of traffic!

Lightroom is not bridge. Lightroom is the Raw Shooter Premium or Pro that
forked out of dispute with developers over how an earlier developer
program should have evolved.

My OP was about Photoshop forking into two Photoshop versions.

On Mar 8, 7:24 pm, "TheDave©" wrote:
[snip]
I'm in a quandary right now. I have and use Elements 4, and am
considering purchasing full-blown CS. CS2 is out now, but CS3 will be
out "soon", whatever that means, and I have held back a purchase
because of that. Now, if the OP's post is accurate, maybe I should go
ahead and buy CS2.
[snip]

Why does the announcement make any difference to you?

If you were already considering getting CS3, then the CS3 identified
in the announcement is the same thing you were considering. If you
don't want all the multimedia and analysis stuff, then ignore "CS3
Extended" - pretend it doesn't exist.

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/photography/

D-Mac wrote:
Adobe has clearly decided that Photoshop CS3 is just too much program for
one application and forked it into two different applications. We can only
wonder at this point how much extra the "Extended" version is going to cost
to keep abreast of multi-media photography needs.

May be they are intent on controlling your workflow today - tomorrow... ZE
VORLD!
http://www.adobe.com/products/photos...sext_info.html for anyone
interested.

CS3 is already beyond what most photographers need to process a photo
image into a display or print image. I'll eventually step up to it for
a few reasons including the fact that elements has half hearted 16 bit
support (some functions/filters work at 16 and others requiore
re-sampling to 8) and several other shortcomings.

The "extended" edition is far beyond what I would need, want or use, so
I really don't care what they charge for the "x".

In short, Elements 3.0 (and 4.0 and 5.0) are a bit "short" of the mark
and CS3 is a bit long. I wish they had something in between those two
rather than an extended v. over CS3.

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.