Well, it's officially official.
CS4 has been launched and the prices set, though as usual we in the UK pay more.:mad:

http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/photoshop/

I've been Beta testing it since June and not used CS3 since then, despite CS4's Beta status. Bridge and ACR 5 are simply way better than previous versions. Lots of negativity regarding new interface on the Mac, though usually from numpties who hadn't even tried it - it's much better!:thumbsup:

Is it worth the upgrade? As far as I can see, the only difference is that it's a little quicker on higher powered PC's, and a bit smoother.

There's a lot more to it than that. Content Aware Scaling is jawdropping.
The improvements to Bridge are worth the upgrade alone.
Not that most people even realise Bridge is there let alone how useful it is.

The content aware scaling is a bit of a fad, there's already software out there that do this anyway.

Bridge is good, but Lightroom is better. In fact, I only ever use Bridge when renaming files. It's probably why Bridge is given away with Photoshop, it's not anything special.

:)

The content aware scaling is a bit of a fad, there's already software out there that do this anyway. But doing it within PS is so much easier/more efficient and besides how many people have the other software or even know it exists?

Bridge is good, but Lightroom is better. In fact, I only ever use Bridge when renaming files. It's probably why Bridge is given away with Photoshop, it's not anything special.
:)Obviously you don't know how to use it properly then.:P
I've hardly used LR since installing Bridge CS4, not even LR2.
LR is a great programme, but sadly deeply flawed, it cannot even import all my photos, duh! :rant:

This image was a RAW file tweaked without leaving Bridge.


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3106/2885276320_9a8f49f06f_o.jpg

But doing it within PS is so much easier/more efficient and besides how many people have the other software or even know it exists?

Obviously you don't know how to use it properly then.:P
I've hardly used LR since installing Bridge CS4, not even LR2.
LR is a great programme, but sadly deeply flawed, it cannot even import all my photos, duh! :rant:I dunno about other people in the world, but I know it exists. Im sure if it was there in CS4 and I used it just once then it's worth having. :)

I obviously don't know how to use Bridge then - I was under the impression it was simply a cataloguing and editing piece of software. Is it not? What can it do then? May be worth using!

What's the problem you're having with Lr? I've used it since v1.0 and never had one problem with it - I do find I use it less and less to edit and more and more to simply catalogue though. Ps is still king of editing. My workflow usually means I colour-correct in lr, export to JPEG and then edit in Ps. I don't know what all this 'non-destructive editing' malarky is all about - who cares if you have to change a pixel or two to get the result you want!? ;)

This image was a RAW file tweaked without leaving Bridge.


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3106/2885276320_9a8f49f06f_o.jpg

I'm not being an awkward so-and-so but I fail to see your point? :) I can do that in Lr too?

I obviously don't know how to use Bridge then - I was under the impression it was simply a cataloguing and editing piece of software. Is it not? What can it do then? May be worth using! Apart from you can batch stuff into PS in lots of clever ways, cataloging and finding images is a major part of one's workflow So nothing simple there.

What's the problem you're having with Lr? I've used it since v1.0 and never had one problem with it I have used it since the betas, but only with 1.3 was it robust enough to actually work with. And it is still deeply flawed.

- I do find I use it less and less to edit and more and more to simply catalogue though. Ps is still king of editing. My workflow usually means I colour-correct in lr, export to JPEG and then edit in Ps. I don't know what all this 'non-destructive editing' malarky is all about - who cares if you have to change a pixel or two to get the result you want!? ;)Oh, not understanding non-destructive editing means you have missed one of the major points of LR. Saving to JPEg to edit in PS - :gag:
Besides what editing can you not do in LR?

I'm not being an awkward so-and-so but I fail to see your point? :) I can do that in Lr too?The point is that Bridge is a very good app in its own right.
Not to mention being a major part of an efficient workflow.
Also you could not develop the picture above as demonstrated in LR until LR2.

I do understand non-destructive editing, I was making the point that it isn't the be-all and end-all of your workflow - too many people get aroused by what they read online and believe it's the future, without actually trying things themselves. When changing a few pixels or editing a JPEG doesn't make a bit of difference when the print is finished and hanging on a wall, or in an album.

I truly don't believe that Bridge does or can do anything Lr can't. Lr is a much easier program to use too.

You can batch lots of stuff in Lr too, by sync'ing and copying-and-pasting settings, not to mention presets. And of course, using Droplets.

I'm sure Bridge is a great program, but Lr works much better for me. :)

Bridge can look through all your files types, without tediously importing them first and more importantly, it is not limited to a few select image tyes. A lot of my photography portfolio is simply ignored by LR, which makes the DAM aspect of it, next to useless. Not to mention underming the concept of LR being a photographer's tool. I think LR could be one of the best programmes ever but it is still clunky and a bit rough around the edges at present.

You said you use Bridge to rename - could that be because renaming in LR is quite fiddly and not easy to understand? :D LR is certainly not the simple programe it set out to be.
With regard to batching I was talking about editing files directly in PS. And without messing around with droplets. Much of the batch export in LR comes from Bridge, but LR lacks Bridge's close integration with PS.

Actually non destructive editing is most definitely a huge step forward and I've always strived to do it as much as possible even in PS, ever since PS3.5. But with meta data editing as used in LR/ACR it doesn't increase file size so much.

You still haven't said why you need PS, if you use LR.

Cool, well that's your opinion, as I say and I love Lr and find it extremely quick and not at all clunky.

I use Ps for a variety of things, too numerous to mention.

So what do you need PS for that LR cannot do?

LR is only quick if you have a very fast machine, rendering large files at 100% is anything but quick even then.

I have Lr on my PC - but only ever use that PC for photo editing. It's only a 2.66ghz C2D with 4GB 800mhz RAM - hardly the fastest machine ever, but I think that by keeping it clear of clutter it remains quicker, it's certainly quicker at editing than a friends Quad Core but he uses his for everything.

In Ps you can do graphic design - logos and things, website design, etc... I do use Ps for most of my 'finishing off' - dodging & burning, sharpening, etc... but probably because I'm used to doing it in Ps, as Lr 2.0 is so new (and hence I haven't got used to doing it with the new ACR tools).

Graphic design doesn't count.:P That's not photography.

Dodging, burning and sharpening are certainly do-able in LR2 and saves having to go into PS. Though until CS4 the Dodge and burn tools were usually avoided as they weren't very good. Apparently they are better now, but as I never use them, I can't say.

Keeping a machine for specifics will certainly make a huge difference. Clutter kills speed. But for most people it's an expensive luxury.

Even for a photography website!? ;) :D

I don't use the specific dodge & burn tools, I use a combination of Curves and Levels adj. layers and layer masks. Also, I find the shadow/highlight tool does quite a good job sometimes, even if it does double the size of the image. Again, it can be done in LR now, but I'm yet to swap most of my workflow over to Lr. As I said, I generally just colour-correct in Lr, and leave the RAW's there until I need to export them.

I also use it for album design too - for wedding albums.

Well, I'm not rich but realise that the time saved is worth more to me than the few hundred quid it costs to have a laptop for general bumming around.

I hardly do any image correction work in PS anymore as ACR/LR is so good now.
Cannot even remember the last time I used Shadow/Highlight tool in PS and I used to think it was wonderful.
I use PS mainly for compositing or textural looks - i.e. the more creative stuff.