Photoshop CS or CS2

[blue_max]

From a photographer's point of view, does the new version bring anything to the party that you would consider a killer difference.

Keeping up with the latest and greatest is getting expensive! But if there are a few things that make it particularly worthwhile, I may have to dig.

Thank you.

Graham

[weemannie]

For me, the spot healing brush is great. But then again, I'm lazy, and not very good with PS:lol:

Adobe Bridge is better than the old File Browser, for me anyway.

I can't say whether or not its worth the price of the upgrade.

[blue_max]

For me, the spot healing brush is great. But then again, I'm lazy, and not very good with PS:lol:

Adobe Bridge is better than the old File Browser, for me anyway.

I can't say whether or not its worth the price of the upgrade.

Thanks wee, I'm not worried about my complexion! :lol: and the bridge is not too much of a concern (I'm on a mac and use iPhoto to good effect).

My money is safe... so far ;)

Graham

[ejwebb]

Big changes in the RAW converter to improve workflow and allow curve manipulation before conversion. You can now open a whole folder of images and apply changes to the group, batch process several photos at once, etc.

[jfrancho]

If you were to learn to use the file browser, you can have batch automation without updating to CS2. Since your camera is supported by the version you have, I suggest sticking with CS, and learning new ways to streamline the workflow. I don't see a big ROI in moving to CS2 for you.

[blue_max]

You guys are saving me money :lol:

I'm lovin' it.

Graham

[jfrancho]

Unless, of course, you really need curves in ACR...
But you can get similar results using the sliders, curves is just more precise.

[blue_max]

Unless, of course, you really need curves in ACR...
But you can get similar results using the sliders, curves is just more precise.


I find that most of the time, I don't need to do that in ACR. I assume that saving as a 16-bit tiff, gives me all the data anyway (is that a correct assumption ?).

But most of my pics don't need to be altered because:

1. I'm such an excellent photographer.
2. My L lenses are so great.
3. I only tend to make them worse*

Graham
* 1 isn't true. 2 may be true and 3 definitely is.

[ejwebb]

If you were to learn to use the file browser, you can have batch automation without updating to CS2.

Granted, I am sure this is true - but since I never had CS and moved from PSE3 to CS2 there were many reasons to upgrade - the new ACR functionality was the icing on the cake. I do have to say that the workflow in the new ACR is much better than that of the previous ACR - at least as it functioned in PSE3. I heard of a way to batch apply ACR changes in PSE3 but it did not seem near as fast & easy as the CS2 version - could be different in CS, though. If you have fast access you could download it and give it a try. That and the $299 Canon deal sold it for me but if I already had CS I would probably question the need as well.

[jfrancho]

but since I never had CSSo, you aren't really qualified to provide a meaningful answer. You do point out some of the great improvements in CS2, though, I don't see the giant leap in functionality between CS/CS2 you are describing. One of the driving forces to upgrade to CS2 for most is support for newer raw formats, not supported by the older versions of ACR. Furthermore, my answers were directed to the thread originator, not you, since he clearly staed he has CS.

[ejwebb]

So, you aren't really qualified to provide a meaningful answer

Thanks for your gracious observation. Speaking from my experience with ACR in the CS trial (guess I should have clarified that I never owned CS and had limited experience with it) and in PSE3 which was not all that different. Granted I am not an expert on CS but I was just sharing an observation of my experience when I first tried CS2 compared to my use of CS trial and PSE3. While I never said this was a "giant leap" or made any comments on other improvements, I happen to believe the workflow in the new ACR is a major improvement worth considering when deciding whether or not to upgrade from CS. Sure, it is a matter of opinion but I thought that was what the original poster was interested in.

[blue_max]

Easy guys. All contributions welcome.

Graham

[jfrancho]

Big changes in the RAW converter to improve workflow and allow curve manipulation before conversion. You can now open a whole folder of images and apply changes to the group, batch process several photos at once, etc.Then what did you mean by this post? My point was not to insult or embarass you - I apologise if I came off that way - but that you admittedly cannot comment on the differences in the two versions in a way that will answer original poster's question.

[ohenry]

You can download a trial copy and see for yourself. From my perspective, CS2 was a worthwhile upgrade from CS. The ability to use smart objects, 32 bit HDR blending, better ACR, improved noise reduction, spot healing brush, vanishing point, lens correction, smart sharpen, improved 16 bit support in filters, and on and on.....try it yourself and if you don't think it's worth the upgrade price then keep using CS. When a company gives you a 30 day trial period to test a program without crippling it, seems like an obvious thing to try out and come to your own conclusions.