Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!
Yes. I think so. PS for Mac needs to be rewritten in a new development environment. This is much more than an extra hour’s worth of work.
You always have Boot Camp and you always have the right to control your wallet. As fewer people buy PS for Mac in a proposed boycott, Adobe will have less desire to pour resources into it.
If you read up on the topic, you will see that the problem was designed by Apple jumping around with development environments. So you’ll need to be blaming Apple as much as, if not more than, Adobe. If we want the innovation of Apple, we need to bear the growing pains (motorola/ibm/intel & classic/OSX & carbon/cocoa).
I don’t buy it (literally and figuratively). A little payback from Adobe would be nice. Its not as if they haven’t made millions or billions off Apple users. They have enough money resources to rewrite photoshop in a and OS environment.
Its one of the things I like about Apple. They put quality ahead of profit (at times–all companies need to make money obviously).
Adobe makes this big issue about releasing both PC and Apple PC upgrades at the same time so they couldn’t give Apple 64 bit addressing. However when it suits adobe they do different release dates. Its just spin.
Then you don’t understand the issues…at the WWDC in 2006, Apple promised that they (Apple) would provide 64 bit libraries for BOTH Cocoa AND Carbon. In the spring leading up to the 2007 WWDC Apple even had seeded working alphas/betas of 64 bit Carbon libraries. Adobe had based their entire dev cycle for CS4 based upon Apple’s promise of 64 bit Carbon. Then in June 2007, 64 bit Carbon was killed which left 64 Cocoa as the ONLY 64 bit set of APIs left.
You don’t take 4 million+ lines of code and switch APIs in a year and a half.
The ONLY thing Adobe COULD have done was kill 64 bit Windows to keep platform parity. But why? Vista 64 is a stable and powerful platform (unlike XP 64), Adobe already had CS4 working and working well on Vista 64. So, why penalize Windows users for the actions of Apple?
Its one of the things I like about Apple. They put quality ahead of profit
Well, let’s see…64 bit Carbon was dropped and Leopard was delayed about 6 months. Why? iPhone…so, in large measure, Mac computing has been adversely effected by Apple’s "putting quality ahead of profit".
I dunno — Maxon was able to completely re-write Cinema 4D and BodyPaint (which arguably may be more complex than Photoshop) in Cocoa in less than a year. If a high-end 3D apps AND 2D painting and image editing application can be completely re-written for 64-bit Mac in less than year — surely big bad Adobe can do it to their 2D paint and imaging application??
Thank you so much for explaining the 64-bit issue and the Apple situation so clearly.
—-
Perhaps we can now return to discussing some of the truly exciting new features in CS4 without having to suffer from the uninformed and adverse comments from those who have not even experienced using CS4 so far?
Just to be clear, I’m pissed that CS4 won’t be able to take advantage of more ram as well…I have a Mac Pro with 16 gigs. I would have LOVED to be able to let Photoshop access more ram because I often work on large images that won’t fit in ram. But I know who to be pissed at about this issue.
On the other hand, CS4 printing through Leopard with newer print drivers can print the entire 16 bit/channel image files without having to drop the print data to 8 bit/channel. That’s something that can’t be done on any flavor of Windows.
Adobe has to deal with the OS platforms they operate under. There are some things not available cross=platform. Depending on what you are doing, the platform may or may not impact you. Unless you routinely work on multi-gig images, 64 bit computing isn’t gonna matter to you one way or the other. Adobe did release the first major digital imaging app for 64 bit processing in the form of Lightroom. Course, that was developed using the Cocoa APIs so it wasn’t a super, major job like it will be for Photoshop.
But there are plenty of other features and functionality in CS4 that WILL help productivity on the Macparticularly GPU if you have a hefty video card. In point of fact, the GPU acceleration will positively benefit more people than the lack of 64 bit on the Mac will negatively impact people.
But hey, if you have a Mac Pro with a ton of ram, you can always use Bootcamp and run a Win version of Photoshop CS4 in Vista 64 and actually be able to take advantage of all that ram in your Mac Pro…if I was gonna be working with a lot of 2-3 gig images, that’s what I would do (actually I’ve already done that and it works just fine)
use Bootcamp and run a Win version of Photoshop CS4 in Vista 64 and
actually be able to take advantage of all that ram in your Mac Pro
When did Mac Pro hardware support Vista 64?
I tried two Erase-start-from-scratch installs of Vista Business 64 and had nothing but problems on a Mac Pro 2.66 with 10gb ram, even then I recall Vista 64 was listing only 3gb of installed ram.
When I did another Erase to Vista 32, I had no problems, but I recall it only saw 2gb ram.
I don’t know about PS on Vista tho, because I don’t have a copy.
I guess my point is: IS APPLE OFFICIALLY SUPPORTING VISTA 64-BIT, or are there still driver issues that must be hacked?
Now to use it all I have to do is Erase my HD and start over again
Actually, just the Win partition…and yes, Bootcamp 2.1 (I think that’s the current version) supports 64 bit Vista.
But I really think that updating ones video card to make good use of the new GPU will benefit a _LOT_ of users…the new vid cards with 512MB of vram or more will REALLY speed up a lof of functionality.
While CS4 doesn’t have a lot of new "Photo-Centric Only" type features, there are enough general user features that will make up for it. I think the CS3>CS4 is bigger than CS2>CS3 upgrade was and anybody who is still using CS2 will DEFINITELY see MAJOR benefits regardless of your "centric".
Just being able to rotate the workspace when using a tablet is gonna send shivers up a lot of peoples’ spines…seriously! And the GPU zoom is much, much smoother/better. No more of this "it looks ok at 100/50/25 but sucks at every other zoom level" business.
"Just being able to rotate the workspace when using a tablet is gonna send shivers up a lot of peoples’ spines…seriously!"
That, almost by itself, could be reason enough for some folks to upgrade. It’s one of the reasons I’ll currently move over to Painter for certain Wacom operations.
But still, no beefed up Guidelines functions?
Ann has her "Split History Panel" white whale, and I have my "Quixotic Guidelines Windmill."
"64-bit editions of Microsoft Windows Vista are supported on certain Intel-based Macs via Boot Camp. (Boot Camp is included with Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard).
"Products Affected Boot Camp, Microsoft Windows Vista (64 bit editions) These Macs support 64-bit editions of Windows Vista:
"MacPro (Early 2008) MacBook Pro (15-inch Early 2008) MacBook Pro (17-inch Early 2008)"
+++++++
That seems pretty clear my 2007 Mac Pro is not supported. The Hatter on Apple forum said it is because the hardware requires EFI64 ROM is UEFI 2.01+
He also recommended "Format drive as MBR and NTFS (and skip using BootCamp Assistant). "
For what it’s worth, I have a very successful XP Pro 64 bit system on a dedicated drive in a 2006 Mac Pro. I primarily run that system for big renders (4500 x 6000px and above) in Vue 6 Infinite as it is about 20 -25% faster than the Mac 32 bit version. I have PS CS2 installed there as well and it runs without issue. The drivers were a bit of an issue to amass but they were all out there.
My complaint is not always PDF issues. It’s only a part of the problem that exist when you want to repurpose files for a different device.
Actually today, I get a request to match a digital press and an Epson 9800 output. Numbers are the same, but the color is different. Light lime green is the color. PDF’s are exactly the same. CMYK mode PDF. This instantly requires editing in Photoshop and saving back into the PDF if you don’t have native files. Save file and and you can’t retain layered data.
Fun.
So I happen to have the In Design document and can directly edit the images – IF – I have the links – I can do such edits. If not, screw you, and write out PDF’s and extract images that way. Again, another generation of who the hell knows what flavor of image it was when it was given birth.
What I really love is when customers supply "copy + paste" objects within IN Design. They are not links and therefore are not editable – nor do they register to exist. But they are there and need to be edited… Sweet…
And then you have issues like vector elements that can’t be picked apart For whatever reason, some vector objects come into INDY as copy/paste objects but as a whole sum object and not how the art was originally created. That leads to once again saving out a PDF and then opening it in Illustrator – raping the object, then stuffing it back in INDD to be able to perform edits such as scale, AND of course color change – cuz the designer can’t understand the concept of spot colors and white ink interaction on color paper.
So – farther up the tube of wonders comes the simple concept of how was the CMYK files separated – why – from whom – what for – where is it going – and how many directions shall it be listed as acceptable art and for what purpose.
web, animation, 3D, medical, aerospace, and guess what – and I will tell you – everyone prints. I don’t care you the hell you are and what you do – but I KNOW -you- print because you want something in your hand. Adobe has neglected this simple human intervention with said art and is not promoting good behavioral habits in a short tempered, get it done now society. OK – forget print for a moment and all that noise…
Reliability of RGB files is very low as far as handling of said files. Files come from all walks of life and when one goes a whacking due to various educational levels – you only have so much to work with. I think everyone here in these forums has had some kind of experience with receiving others files and are told to do something with them. How many users REALLY KNOW WHERE the files came from and is it in the correct color space and did the user giving you the files was even aware of if it was converted, original, RAW, CMYK once, or is golden. Who the hell knows? Clearly not me. YOU?
So Buko –
It’s way more then dealing with PDF files. It’s much larger then my arrogant ways. It’s a bigger problem then Adobe itself.
IT’s about reliability and usability for your needs.
I can’t confirm or decay files.
can you?
Just shoot me at that point… The masses does not understand file creation and we are creating more of a mess with each release.
I think the bulks of the issue are the schools churning out every student who dreams of being a "designer" without teaching core theory as opposed to what the "cool Vanishing Point filter does." Somewhere in the 80’s/90’s the schools became all Adobe software classes and no production theory. I bet there’s not a single Amberlith in any design school classroom anymore.
Not every doctor gets As in med school. Some slip by with Ds. It’s hard to pick out the D students until you see their work.
For those, who like me (I am Swedish so not always understand those English terms) had no idea what amberlith was:
"Amberlith
Indices : Terminology : Amberlith
Amberlith is an orange gel adhered to clear acetate. It was used as a way to knock out or separate areas of camera ready art for different color or screen treatments. The orange film was cut and stripped away with a knife or swivel knife. The orange was clear enough to be seen through for cutting purposes but opaque to light from the lithographic film it was exposed to."
I also read elsewhere that the making of it is discontinued as it isn’t used any more as more modern ways of getting the result have evolved. I see nothing wrong in newer technology taking over and killing the older ones. Evolution and progress.
Its not that Scott is complaining that new technology is killing older ones. What scott is complaining about is that the schools are teaching the wizz bang features and not basic implementation of printing.
We used to take our students to the printing museum in Munich where they had an uninterrupted sequence of historic machinery, from woodblock, through movable type, to computer-controlled type-setting.
When I was in College and took Graphic Arts I had to get a Job in the College owned Print shop. I started out in the warehouse and bindery and worked my way into the prepress. All before computers. My classes covered the full gamut of printing from hand set type to using the new at the time verityper optical imaging typesetter on Photographic paper that we had to paste up with artwax.
My complaint is not always PDF issues. It’s only a part of the problem…
Thank you Mike for that very well written description of some of the issues involved in achieving hard copy. I may well quote your mini white paper in the future.
My classes covered the full gamut of printing from hand set type to using the new at the time verityper optical imaging typesetter on Photographic paper that we had to paste up with artwax. >
I actually owned and USED all of those!
I still have two Varityper machines, unused rolls of photo-paper and chemicals, sheets of Amberlith and two Hot Waxers.
I’ve been in the business since hot type and pasteup mechanicals. We had to learn a certain amount of print production, worked closely with printers, did press checks, etc. Although we had instructors who allowed "pie in the sky" (unrealistic) design solutions in school, we had our reality checks after graduation whenever we got print estimates for printing based upon our Magic Marker layouts and/or when we did the mechanicals.
But today, with computers, all the technical production stuff is well masked by what we see on screen and the satisfaction of being able to just save a file and pass it off to the printer without anything obviously wrong showing until you do a complete flight check. And, yes, you’re right — today’s art school grads learn all the "cool" software/super portfolio stuff without having a clue how the heck it is actually going to get printed. And you have no idea of good their files are until you dissect them.
Go ahead and ask a grad what he/she knows about CMYK or RGB or spot colors, printing, paper, ink, varnishes, sheetfed and web litho, printing plates, binding, knockouts, surprints, hot stamps, blind embosses, scoring, die cuts, etc… The production details aren’t fun or cool, so to keep students (and their tuition-paying parents) happy, they seem to be glossed over in school.
And, of course, there is the whole class of alleged "designers" who are naive, egotistic office workers who figure, "Hey, I can put Photoshop and InDesign on my computer. And I’ve always wanted to use some of those other typefaces on my computer. I’ll just make the art files myself and save those company design fees."
Sure, I can play the piano like Vladimir Horowitz, too!
Sometimes we get handed art that was prepared by others. And whether from individual designers, art studios, "creative" agencies, I’ve learned that I MUST spend the time to check every aspect of the files. I get logos with "live" type; files with mixed color spaces and low-res graphics; bloated/non-optimized files; no attention to design details; etc. OUR reputation to deliver art that can print well is at risk if I don’t. WE get blamed if it fails.
Yep, I know what you’re talking about. And, Mike, you certainly enlightened us further with your report from the trenches.
That came later for us. We worked with two-coat "Best-Test" rubber cement. I still have and use squirt cans and Bestine thinner. It is one of the best solvents out there — great for removing sticky label and tape residue, without harming plastics or staining paper.
When I was in college, I never took graphic arts, but I took hand illustration, marker rendering, mechanical drafting by hand mind you as well as Autocad. Back then a person HAD to learn how to do things and understood the mechanics of a craft, trade or art. Now days, like I’ve said, everyone is a professional, but some are better then others. Not enough time is spent studying by many.
Scott –
I have been an instructor at a trade school. I have been an instructor at a graphic design school. I have turned down a very honorable job at the Academy of Arts College here in San Francisco for one simple reason. I wanted to make money, have a life and not live in a van under the freeway like my students. I did and still do enjoy teaching, but one has to understand that most people who do graphics now – do it as an add on to their other job responsibilities and is not the core of what they do. This simple fact is the void in Adobe’s understanding of developing smart software for the masses. Hell, I even know some people who absolutely refuse to learn anything graphic related, but they are in charge of decisions related to graphics. There are all kinds in this world and we need a bigger net to capture a wider range of user(s).
What is missing in Adobe products? To me, it’s clear. There is little if any reliability in files once they leave your possession.
We need file process control for many reasons.
All people from all fields need a road to follow. Adobe has no road. They have a bridge, but no road.
I can even remove the CMYK issues from the equation completely because they are far more difficult to deal with then RGB. Adobe’s RGB workflow has had limited success. The technology works. The implementation is a pile of shit and it will continue to be such until they implement a process control workflow.
What sort of RGB Process Control do you have in mind, Mike.
It’s very simple Ann.
A master working space for RGB that retains the color appearance regardless of what you throw into the working space. Honor ICC tags coming in and convert to the master RGB space.
People don’t care to be bothered with dialog boxes about color and it just confuses them to no end. Color management needs to be more seamless and THIS is how to make it more so. Then and only then will we be able to have a more reliable file for conversion to some other flavor of output. It’s so damn simple that my head hurts from all the shouting…
Should that Master RGB Space be Adobe RGB or one of the wider spaces?
What would happen if someone opens an untagged file under your proposed system: would the current Assign and Convert Profiles routines still exist because that, I suspect, is the cause of a lot of the current confusion?
A master working space for RGB that retains the color appearance regardless of what you throw into the working space. Honor ICC tags coming in and convert to the master RGB space.
Should that Master RGB Space be Adobe RGB or one of the wider spaces?
Much wider. It has to be a linear RGB space that can capture even the current ink jet gamma range and be at least 16 bit. It’s even bigger then Prophoto 16 bit space. Having your monitor reflect a file that is actually that wide is yet to be seen, but the point is that you have a file that is technically for example Adobe RGB, but it resides in a much wider linear color space.
What would happen if someone opens an untagged file under your proposed system: would the current Assign and Convert Profiles routines still exist because that, I suspect, is is the cause of a lot of the current confusion?
First off, you have to understand that Adobe still has not fixed the bug in Photoshop that does not allow you to preview the image before you assign a color tag to the image upon open. THIS needs to be fixed with out a doubt for this system to work properly.
There will no longer be a working space color setting. It will be changed to a untagged file color space option and you choose what color space you want to assign or a default will be provided for you. It’s the same concept as of now, but different. Files will come in and you choose if you want to preview the image as you assign or assume the assignment of the color space and not be bothered with color management. Either way, what you bring into the color appearance holds in the uber RGB space.
…. as well as the only space that "retains color appearance regardless…"
the bug in Photoshop that does not allow you to preview the image before you assign a color tag to the image upon open
What would be the point of this? What are you previewing? The RGB values have to be interpreted into your monitor space by something.
It sounds like you are advocating for some sort of universal device-independent RGB color space. My feeble mind cannot conceive of how this would be constructed. Help me out here.
the bug in Photoshop that does not allow you to preview the image before you assign a color tag to the image upon open
What would be the point of this?
Well don’t you want to look and the damn file as YOU assign a color space to an untagged file before opening it to see what works best? Why force the user to open the file _THEN_ assign a color space to the image. So ass backwards that logic is and once again leaves a gate way to screw ups.
If your system is an attempt to bring clarity to the current state of color management, or an attempt to have people "not be bothered with color management OR honor the ICC tag", I’m afraid the clarity is escaping me.
I share your general desire to have this stuff be a bit more democratic and accessible to the great unwashed. I’m all ears.
It’s bigger then color management Rick. It’s about reliability and control of files when you pass files to another user. It’s not that hard Rick to fathom.
Illustrator Vector files still continue to rasterize when Saved as a Photoshop PDF.
However, double clicking on a Placed Illustrator Vector SO in Photoshop CS4, immediately opens the parent file in Ai and any changes made to that file are immediately updated in real time in the Photoshop CS4 file as soon as you Save in Ai.
And, as you stated, CS4 SOs can now have their own Layer Masks and Effects.
Ann, you’re saying now the ORIGINAL AI file opens? Not a temp file that leaves the original AI file untouched?
This is actually a really important distinction. Pre-CS4, vector (and raster) SOs were NOT linked to the original files; once an SO was created in PS, no connection (link) existed between that SO and the "parent" placed file ("parent" therefore was actually the wrong concept). I remember having a very hard time understanding the ABSENCE of a link with the advent of SOs.
But if the original AI file now opens when you double click a vector SO in PS, not a temp file, then now there IS a link!
The Smart Vector objects are not linked…they are embedded. So while the vector can open in Illustrator it won’t be the original file but the one embedded. So, you can’t link to a master, edit that and have it automatically propagated to all subsequent iterations, no. That would require a whole level of complexity that would be massive to support.
Thanks Jeff. I actually wasn’t suggesting a "true" link would be superior or even desirable at all. Having finally understood precisely the operation you describe (an embedded and unlinked version) when SOs were first introduced, I was merely wondering if Ann was indicating the process had changed in CS4.
Apparently not. So if you double click on a vector SO, I know it opens in Illustrator… but it IS or it’s NOT opening the original AI artwork? Based on what you’ve just said, it is NOT… just as it is in CS3.
Right, Mike. But in this case, "parent" refers to the file that HOUSES them (the PS file), not the file from which they ORIGINATED. This was for me (back in CS2) a very different meaning of the term "parent."
They are more embedded more than anything else. Yes,it’s a hack…but what’s embedded into the PSD file is the state of the original at the moment that it is imbedded.
Thanks folks. Sounds like not much was done to advanced SO in CS4 where vector objects are concerned. All I’ve read is already possible with CS3.
I actually like the "embedding." It allows me to know that the original AI is untouched. If I want the original edited I’ll edit in AI and replace in PS, not edit from within PS.
The main thing I was hoping for was complete transform functions with Vector Smart Objects.
With CS3 it’s not easy to do a perspective distort on a VSO, or anything other than skew and rhomboid-type distortions unless you use Warp, which isn’t exceptionally accurate.
That and of course mask linking. But I know mask linking is fixed.
I get that.. but does PSCS4 include any additional Imageready features that were removed in CS3? I despise the need for a secondary application just because Adobe decided to remove features from Photoshop.
I know FW is the Adobe solution to no Imageready. And CS4 may be better than CS3, but here, it’s not a substitute, it’s an additional application that requires learning when it was NEVER needed before. I was merely curious if Adobe attempted to make Photoshop a viable tool again since they crippled it in CS3 where some web features are concerned.
That video certainly sells CS4 to me. However an obvious issue (and repeated key words) IMO was hardware acceleration. It looks to me that folks will want strong modern hardware for CS4. To me that means investing in MacIntel rather than investing in retrofitting G5 setups. Certainly I think we should wait for CS4’s release and mainstream testing before putting money into G5 setups.
Currently the 7600 card from Apple is a good value, but requires OS 10.5. Various pre-CS4 tests are available via <http://www.barefeats.com/>. However IMO it makes sense to wait until after CS4 is on the street for a few weeks and modern cards have been real-world CS4 tested before considering any upgrades.
I will buy CS4 for clients immediately but wait at first on my personal upgrade.
Certainly I think we should wait for CS4’s release and mainstream testing with various systems/cards/RAM before putting money into G5 setups.
I totally disagree!!
I have just installed my new nVidea 7800 GT (a mutant card with firmware-updated for Mac and the only Model Shader 3.0 card available for G5/AGP x8 Bus Macs). Cost: about $338.
I can assure that all the OpenGL features of CS4 now work and CS4 absolutely rocks! It is by far the most exciting, and stable, version of Photoshop that I have yet seen.
Also, I have the advantage of being able to stay with OSX 10.4.11 until Apple sorts out Snow Leopard.
One other small (?) point is that $300 IS rather less than the $4000-plus that a new Apple Pro with minimum suitable power, HDs and RAM would cost me.
Thank you SO much for telling me about the "mutant" cards!
I got my Mac nVidia GeForce 7800 GT 256MB AGP Video Card from applemacanix.com.
Service was amazingly quick, the card is warranted by them for 90 days, plus for a year by nVidea, and I bought a full three year warranty for a small extra payment.
They provided excellent installation instructions. I popped the card in and started up: my display is fine and Photoshop CS4 immediately recognised the card for Open GL.
Just to expand a little on my total avoidance and rejection of Leopard, I would like to stress that it’s not just the bugs and stability problems that put me off, but also basic functionality issues.
For instance, given that I’m still scanning film from as long as over fifty years ago, the Grain Surgery set of plug-ins is pretty much vital to me. At about the same time that CS3 came out, Adobe acquired Grain Surgery from Visual Infinity, and promptly pulled it from the market. Fortunately, Adobe was decent enough to fix a fatal CS3 crash triggered by Grain Surgery in beta versions of CS3 before the application was released.
As far as OS features, the ones offered by Panther were and are more than enough for me, since I’m running Tiger essentially as if it were Panther, with Dashboard and Spotblight permanently disabled.
In Leopard I would have to disable Spaces and Time Machine additionally, and I would lose all the applications I still run in Classic and lose all access to Grain Surgery.
I’m sure my machine and system setup will outlive me.
I’m delighted your mutant card worked out fine. That was certainly fast service.
I’d recommend you get Temperature Monitor. It will give you readings of the temperature of the GPU, CPU and individual RAM sticks.
If you have enough PCI slots available, stick an inexpensive PCI fan in there if temperatures rise too much. The card on which the PCI fan is mounted takes up only one PCI slot, of course, but the thickness of the fan itself usually means you have to sacrifice the slot next to it.
Thank you for this thread, and for continuing to update links. I may not be able to go back and read everything since I only just subscribed to it, but I am watching the You Tube video on Adobe Photoshop CS4: Imaging Resource Photokina 2008.
One feature I find rather fascinating is the new Content Aware Scaling feature. This looks wonderful.
What’s the best place to order CS4? Direct from Adobe? Or should I wait for Amazon or an outlet like that to offer it for less if there is such a thing?
When I ordered CS3 I had to use Adobe because of an upgrade offer. But I am not locked into that now.
Amazon.com will ship a lot faster than the Adobe store, the price is only $1 less from Amazon, but amazon doesn’t charge me sales tax and gives me free shipping.
Based on what I have seen and experienced so far (and I haven’t seen the complete Suite) I think that CS4 is an outstanding upgrade frankly the best one that we have ever had.
I wouldn’t want to forego the CS4 Design Premium Upgrade but do make sure that you have a card which supports OpenGL because it would be a pity not to be able to use those features too.
I do have a card that supports OpenGL although it may not be the best video card for the Mac Pro. I have the NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT. I cannot foresee buying a video card at this point.
CS4’s OpenGL features need the card to support something called "Model Shader 3.0".
My previous card supported OpenGL but it only supported "Model Shader 2.0" which prevented me from using the OpenGL features and there are more of these features yet to come according to John Nack’s Blog.
Cindy, yes, in my experience Amazon is MUCH faster. I get my Photoshop upgrades in 48 hours or so. The time I ordered directly from Adobe, it took several weeks to leave their shipping warehouse in Georgia and another 12 days to get to me. Obviously, I switched to Amazon after that.
I totally disagree!! (with Certainly I think we should wait for CS4’s release and mainstream testing with various systems/cards/RAM before putting money into G5 setups)
Ann, I fully accept the validity of your beta experience with CS4 as justification for the rest of us to rush to buy CS4. I unequivocally accept your counsel in that regard.
However IMO rushing to buy new untested hardware to support CS4 when production CS4 has not yet been available even for testing is NUTS.
I way prefer Amazon for most purchases, but Adobe more often than not screws up my product ownership records, so buying direct from Adobe seems to help keep them straight.
Adobe have already made the minimum System requirements for running CS4 with full access to the advanced GL features perfectly clear and that is not going to change in he next ten days.
Minimum hardware requirements include a video card of at least 256 MB VRAM (more is desirable if you can get it); supports Open GL 2.0 and Smart Shader 3.0.
For people with the earlier G5s (with an AGPx8 bus like mine), there appears to be only one available solution.
You can either try to acquire a mutant nVidia GeForce 7800 GT 256MB AGPx8 Video Card that has been "flashed" for Mac or you will NOT be able to access the full feature-set of CS4.
Cards for the later G5s with a PCIe bus are easier to come by and I understand that the MacPros shipped with suitable cards anyway.
So, if you want to be able to access the OpenGL features in CS4, you have no choice but to fit a card that meets at least Adobe’s stated minimum required standards.
Thanks for the Adobe store pre-order discount tip. Even after tax and $15 shipping I saved $12 over Amazon but the big deal is that it will be here a couple of weeks earlier.
Only $12? I got more than that out of it. I did 2 day shipping. Amazon would not have been free shipping if you wanted it sooner than their free shipping.
My Amazon CS4 Extended Upgrade was going to be $350 with shipping. Adobe was $338 of which CA state tax and shipping was about $40. It was a small overall saving but the time of delivery seems as though it will be a couple of weeks earlier.
No disrespect intended, but you of all people should be aware that overall PS/system performance is not simply about what Adobe specifies: "Adobe have already made the minimum System requirements for running CS4 with full access to the advanced GL features perfectly clear" Heck, even today Adobe lists "system requirements" at 512 MB RAM. Anyone basing purchase or upgrade hardware optimizing on 512 MB RAM would need her head examined; why should we ignore that experience with graphics upgrading?
It is not about caution, it is about logic. Adobe has essentially ignored available graphics power for a long time. We simply do not know what card(s) will be best value on all the various boxes. Based on posts here it would seem that folks on legacy G5s currently may have few card options, but folks on modern boxes have several choices at various price points. The idea that folks should RUSH out to buy new hardware based on Adobe’s listed system requirements to support specific features of UNRELEASED software is ridiculous.
It only makes sense to wait a few weeks after the product is released to view test results with production software; after all, we don’t yet know what CS may be sensitive to. E.g. cards have varying VRAM and varying prices. Aside from knowing that more is better we have no clue as to value relationships until after real-world testing.
Ann, I think you made a wise choice on the card. I got one of those flashed cards off eBay at one point and they work great to postpone the upgrade. As long as your G5 is in good running order and it does the trick with CS4 I see no reason not to hang in there with it.
Even with my MacPro set up I would have software upgrades should I upgrade to Leopard. I am glad I have the earlier MacPro and don’t have to make that expenditure right now.
I must say that I filled with trepidation about buying a Flashed card on eBay but the fears have proved groundless: the card was easy to install and appears to be just fine.
Until the flashed card dies in 6 months 🙂 Sorry, don’t mean to be a voice of dissent, but this is the most common issue with flashed video cards on a Mac from my reading. They fail often and require repurchasing. I sincerely hope your experience is different, Ann.
They fail if one or both of these conditions apply:
1.– you let the temperature rise unduly;
2.– you bought one with the wrong voltage setting (see link above).
I bought mine in June of last year and it’s going on strong. I used it myself daily through last April 14, and my six-year old grandson plays games in his own Mac account a few times a week, so I know the card is still working. 🙂
Trouble arises especially when you run a 2X or 4X speed AGP card (1.5 volts) in a machine with an 8x speed bus (0.8 volts). In theory, the box shouldn’t even run under those conditions, but if you force it to, then the card will die sooner rather than later.
One good thing is that I bought a three-year extended warranty for the card from Square Trade (over and above the one-year nVidea warranty and the 90-day warranty from the Supplier) so I should be covered.
The card that I have has its own built-in fan and the GPU is running at 114°F so hopefully all will be well.
Yes, all flashed cards I’ve seen come with a built-in fan.
Processor napping and fan control bring down the temperatures easily another 20°F to 30°F inside my machine, cooling the CPU, the RAM sticks and the GPU; but not all machines allow you to manipulate fan speeds and processor napping as easily.
In depth, Cindy; and over several days with multiple calls to various manufacturers and suppliers; and with a LOT of help from the members of this Forum.
The machine AND the card have to be equipped with sensors to monitor the GPU temperature. Temperature Monitor (the full version, not "Lite") will show you.
They had better hit our credit cards (they don’t charge till the item is shipped) on all the pre-orders before the credit market completely shuts down.
