# I HATE Photoshop CS2



## guitarkid (Jul 30, 2006)

i use adobe for EVERYTHING from video production to FX to photos.  We use their entire line.  So i upgrade to CS2 to work RAW files.  to me, what a mistake!  i have used photoshop 6, 7, CS, etc.  

How many of you have decided against the CS2 software for RAW files and if so, what are you using to work with RAW files?  I was using Digital Photo Professional that came with my 20D and i love it.  I think i will go back to that.  the histograms and functions were so much easier and powerful to me.  Also, the sharpening function in CS2 doesn't work.  I slide the slider for sharpen from left to extreme right and NOTHING!  the photo doesn't change at all. what kind of garbage doesn't let you preview!  you can preview all other settings!  Maybe there is some learning curve but i have to tell you, it wasn't worth it for me for just working with RAW files.  when you transcode to jpg from RAW you don't even have an option for DPI.  it gives you quality of 1-12 !!!  what's that?!  what is the dpi for 7? for 10? Digital Photo Pro gives you options for dpi, pixels, batch naming, everything, all in one final step.  it's very thorough

sorry for the rant.  maybe i'll look at it a bit more but i think it may just be shelved.  i knew i should have listened to my gut.  i thought i should buy it just because it's THE SOFTWARE FOR RAW FILES.  stupid.


----------



## photojunky (Jul 30, 2006)

That's OK.


I use PS 7. I tried CS and did not like it. I remember having a problem saving images and just though it was faulty software. The sharpening problem may be a ram issue. I have 2 gigs and when I am messing with large files you wont see the effect immediately. Some times it takes at least 10 seconds before the effect takes place. I have used Jasc paint shop pro but like PS better.


----------



## guitarkid (Jul 30, 2006)

thanks for the quick input.  i will mess with it a bit more and do some reading into it but i think i will ultimately just use the software that came with my 20D. i love it!  i'm running a very fast pc which has 4 gigs of ram.  if that isn't fast enough, not sure what will do it.  the digital photo professional software i mentioned shows you the effect instantly!  and all the other settings show up instantly as well but not the sharpen.  i hate to say it but just cuz it's adobe doesn't mean it's the best.  looks like they didn't spend too much time on the RAW part of things.  sure there are options there but not like in the digital photo professional software.  

anyone have experience with both? i would love to hear what you have to say on them.
thanks,
steve


----------



## bethany138 (Jul 30, 2006)

Do you have the "preview" checkbox checked?  My version always previews.  Sounds like a problem with your individual copy.

b


----------



## ksmattfish (Jul 31, 2006)

guitarkid said:
			
		

> Maybe there is some learning curve but i have to tell you, it wasn't worth it for me for just working with RAW files.



It's the learning curve, because I am able to do everything you mentioned in the raw converter (preview sharpening, set file size/dpi, etc...).  It seemed clunky when I first fired it up too, but now I'm speeding along nicely.  Definately there is nothing wrong with sticking with software you like and know better.    

When you save as a .jpeg, and it asks for quality 1-12 it's asking you how much compression.  1 = the most and 12 = the least.  This has been standard in Photoshop and anything else that works with jpegs for as long as I can remember.  It has nothing to do with resolution or dpi.

I don't know how the sharpening in the Adobe Raw works.  I've heard it's basically USM.  But when I've used it I've noticed it can exaggerate chromatic aberations along edges.  I don't get this when I use USM in PS.  With most photos there isn't a problem, but it does crazy, horrible things with peoples' back-lit heads.


----------



## danalec99 (Jul 31, 2006)

Check out Russell Brown QuickTime tutorials - 

Scroll down for:
*CS2 Bridge Workflow
CS2 Camera RAW
CS2 Exporting RAW Images
*
The Image processor is a _great_ time saver.


----------



## Arch (Jul 31, 2006)

ksmattfish said:
			
		

> I don't know how the sharpening in the Adobe Raw works.  I've heard it's basically USM.  But when I've used it I've noticed it can exaggerate chromatic aberations along edges.  I don't get this when I use USM in PS.  With most photos there isn't a problem, but it does crazy, horrible things with peoples' back-lit heads.



yea...... i wouldn't bother with sharpening in adobe raw all together.... imo, unsharp mask or smart sharpen does a much better job.

I understand your frustrations with starting to use adobe raw.... but it really is good imo when you get to know it a little better..... the only thing i dont use it for is IR raw converting which is ...... well..... another story all together really... but its the only time i find adobe camera raw to be useless.

Plus think of all the extras you have now...... the smart sharpen.... which can be used alot more effectivly than USM for some pictures.....
You now have the HDR merge command, to produce HDR images..... you have  the vanishing point tool..... the lens correction filter..... and loads more.....

A worthy upgrade IMO


----------



## Big Mike (Jul 31, 2006)

A lot of people don't like 'Adobe Camera RAW' (the RAW converter)...so they use other programs for that, then use PS to edit the image from there.

There used to be a program called 'RAW Shooter Essentials' which was free, but I think Adobe bought it out.  

If you are comfortable with Canon's D.P.P.  then use that.  It was designed to work with the large image files from these cameras.

You might want to adjust your work flow.  Most of the reading I have done, recommends that you leave sharpening to the end of your editing process.


----------



## danalec99 (Jul 31, 2006)

I'm a happy user of 'Adobe Camera Raw'. Was under the impression that it must be the easiest of all. 

USM is a mystery to me. Never could figure out the correct numbers for different file formats. 
I now use _KPD Magic Sharpen_, from Kubota Tools. It's the ultimate. Just one click and viola! No matter what format/size. My best investment ever!


----------



## markc (Jul 31, 2006)

I've had no issues with CS2 itself. I don't usually use Adobe's RAW converter. I tend to batch convert using Breeze Browser and only go back if an image has a blown area, but I do all my adjustments in PS anyway.


----------



## guitarkid (Jul 31, 2006)

thanks for the opinions as always.  i'm waiting on the arrival of some book i purchased from adobe when i bought this.  i'm familiar with the 1-12 compression but i didn't really see a dpi setting anywhere and the one i thought i saw looked limiting.  not to mention, what i really like about canon's digital photo pro is that you can convert to jpg, manually type in the DPI, the pixel size, the compression 1-10 AND RENAME AND NUMBER THE FILES.....all in one final step.  it's great.  i think i will unfortunately go back to that and realize i wasted my money like an idiot.  i will go back to CS2 when i'm done being frustrated with it and after i have done some reading.  BUT, to me, a good software program should be very user - friendly out of the box.  even after spending a few years in PS i found myself surfing and constantly looking at help files in CS2.  after half a day i packed it in.  i'm sure the checkbox is checked in preview window for sharpen. i see all other filters and effets working but not that one.  the histogram is a real pain as well, as i mentioned.  maybe some more hours on the clock will help.....when i'm ready.

steve


----------



## markc (Aug 1, 2006)

You might want to read this about DPI. http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=40157


----------



## guitarkid (Aug 1, 2006)

NOTHING WORKS in the detail tab!  this is where sharpen is.  it's just ridiculous.  i guess i have to change all to jpg and then do the unsharpen / sharpen mask.....or sharpen filter.  hopefully that can be done as batch.  i think i'm done with CS2 after this wedding.


----------



## thebeginning (Aug 1, 2006)

are you zoomed into 100%?  you won't notice a big difference if you're zoomed out alot, as it effects details and edges more than anything...

i wouldn't drop CS2 just because of ACR...that would be pretty unwise IMO, as CS2 is basically PS 7 on steroids and with some new stuff (including bridge, which is great).  if you decide that you cannot use ACR, try another RAW conversion software, but i think photoshop CS2 is well worth keeping.


----------



## Flash Harry (Aug 2, 2006)

I work in raw for all my pro work, convert to tiff till the processing is complete, batch process to jpeg and then sharpen/usm, works a treat. Then again I'v stuck with CS PS version 8 as Iv been donating to Adobe since version 4 and am sick of the upgrades that really do very little apart from taking up more HDD space.


----------



## guitarkid (Aug 2, 2006)

so you do color edits in RAW, highlighting, etc, then convert to tiff just because, and then convert again to jpg where you sharpen?

or....

you edit in RAW, convert to tiff, sharpen, and then convert to jpg finally?  sounds like a lot of work.


----------



## markc (Aug 2, 2006)

One thing to remember is that you don't edit in RAW, JPG, etc. Those are formats that the data is saved in. People may not see much of a distiction, but there is one, and it can lead to confusion when trying to learn different workflows.

When you run a RAW file through the converter, it does change the gamma, number of color bits, and the color space that you are working in, but it doesn't become a TIFF or anything else. The file on your HD is a TIFF or JPG or whatever.

And yeah, an optimized workflow can seem like it has a lot of steps, but I don't think it's that bad when you get used to it.


----------



## guitarkid (Aug 3, 2006)

when i said edit in raw i meant color correction and cropping.  from there i would take it to jpg.  sorry for not being more clear.  i just got that book in the mail today from adobe.  time to crack it open this weekend and give it a browse - through.
steve


----------



## Flash Harry (Aug 4, 2006)

I do the basics in raw converter, exposure, brightness etc, then convert, save as a tiff, do all corrections/enhancements in this format and save, then batch action all the folder to jpeg in another folder. 
I work in tiff as jpeg is a lossy compression and I do not wish to lose any detail by open/closing the work several times in jpeg.
Jpeg is then written to cd for the lab prints.


----------



## 964 (Aug 4, 2006)

I use the Canon DPP software to batch convert the RAW's to 8-bit TIF's then I use CS2/Bridge to browse and process. I send TIF's to the lab on DVD's for printing.....I am actually thinking of trying PhaseOne instead of CS2....


----------

