System: PShop CS2 9.0.2; PowerBook G4 with 10.4.8; latest Camera RAW plug-in, just in case you’re curious.
I was given a bunch of files that are BMPs but are incorrectly labeled (via file extension) as TIFFs.
Attempting a Finder double-click, or a File > Open results in the "Could not complete your request because Photoshop does not recognize this type of file" error. I can accept that (except I thought years ago, earlier versions would open it and tell you what was wrong).
Anyway, I thought that I could choose File > Open > select format BMP > open the BMP file whose name has a TIF extension. But what happens is that PShop brings up a "Photoshop Raw Options" dialog asking for dimensions, channels, and so on. On THIS one, I would have bet money that this would not have caused a problem with earlier versions. How early? Heck, I don’t remember, but I could have sworn that this would been handled with no problem. Maybe I’m thinking of when the dialog used to say "Open As" which is not really the same … or am I thinking of Windows???
Finally, after removing the extension and ensuring type:creator codes are blank, a right-click > open with PShop yields the "does-not-recognize" error.
Neither Graphic Converter nor Apple Preview have problems with these files.
Any old-timers here agree that Photoshop has taken a step backward, in that previous versions were not so dependent on the extension? Or am I longing for a past that never happened?
No, OS X absolutely does not demand an extension. It’s the applications who deal with the extension. There are OS <> application <> extension relationships, such as the launch services database, but the success or failure of an application to deal with an extension falls upon the application.
Add .bmp to the file name.
Well, yes, of course, but I was asking about Photoshop’s changes over the years.
Are you sure you have the "BMP.plugin" installed in the correct location?
If the BMP plug-in were not installed in the correct location, wouldn’t PShop fail to open BMPs? It opens BMPs just fine.
I agree, the current "functionality" is a step backwards.
I believe there was a very strong bias, led by Avie Tevanian at Apple against the "old" Mac way of recognizing files, because Unix required extensions. During that same transition period in the Mac universe, Adobe was recognizing that a huge part of its business was going to be in the Windows world and decided that differences in the way their applications worked on Macs and Windows machines had to be reduced, if not completely eliminated, especially when it looked like the Mac version worked better.
I don’t know if bias against "the old ways" at Apple under (the now departed) Tevanian had anything to do with decisions at Adobe, but it sure looks that way. Adobe doesn’t want any difference in file handling behavior between the 2 platforms, although it could very easily allow PS to open files without requiring a file extension. In fact, it looks like PS deliberately gives an error message when none is needed.
Personally I like the extensions I can now have the same file saved as a PSD, Tiff, jpg, png all in the same folder. I couldn’t do that before without changing the name. Also I can send files to PC people without them complaining there is no extension. I realize I could add it but thats one less thing to think about. And then there is the web you need extensions for all that stuff.
You’ve always been able to create multiple files as you’ve described. Appending extensions in OS9, for instance would have been ok for foo, foo.psd, foo.tif. They would all have been unique files to that OS. They also are unique to OS X, but for a fundamentally different reason that only the OS needs to worry about.
But there is no reason that PS cannot recognize all those files if they are raster image data, just like it used to, pre OS X.
Needing to be careful to send files with extensions to Windows users has not changed since the advent of OS X. We needed to be careful pre OS X, we need to do the same now. All you’re experiencing is that since we (apparently) need to make sure all our files now have extensions, that’s one less thing to keep track of. It’s silly, it’s not necessary (especially since Apple also realized they were going down the wrong path with that very restrictive programming policy in early OS X) and it’s really capitulation to the stupid, brain-dead way that Windows still forces people and programs to name files.
I really don’t understand what there is to fuss about. I just choose "Append File Extension: Always" in Photoshop prefs/File handling and don’t give it another thought.
Ann, the point has been clearly articulated in the posts. It’s a shame you can’t "understand."
PS throws up unnecessary obstacles in the way of someone trying to open a file that it is perfectly capable of opening when the file has no extension. Anyone could comprehend that from the posts.
That fact that you always save your files with an extension has nothing at all to do with this. Good for you. PS will always open your files.
Why is it no surprise that you, Buko and Ramon, as always, have to be apologists for Adobe? Nothing Adobe does can be wrong, and any post suggesting otherwise is met with objection from you 3 almost automatically.
Now your response belittles the question and the questioners. Who said anything about a "fuss?" There was no fuss until you characterized it that way. Just a reasonable discussion, with a reasonable request. To which you have reacted in knee-trigger, defend-Adobe-fashion, and dismissed the matter (in your mind) to the level of a "fuss."
This is just another one of your, "Do it my way, and you will never have any problems. I never do, because I do everything the way it’s supposed to be done. My methods and my equipment are pure as the driven snow," responses.
Since you don’t seem to be informed, this "fuss" goes to some of the core issues of the operability and functionality of the Mac OS, it raged in the Mac community for quite a while and it ultimately resulted in Tevanian’s departure from Apple. Pretty important issue, no?
Tevanian is a brilliant, but abrasive and fiercely opinionated guy who demanded that the Mac OS follow the path of the Next OS, of which he was the chief architect. That the Next system was a brilliant piece of work is undeniable and its legacy is probably the reason for Apple’s survival. But he could not accept any notion that the previous Mac system had merit when philosophy of operation conflicted with that of Next/Unix. He probably has an ego as big as Job’s and I think Steve would have liked for him to stay, but his inflexibility was his undoing. And a little flexibility returned to OS X against his wishes.
But PS continues to be inflexible.
See how simple that was to "understand?"
Now Buko and Ramon angrily will ride in on their steeds to defend your honor. Yawn.
From a practical point of view, anyone who has read through this thread has already wasted more time and effort than would be expended in a lifetime of adding an extension to the occasional extensionless file some idiot hands you.
Reed: If you are stuck with idiot clients that cannot, or will not, follow the instructions which you should have given to them; there is a perfectly simple answer available to you:
Open the miscreant file in Apple Preview or Graphic Converter (both of which are included for free in OSX); and simply Save As to any format that takes your fancy.
So yes, IMHO you ARE making a ridiculous fuss about absolutely nothing.
and I’ve witnessed the problems no extension causes with OS9 and earlier systems. Like I said you can hide the extensions in OSX at a system level if you want. Its an Apple thing not Adobe
OS 9 and earlier didn’t give two beans about extensions. And it is not an Apple thing, it’s an Adobe thing – it is how they choose to deal with extensions. This is a layer way above the OS layer.
Ramón:
From a practical point of view, anyone who has read through this thread has already wasted more time and effort than would be expended in a lifetime of adding an extension to the occasional extensionless file some idiot hands you.
Have you missed the point of the initial post? It was not that extensions are missing, it that when they are wrong, Photoshop now chokes, where [I think] it did not used to: I was asking for verification of that.
OS 9 and earlier didn’t give two beans about extensions.
that was my point no extension file got writen over by other files of the same name but different file type.
it’s an Adobe thing
no its not Apple was the one who set files to use resource forks. If it was an Adobe thing then all the Windows files would have resource forks too, as would the OSX (Unix) files.
As far as the files being labeled with the wrong extension you just need to be more careful when you save a file, buy luckily its easy enough to troubleshoot.
Ann: From a practical point of view, anyone who has read through this thread has already wasted more time and effort than would be expended in a lifetime of adding an extension to the occasional extensionless file some idiot hands you.>
While I was not the author of the above quote, I happen to concur with every word of it!
That was my point no extension file got writen over by other files of the same name but different file type.
Just thought I’d point out that these came from Windows uses for diagnosis. I didn’t think it relevant, but if I think you believe these came from a Mac.
no its not Apple was the one who set files to use resource forks.
Umm, yes, Apple did do resource forks, but that is irrelevant — resource forks have nothing to do with it. If you are thinking forks matter because of type:creator codes, they are not embedded in resource forks anyway. In this situation, neither type:creator codes nor the presence or absence of resource forks has any bearing on this behavior of Photoshop.
If it was an Adobe thing then all the Windows files would have resource forks too, as would the OSX (Unix) files.
Incorrect. The operating systems’ file systems (unmodified) cannot deal with resource forks.
Yes, relying on just the file extension is a big step backwards. And yes, someone at Apple was trying to push things that way.
Right now Photoshop tries to use the MacOS file type (creator doesn’t matter) to determine the file contents. If that file type is not recognized, then we fall back to the file extension. A number of interesting (in the Chinese proverb sense) problems currently prevent us from trying to determine the file type from it’s contents in a reliable way. (some embedded previews and fake formats used as wrappers are high on the list)
