Possible new feature for next Photoshop

In article , Charles E. Hardwidge
wrote:

That's not a standalone download of Camera RAW. Period. The clue is in the
fact it's not called "Camera RAW" but "DNG Convertor".

you get both. camera raw is the plugin and needs a host to work, which
is either the free dng converter or photoshop (which is sometimes free
when elements is bundled with hardware).

And you evaluated the API and porting issues like a software developer would
(which would be me) before coming to that conclusion?

yes i have. i've written photoshop plugins and know what's involved.
camera raw is a plugin on steroids. there are also issues with building
plugins for older versions of photoshop. it's nowhere near as simple as
you think it is.

Your alternative is a workaround and fine as far as it goes. Just don't
oversell it.

it's no more of a workaround than using photoshop directly. it's the
exact same plugin.

In article 2011101423423534118-pete3attkins@nospamntlworldcom, Pete A
wrote:

who uses 16 bit anymore?

Those that use 16-bit software for very good reasons, especially at
boot-time to fix a badly designed, therefore broken, OS.

that's vague. who are they and what apps? why haven't they updated to
32 bit or 64 bit versions? if the os is broken, it's time to fix or
replace it, not maintain compatibility with 30 year old technology.

People have been paying large sums of money over the years in the dream
of fixing their broken OS from a certain well-known vendor. Well, now
they have 64-bits of broken crap instead of 16. The crap runs faster,
only because the CPUs are much faster, it takes ten thousand times more
RAM to operate, and needs mind-bogglingly complex add-on software to
protect it from itself. Progress, eh? Can't wait for the 128-bit
stuff...

other people switched to an os that isn't quite as broken.

On 2011-10-14 14:36:14 -0700, nospam said:

In article 2011101413593879852-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

Only if you use the work around with DNG Converter, and even then you
might be working with limitations,

it's not a workaround. it's a fully supported method.

It is a work around for those who have new cameras which don't have RAW
support in the version of ACR they own and they choose, for whatever
reason, not to upgrade.

it's not a work around. if someone gets a new camera they can get a
newer version of camera raw and use dng converter to batch convert all
of them to dng and keep using their existing old version of photoshop.
it works fine and is fully supported. it's also totally free.

Sort of true.
There is no stand alone ACR.
The new versions/updates of DNG Converter and ACR are downloaded free
as a combo, but with any version of PS or LR other than CS5 or LR3 you
will not have ACR 6.5 installed.
In the case of CS4 that would be ACR 5.7; For CS3 - ACR 4.6, & CS2 -
ACR 3.7, none of those have the feature of, or can be upgraded to have
the features of ACR 6.5. All of them use the 2003 RAW process engine
which was updated with ACR 6.5.

You will be working with the last installable version of ACR you were
able to install with the version of PS you own, and only the DNG
Converter 6.5 will work for you to make those new RAW files accessible
to your legacy edition of ACR & Photoshop.


if they want the newer features of a later version of photoshop,
lightroom or some other app, then they can upgrade that app.

the only limitations are that of camera raw itself, which you'd have if
you upgraded photoshop or lightroom.

Non-current versions of ACR do not have the features and performance of
the latest edition, which does not function with the legacy CS releases.

right, but current versions of camera raw are available for free. it
just requires a conversion to dng (which can be batched) for older
software.

That is true, however after downloading ACR 6.5, you will discover that
it is not compatible with versions of Photoshop earlier than CS5 and
will not be installed on your computer. Whereas the DNG 6.5 update will
install and work just fine. So what you have is the DNG converter 6.5
making the RAW conversion to DNG, and your legacy version of ACR
dealing with the converted DNG without the features and benefits of the
latest ACR.

There is no free route to ACR 6.5 without an upgrade to CS5 or LR3.



and the RAW conversion SW packaged
with the camera might prove to be superior.

could be. every raw converter is a little different and some people
prefer one over the other. the same would apply if you upgraded
photoshop or lightroom.

...and ultimately it is going to be the consumer who makes the decision
on how to deal with his workflow issues.
That said, if you are a user of earlier versions of Photoshop or LR,
and especially if you are a RAW shooter, the changes are significant
enough to consider the upgrade if your wallet will tolerate the hit.

many changes are significant, and to expect the newer features and
capabilities for free is crazy.

Exactly.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article , Bruce
wrote:

The problem comes when you buy a new DSLR, CSC or any p+s or superzoom
that offers RAW. Given the amount of time that usually elapses
between such purchases, it is almost a certainty that you will need a
new version of Adobe Camera Raw (ACR), and that your new version of
ACR won't work with your current version of Photoshop.

only if you haven't upgraded it already.

adobe adds a *lot* of features that justify upgrading independent of
raw conversion, such as content aware fill. when you get a new camera,
you already have the latest and greatest and can use the latest and
greatest camera raw. if you bought a just released camera it might be a
month or two wait for support, but that's about it.

Yes, it is possible to use a DNG converter or the RAW conversion
software supplied with the camera, but many people feel pressured into
buying the latest version of Photoshop, and that ends up costing a lot
of money.

photoshop elements is typically $50-70 and lightroom is sometimes on
sale for as little as $99 (normally $200). that's not what one would
call a lot of money. even lightroom not on sale is not prohibitively
expensive.

No-one is denying that alternatives exist, but they aren't totally
satisfactory. So significant numbers of people will be spending money
on Adobe products that could instead be spent on lenses and
accessories, or even a camera body.

what lenses or cameras can you buy for $50-100?

I admit I have a vested interest here, but I do feel that people are
being forced to spend a disproportionate amount of money that serves
only to make Adobe rich without yielding any significant benefit to
the purchaser. The purchaser needs only to be able to work on his/her
new RAW files, and the cost of doing that via ACR and Photoshop seems
ridiculously high.

if there's no significant benefit then the user does not need to buy
it. very simple.

In article 2011101416283050073-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

It is a work around for those who have new cameras which don't have RAW
support in the version of ACR they own and they choose, for whatever
reason, not to upgrade.

it's not a work around. if someone gets a new camera they can get a
newer version of camera raw and use dng converter to batch convert all
of them to dng and keep using their existing old version of photoshop.
it works fine and is fully supported. it's also totally free.

Sort of true.
There is no stand alone ACR.
The new versions/updates of DNG Converter and ACR are downloaded free
as a combo, but with any version of PS or LR other than CS5 or LR3 you
will not have ACR 6.5 installed.

technically true but you get dng converter & camera raw as a package
and it 'just works.' the user doesn't care whether it's a host/plugin
or a single monolithic app.

In the case of CS4 that would be ACR 5.7; For CS3 - ACR 4.6, & CS2 -
ACR 3.7, none of those have the feature of, or can be upgraded to have
the features of ACR 6.5. All of them use the 2003 RAW process engine
which was updated with ACR 6.5.

which is why you use dng converter & the latest camera raw.

You will be working with the last installable version of ACR you were
able to install with the version of PS you own, and only the DNG
Converter 6.5 will work for you to make those new RAW files accessible
to your legacy edition of ACR & Photoshop.

nope. once it's converted dng, you've already benefited from the latest
version of camera raw.

Non-current versions of ACR do not have the features and performance of
the latest edition, which does not function with the legacy CS releases.

right, but current versions of camera raw are available for free. it
just requires a conversion to dng (which can be batched) for older
software.

That is true, however after downloading ACR 6.5, you will discover that
it is not compatible with versions of Photoshop earlier than CS5 and
will not be installed on your computer. Whereas the DNG 6.5 update will
install and work just fine. So what you have is the DNG converter 6.5
making the RAW conversion to DNG, and your legacy version of ACR
dealing with the converted DNG without the features and benefits of the
latest ACR.

convert it to dng with camera raw 6.5 and you gain all of the benefits
from it. once it's dng, older versions of photoshop will open it. you
don't lose anything.

There is no free route to ACR 6.5 without an upgrade to CS5 or LR3.

again, this is not true.

"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article , Charles E. Hardwidge
wrote:

That's not a standalone download of Camera RAW. Period. The clue is in
the fact it's not called "Camera RAW" but "DNG Convertor".

you get both. camera raw is the plugin and needs a host to work, which
is either the free dng converter or photoshop (which is sometimes free
when elements is bundled with hardware).

And you evaluated the API and porting issues like a software developer
would (which would be me) before coming to that conclusion?

yes i have. i've written photoshop plugins and know what's involved.
camera raw is a plugin on steroids. there are also issues with building
plugins for older versions of photoshop. it's nowhere near as simple as
you think it is.

Your alternative is a workaround and fine as far as it goes. Just don't
oversell it.

it's no more of a workaround than using photoshop directly. it's the
exact same plugin.

Again, explain where Camera RAW is supplied as a standalone.

Again, explain why older apps can't be supported.

We're not going to get very far if you just rely on *insisting* you're right
and *assuming* other people know less than you. I had the grace to throw you
a bone and if you can't play nice then **** off.

--
Charles E. Hardwidge

On 2011-10-14 16:34:01 -0700, Bruce said:

Savageduck wrote:

Well, an upgrade to CS5 was $199 and I can't get the glass I lust after
for that price.


Here in the UK we usually have to pay GBP 1.00 for every US$ 1.00 you
pay, so the upgrade is likely to cost GBP 199. Then, unless you run a
business, you have to pay 20% VAT (sales tax) on top. So that's about
GBP 239, or US$384.

Lenses cost about the same as in the US, so you can perhaps understand
that there is even greater reticence to buy Adobe software over here.



Yup! $384 is not acceptable for an update. Would that update prices be
more reasonable at say $50 there would be far more takers.

Then consider that those who use plugins might have an investment
totaling many times that of Photoshop, and some folks have found that
their plug-ins cease to function, and/or not even install when they
update PS.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article 2011101423423534118-pete3attkins@nospamntlworldcom, Pete A
wrote:

People have been paying large sums of money over the years in the dream
of fixing their broken OS from a certain well-known vendor. Well, now
they have 64-bits of broken crap instead of 16. The crap runs faster,
only because the CPUs are much faster, it takes ten thousand times more
RAM to operate, and needs mind-bogglingly complex add-on software to
protect it from itself. Progress, eh? Can't wait for the 128-bit
stuff...

other people switched to an os that isn't quite as broken.

This circular/changing the goalposts/always right discussions get very
boring very fast (and render you *irrelevant*).

--
Charles E. Hardwidge

On 2011-10-14 16:40:20 -0700, nospam said:

In article 2011101416283050073-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

It is a work around for those who have new cameras which don't have RAW
support in the version of ACR they own and they choose, for whatever
reason, not to upgrade.

it's not a work around. if someone gets a new camera they can get a
newer version of camera raw and use dng converter to batch convert all
of them to dng and keep using their existing old version of photoshop.
it works fine and is fully supported. it's also totally free.

Sort of true.
There is no stand alone ACR.
The new versions/updates of DNG Converter and ACR are downloaded free
as a combo, but with any version of PS or LR other than CS5 or LR3 you
will not have ACR 6.5 installed.

technically true but you get dng converter & camera raw as a package
and it 'just works.' the user doesn't care whether it's a host/plugin
or a single monolithic app.

In the case of CS4 that would be ACR 5.7; For CS3 - ACR 4.6, & CS2 -
ACR 3.7, none of those have the feature of, or can be upgraded to have
the features of ACR 6.5. All of them use the 2003 RAW process engine
which was updated with ACR 6.5.

which is why you use dng converter & the latest camera raw.

....but if you do not have CS5 or LR3 installed you will not, cannot
have the benefit of ACR 6.5.


You will be working with the last installable version of ACR you were
able to install with the version of PS you own, and only the DNG
Converter 6.5 will work for you to make those new RAW files accessible
to your legacy edition of ACR & Photoshop.

nope. once it's converted dng, you've already benefited from the latest
version of camera raw.

No you haven't. That DNG file still has to be processed with the
version of ACR you have installed. The RAW file is not touched by ACR
in the conversion to DNG.
....and the latest version of ACR is not going to work without CS5 or LR3.


Non-current versions of ACR do not have the features and performance of
the latest edition, which does not function with the legacy CS releases.

right, but current versions of camera raw are available for free. it
just requires a conversion to dng (which can be batched) for older
software.

That is true, however after downloading ACR 6.5, you will discover that
it is not compatible with versions of Photoshop earlier than CS5 and
will not be installed on your computer. Whereas the DNG 6.5 update will
install and work just fine. So what you have is the DNG converter 6.5
making the RAW conversion to DNG, and your legacy version of ACR
dealing with the converted DNG without the features and benefits of the
latest ACR.

convert it to dng with camera raw 6.5 and you gain all of the benefits
from it. once it's dng, older versions of photoshop will open it. you
don't lose anything.

There is no free route to ACR 6.5 without an upgrade to CS5 or LR3.

again, this is not true.

Then perhaps a read of Adobe's note from their very own Adobe Camera
Raw 6.5 page and the accompanying "ReadMe";

"The Camera Raw 6.5 plug-in is not compatible with versions of
Photoshop earlier than Photoshop CS5."

http://www.adobe.com/special/photosh...6.5_ReadMe.pdf



--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article , Charles E. Hardwidge
wrote:

Your alternative is a workaround and fine as far as it goes. Just don't
oversell it.

it's no more of a workaround than using photoshop directly. it's the
exact same plugin.

Again, explain where Camera RAW is supplied as a standalone.

i did, and gave links.

if you want to argue that the dng converter & camera raw package which
is a single download and install is not a standalone camera raw, then
that's technically true but it makes absolutely no difference to the
user. at the end of the day, you download it and process raw files,
entirely for free.

Again, explain why older apps can't be supported.

i did.

We're not going to get very far if you just rely on *insisting* you're right
and *assuming* other people know less than you. I had the grace to throw you
a bone and if you can't play nice then **** off.

what part wasn't nice? you're the one dropping to obscenities.