Faster and better pictures in PS CS4

Depending on your graphics card, your pictures in PS can be much faster and
better looking, for example in 33% it looks pretty bad, but in 50 it's OK.
Go to:
Edit - Prefs - Performance

Click the box under GPU.
Restart.
If it's all OK you should now see in and out zooming in real time and all
levels sharp.

If it doesn't, get a better graphics card: it's worth it!
--
---
Focus

The way CS4 taps the GPU is underwhelming at best.

In article , pupick
wrote:

The way CS4 taps the GPU is underwhelming at best.

it's actually quite impressive. apparently you aren't aware of what it
can do.

"Focus" wrote in message
...
Depending on your graphics card, your pictures in PS can be much faster
and better looking, for example in 33% it looks pretty bad, but in 50 it's
OK.
Go to:
Edit - Prefs - Performance

Click the box under GPU.
Restart.
If it's all OK you should now see in and out zooming in real time and all
levels sharp.

If it doesn't, get a better graphics card: it's worth it!
--
---
Focus
If the zoom is a Multiple of the image size the it will always look better
then one that is not. If you have 4 pixel square and zoom to make it 16 its
going to look better then splitting them to get a 12 Pixel sq. Same works in
reverse.
Paint shop Pro used to have fixed step's of zoom but folks wanted it to be
like PS because That more expensive prog must be right to interpolarate
everything

"nospam" wrote in message
...
| In article , pupick
| wrote:
|
| The way CS4 taps the GPU is underwhelming at best.
|
| it's actually quite impressive. apparently you aren't aware of what it
| can do.


is it 3D rendering?

On 2009-04-13 09:38:26 -0700, "k" said:


"nospam" wrote in message
...
| In article , pupick
| wrote:
|
| The way CS4 taps the GPU is underwhelming at best.
|
| it's actually quite impressive. apparently you aren't aware of what it
| can do.


is it 3D rendering?

Here take a look at this: http://tv.adobe.com/#vi+f15629v1001
--
Regards,
Savageduck

In article 2009041310402443658-savageduck@savagenet, Savageduck
wrote:

| The way CS4 taps the GPU is underwhelming at best.
|
| it's actually quite impressive. apparently you aren't aware of what it
| can do.

is it 3D rendering?

Here take a look at this: http://tv.adobe.com/#vi+f15629v1001

that doesn't mention pixel bender which is where the real fun is.

On 2009-04-13 11:05:46 -0700, nospam said:

In article 2009041310402443658-savageduck@savagenet, Savageduck
wrote:

| The way CS4 taps the GPU is underwhelming at best.
|
| it's actually quite impressive. apparently you aren't aware of what it
| can do.

is it 3D rendering?

Here take a look at this: http://tv.adobe.com/#vi+f15629v1001

that doesn't mention pixel bender which is where the real fun is.

No. These do: http://tv.adobe.com/#se+Pixel%20bender


--
Regards,
Savageduck

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009041310402443658-savageduck@savagenet...
| On 2009-04-13 09:38:26 -0700, "k" said:
|
|
| "nospam" wrote in message
| ...
| | In article , pupick
| | wrote:
| |
| | The way CS4 taps the GPU is underwhelming at best.
| |
| | it's actually quite impressive. apparently you aren't aware of what
it
| | can do.
|
|
| is it 3D rendering?
|
| Here take a look at this: http://tv.adobe.com/#vi+f15629v1001


thanks, yes - 3D rendering.


not impressed.


Interpolating images for viewing *while I'm editing* is the silliest idea
ever. and moves the software along with the modern video cards further away
from being graphics editing cards than ever before


There's a reason image editing programs other than Adobe zoomed by factors,
it was to avoid interpolating.

On 2009-04-16 18:17:56 -0700, "k" said:


"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009041310402443658-savageduck@savagenet...
| On 2009-04-13 09:38:26 -0700, "k" said:
|
|
| "nospam" wrote in message
| ...
| | In article , pupick
| | wrote:
| |
| | The way CS4 taps the GPU is underwhelming at best.
| |
| | it's actually quite impressive. apparently you aren't aware of what
it
| | can do.
|
|
| is it 3D rendering?
|
| Here take a look at this: http://tv.adobe.com/#vi+f15629v1001


thanks, yes - 3D rendering.


not impressed.


Interpolating images for viewing *while I'm editing* is the silliest idea
ever. and moves the software along with the modern video cards further away
from being graphics editing cards than ever before


There's a reason image editing programs other than Adobe zoomed by factors,
it was to avoid interpolating.

There are somethings I like about CS4 and some I have to still get
familiar with. I am using the Standard version,
I don't need or use the 3D or video stuff.

Overall It works pretty well for me. I am using it on a PowerBook Pro
17 2.93G with the dual switchable option NVIDIA GeForce 9400M and 9600M
GT.

--
Regards,
Savageduck