The PS/CS2 fav new fav new feature thread

[kawter2]

Ok waiting for shipment, I loaded the trial.. as others get CS2 lets post the new feature PLEASE LIMIT TO ONE PER POST as to make this a valuable resource to people thinking about upgrading!!


1). The feature

2). What "new'" do you like about it

3). Tips / Presets / methods

[kawter2]

1). The "new" camera RAW engine

2). The "AUTO" starting points.. Ability to apply a curve to the image within in the enigine. Ability to constantly view clipped shadows and highlights w/o having to hold down alt on shawdows/exposure

3). I havent been able to use the engine a TON but I usually start with its "Sugested AUTO" values. IMO it is a better starting point thatn "Camera Default" then go from there. The "Out of gamut" warning has stayed on for me lately to kee pin reference how I am effecting the DR of the image. (I will update when I get my method nailed down a tad more)

**update** ohh I almost forgot the "White Ballance tool" about time!!!

[Persian-Rice]

The new ACR is very very very good.

I love how it now lets you crop and tells you what mpx you have after crop and that you can resize it to get more mpx.

The curves feature and auto settings are very usefull.

I also noticed it runs less resource intensive.

[Sydor25]

1. Lens Correction Filter

Here is an example:

Before lens correction:

http://sydor25.com/Pictures/Boston_4_21_05-061.jpg



After:

http://sydor25.com/Pictures/Boston_4_21_05-061c.jpg

[drisley]

Kawter, what are you talking about? All the Camera Raw version in Photoshop CS had a white balance tool.
Sydor, that sample image is amazing! Very nice correction!
But,to be honest, I really like the first image better! ;)
Btw, my new favourite tool is the spot heal brush.

[pcasciola]

I love how it now lets you crop and tells you what mpx you have after crop and that you can resize it to get more mpx.They added crop to ACR? That's huge for me. Does it still retain the full RAW and just save your crop coordinates so you can change them later if you change your mind?

[rfreschner]

Does it still retain the full RAW and just save your crop coordinates so you can change them later if you change your mind?

Yes. I just cropped a RAW and closed without opening. It shows the cropped image in Bridge, but when I open it again it shows the original RAW with the cropped area I chose originally. I can then adjust the crop or get rid of it altogether.

[drisley]

Yup, the crop and straighten tools in ACR is pretty cool.

[tim]

That straighten tool's great! I haven't used it much yet, but so far my favorites are:

1) RAW tools - crop, auto.
2) Spot healing brush - it's not perfect but it's good enough a lot of the time.
3) Smart sharpen - great for noise free images.

Least favorites:
1) Noise reduction - it's crap and barely worth using. Noise Ninja does a MUCH better job.
2) Smart Sharpen - horrible for noisy images.

btw they moved convert profile to the edit menu.

[drisley]

Tim, you hit the nails on the head imho.
Smart sharpen isn't great for noisy images, and noise reduction pales in comparison to Ninja.
But then again, most NR pale in reduction to Ninja. I just gave the latest version of Neatimage a try, and the results were much poorer than Ninja, imho.
The spot healing brush kind of takes the clone and heal brush and combines them. It really reduces time needed for touch ups.
I'm actually quite surprised they didnt include a "straighten" tool for non Raw images.
Although, it can be done easily with the measure, rotate and crop tools.

[tim]

I find Neat Image comparable to Noise Ninja, but I prefer NN.

Spot healing seems to work best when there's not a lot of tonal variation, or variation in lighting. I took a few photos of a friend of mine in the pub this evening, I had to use the healing brush on some things, but about half the time the spot healing worked fine.

RAW doesn't do much for you if you want to rotate the image, at least not that i've found. While I was playing with it though I turned a throw-away image into a keeper by doing a rotated crop, converting to B&W, and doing a bit of digital plastic surgery, so i'm happy about that anyway :)

[kawter2]

Kawter, what are you talking about? All the Camera Raw version in Photoshop CS had a white balance tool.



WB too.. yes, I'm a lamer, I didnt notice the "eyedropper" in previous versions, but checked and now i see it!!!! LOL Funny sometimes when you look for features in new releases it makes you notice stuff that has been there all along


Thanks for the heads up drisley

[Belmondo]

I think the new feature I like best is all the extra time I now have while waiting for Bridge to load. It is sloooooooow.

In fact, I've only loaded it on my 3-gig desktop machine. I'm not going to even attempt to put in on my laptop until I see a real good reason to do so.

[drisley]

Kawter, I almost thought there was a new WB tool for correcting colours in non Raw images when you posted that :)
Belmondo, yes, Bridge is quite a hog. The first time you load it, it takes quite a while. After that, it doesnt take long, but it sure uses a fair bit of memory.

[Belmondo]

Kawter, I almost thought there was a new WB tool for correcting colours in non Raw images when you posted that :)
Belmondo, yes, Bridge is quite a hog. The first time you load it, it takes quite a while. After that, it doesnt take long, but it sure uses a fair bit of memory.

The laptop only has 512 megs RAM, and is not worth upgrading. The desktop has 1-gig, and I think I'm going to double that. Also, I'm installing a second hard drive, mainly for the scratch disk. Just trying to speed things up, while Adobe seems determined to slow me down. :lol:

[jfrancho]

I think with a more capable machine, I'd like Bridge even more. I already like it for renaming and downloading images, but this isn't really a new thing. I like the fact that it runs on it's own though, and having a way to apply binomial classifications (color & rating) is appealing.

[Scottes]

Taking things into account here...

I use Capture 1 since I like it much more than ACR.
I use Neat Image for NR.
I use a few different 3rd-party sharpening tools.
I use iMatch or Capture 1 to browse through my files. Though the Bridge stuff seems nice I doubt that I'd ever use it.

So I can't see a reason for me to upgrade....
Am I missing anything? Is there anything left that's worth the $150 upgrade?

I may just wait until next version to upgrade.... Bummer.

[kawter2]

Taking things into account here...

I use Capture 1 since I like it much more than ACR.
I use Neat Image for NR.
I use a few different 3rd-party sharpening tools.
I use iMatch or Capture 1 to browse through my files. Though the Bridge stuff seems nice I doubt that I'd ever use it.

So I can't see a reason for me to upgrade....
Am I missing anything? Is there anything left that's worth the $150 upgrade?

I may just wait until next version to upgrade.... Bummer.

Personally I try to simplify my work flow, and having one application for that helps.. CS2 is moving to the direction that is a one stop shop application.. sure, some program out there might perform 1% better in areas, but for me that is not enough to open 800 images of an event x's 4 dif applications

[Scottes]

If the difference was 1% I'd agree. Neat Image appears to blow away PS CS. In my opinion the C1 workflow blows away the ACR workflow, because C1 is more to my style of working. CS2 may be moving to a one-stop shop, but I think that will always be for most people, not all. I'm not one of the "most people." I will go through some pain to get a better final image, though I know I'm in the minority.


But all this hardly answers my question: Am I missing anything?

[drisley]

Back in the day of the 300D, C1 definately produced better images than Camera Raw.
But now that I have a 20D, and with the improvements in the Camera Raw versions since 2.0, I get much better quality than with C1, in almost every way. Since I always end up in photoshop anyway after raw conversion, Camera Raw suits my workflow much better. Plus, it renders the Raw files like 4x faster than C1. But that is just me. Everybody has different workflows, and everybody has to decide what software suits them best.

[jfrancho]

Back in the day of the 300D, C1 definately produced better images than Camera Raw.
But now that I have a 20D, and with the improvements in the Camera Raw versions since 2.0, I get much better quality than with C1, in almost every way. Since I always end up in photoshop anyway after raw conversion, Camera Raw suits my workflow much better. Plus, it renders the Raw files like 4x faster than C1. But that is just me. Everybody has different workflows, and everybody has to decide what software suits them best.You mean back in February?

[drisley]

Hehe, no, I've had my 20D since last September, and that is when I was forced to switch to PS CS because C1 took too long to support the camera. That is when I discovered that ACR had improved immensely since I had tried it with PS7.
When C1 finally did support the 20D MANY months later, I gave it a try and didnt like the workflow or output as much.

[jfrancho]

I figured as much. It just sounds funny when we say, "back in the day" and are referring to a time when cameras had 6+ MP. It won't sound as funny in a few weeks.

[tim]

That "camera raw for photoshop" book I keep recommending did wonders for my workflow, I highly recommend it.

I like RSE for its sorting ability, though I have to read up on what the bridge does and see if it'll help me much. I also really like the fill light on RSE, I can't see any way to achieve something similar in PS CS2.