Version: 2008

Comments on: Brace yourself for Adobe's Photoshop overhaul

Adobe Systems is laying the groundwork for a new Photoshop, giving the venerable image-editing software an interface that will adapt to the task at hand.

Add a Comment (Log in or register) (25 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
uhm...
by eGenerations November 6, 2007 2:50 PM PST
this doesn't sound good. though my full opinion will have to wait for the roll out. eeks!
Reply to this comment
wow
by mcthingy2 November 6, 2007 3:29 PM PST
now that's what I call insight
View reply
Task Oriented = Hidden Ability
by taphilo November 6, 2007 3:16 PM PST
The GREAT value of menus is that you always see them and you learn what OTHER options are there. The minute you switch to a TASK oriented only view of the menu world people will have NO CLUE at all what could be done - since those menu items are HIDDEN and you STILL stumble upon them for them to appear to you.
It's putting blinders on people.
"Out of sight out of mind" thinking.
Part of the creativity that made PS great is that people would see other tools and decide to try them out - or remember they will use that one to accomplish a task later on - hiding them away makes it MUCH harder for any new people and you lose the 'mental triggers' of seeing them.
Would you take hide all the tools from view in our woodshop if you are building a cabinet when you are just cutting the wood first? No, you see the drill bits, the countersinks, the stain, the hardware to put into it, hinges etc and it is all there at once to help you create it.
Going MS by hiding menus you are just not using right now makes it harder for people to learn - they have no clue that it even exists when you do that.
Tom
http://www.taphilo.com/
Reply to this comment
Well
by matthewcsims November 6, 2007 9:11 PM PST
Well what about an interface that has become so bloated that it just scares the new user away? Sort of like when I walk into a wood shop.

The real question is, what is the best way to put all the power of Photoshop behind the click of your index finger? No real way to answer that.

People certaintly don't use Photoshop because it's easy. They use it because it's powerful. As long as it stays that way people will find whatever option they need no matter how deeply it is hidden.
Want both
by adasha76 November 7, 2007 1:26 AM PST
Yeah so I'm greedy but can't we have both? Task orientated for new users, specific purposes etc. but 'all-in' for experienced users? It would be easy with modular interface elements - its simple enough to customise your own workspace now so all it needs is some refinement. I'm not sure a total revamp is needed in this regard.

Regarding the comment about the 3D transform tool, well frankly it's underused because it's poorly implemented. The idea is sound and in principle very useful for certain tasks (i.e. correcting perspective) but actually using it is a pain in the fat one.
Reply to this comment
DONīT TOUCH ON THE INTERFACE!!!
by Mark_Smith November 7, 2007 5:18 AM PST
Cmon....if you are a pro you HAVE TO KNOW you have to deal with Photoshop the way it is because your job requires it or forget it. Im not so sure if stripping it down would make users so happy, specially if you are used to the multi-purpose tool photoshop became after many years.

One of the reasons of Adobeīs success is the same interface in the whole line of products. This makes the things easier to learn, and im not interested in change my way just because Adobe is targetting new users (ok, ok, they say its to be more specific).

If you dont need whole photoshop, go buy Elements or go use the photoshop market share version on the web soon. Or try paintbrush.
Reply to this comment
Adobe has lost its mind
by Yakk35 November 7, 2007 6:08 AM PST
Adobe has lost its mind it seems. Why in the hell would you try and make a program that professionals have to buy (normally as part of the suite) for $1,200 total "new user/casual user friendly". It's a damn professional program! You think Mom and Dad's will buy Photoshop to edit the photos from the kid's soccer games? WHAT ARE YOU PEOPLE THINKING???

I am making 3 backup disks of CS suite right now, I may need them for the rest of my life.
Reply to this comment
What are you talking about
by ewelch November 7, 2007 9:39 AM PST
What are you talking about. He's not talking about making it
useful for mom and pop. That ain't ever gonna happen. He's
talking about letting those of us who use it (I have every day
since May of '92) customize it for our needs.

Photoshop Elements - for Mom and Pop - will no doubt benefit
in some ways by this shift in emphasis.

As he points out in his blog, they are long on the way to getting
here. And in fact the Workspaces change in CS3 shows is a bit
about where they are going. But don't panic. Photoshop is not
going to be dumbed down. It's going to be a massive download
that will take years to even begin to master.

And that's good. :-D
keyword search
by PlaceHolder November 7, 2007 6:40 AM PST
I'm a very unoccasional user of Photoshop, so my feedback may not be of any value but nevertheless I had an idea. The new feature in Windows Vista where you can type a few letters and see everything [starting with] those letters is a good power user approach. If Adobe wants to leave the power present, but make finding it easier, perhaps doing something similar would be helpful. I type "blur" and all the features related to blurring show up, I type "etch" and everything about etching shows up... and so on...
Reply to this comment
Photoshop Elements
by felixderkater November 7, 2007 7:07 AM PST
Photoshop Elements is for people who would enjoy seeing less features, *cough*, I mean clutter, as they call it.

As for me, I prefer to see all of the options I have. This calls to mind Microsoft's horrible idea of taking the clutter out of menus in MS Office, when only a small portion of the menus you used most frequently would appear. That died. This will do the same.
Reply to this comment
Why dont you....
by Mark_Smith November 7, 2007 8:30 AM PST
Do you want to do something really great and groundbreaking???? Adobe Photoshop for Linux.
Reply to this comment
Aperture
by Llib Setag November 7, 2007 8:39 AM PST
Apple Aperture pro photo program profoundly influenced Adode
Lightroom development .
No mention from CNET?
Photoshop is a totally different animal...leave it alone!
Reply to this comment
Let the user find out they want...
by M_K_Higa November 7, 2007 9:34 AM PST
and let them customize the application themselves. Of course it's counter productive if a well used command is nested three or four levels deep into the menu system. But that same command may not be useful to others. The opposite is true too - just because a certain command is exposed as a big shinny button at the top level, it doesn't mean that it will be used by everyone.

I'd propose that Adobe write a small app that would log a history of all the commands used by the user. If you run this for a about a month,
then you can see the trend of commands being used. Based on the trend, you can tailor your toolbox to fit your needs. This app can also make suggestions to hide unused tools or add new tools as time goes on.

Of course, this won't work if the command sets arn't modularized. From what I've read in this article, it looks like Adobe is working on modularizing the command sets, so this should be doable.
Reply to this comment
While they are at it...
by Heebee Jeebies November 7, 2007 10:04 AM PST
How about fixing features that added in previous versions that are worthless lame ducks. Fix the extract command so it rivals third party options. Noise reduction, distortion correction, actions with user prompts, if/then branching, password protection again editing, saving history with your files, converting history to an action. Kill that awful filter gallery and so on.

But, now they won't do this, they will waste time making Photoshop a dog with a dogs interface. Frankly I don't want to have to move from one mode to another to get work done.

They also shouldn't hold up Lightroom either. Lightroom is no prize pig either. Bugs, slow, can't handle images larger than 10,000 on a side (no panorama image cataloging unless you do really small ones), poor web gallery module, poor print module, really poor slide show module, did I mention is it buggy and slow. Poor noise reduction, so-so sharpening, no lens distortion correction and so on. All of this in a program that was done from the ground up for professional photographers that actually has fewer features than some freeware that I have used.

Adobe needs to stop playing with their interface (or at least go get a room) and fix the core of their programs, put in professional features instead of the joke features they do add. For a company that is supposedly for professional photographers they sure don't have a clue.

Robert
Reply to this comment
Adobe=Bloat
by Stating November 7, 2007 10:09 AM PST
Software engineers in big companies have an incentive to write bloatware. The more bloat you write, the more engineers and QA people you need. The more people, the more managers. The more managers, the more six figure salaries. The more managers, the more directors, etc. It's creeping payroll, just like Big Government. More people, less real productive stuff gets done because everyone is spending 50% of their time reading email, listening to voicemail, attending meetings, and engaging in CYA.
Reply to this comment
they have atleast identified main problem, solution not so sure
by knowles2 November 7, 2007 1:03 PM PST
well I am ver unoccasional user but the from the articles, I think the simplest way for him to implement his ideas would be a general you on load up which would allow the user to select which mode they want to run in.

so for example you would professional used (all tools features available.), photo editing mode.
and custom mode which the user can manipulate and change the programme to how they want it set up and which menus they want to used.

But I think in many programmes, the user user interface have become over cluttered.

And the first company who finds a solution to this problem will make a lot of money, none have really done so yet. I suspect it will end up with range of ideas, two of them have been stated on sounds like sensible solutions to me, with some usability issues I can.

But adobe main challenge in as far as they are concenr is keeping it main professional audience happy why expanding the market for the product.

us customers can only wait and see what comes out from adobe
Reply to this comment
Isn't it already customizable?
by XMattingly November 8, 2007 3:07 AM PST
What the heck was Nack talking about? Photoshop ALREADY has
workspaces. It's right up there in the options menu. I don't see a
need at all for Photoshop to be re-engineered around "user
modularity"; of all of Adobe's biggest graphics apps, PS has been
the only one that hasn't required any serious fiddling with its
palettes for me to have a smooth workflow, and it's been that
way for years.

The last thing we need is for Adobe to start second guessing
which type of users will use which specific set of functions. I say
the best solution is the one that already exists, which is "put all
the functionality out there in the beginning, let the user decide
what he/she needs." I could see including an easier way to add/
remove functions, say if you want to remove the filter gallery, or
you won't ever use the analyze menu and want to hide it:
anything beyond that would be presumptuous on Adobe's part.

As for those who complain about Photoshop being bloatware:
sure, it's added a ton of features in the past decade, but I'm here
to tell you that CS3 is a massive overhaul from CS2. It loads
much faster than any of my other Adobe apps, and the total
install is LESS THAN HALF that of Illustrator or InDesign (around
500mb). I don't know how they did it, but Adobe made it pretty
darn lean without taking away the power.
Reply to this comment
An attempt to generate more revenue.....
by 70441.2227 November 10, 2007 6:48 AM PST
Isn't this just an attempt to make more money? Isn't it already customizable? Why not keep everything in one package and let the USER customize it to his/her tastes? Whereas now you get one package for $600 full package/$299 upgrade? You might have to buy four packages for $600 each? I'd like to see how they are going to break it up and the pricing to see if this is a good idea. Doesn't anyone else see this coming. My example is Lightroom. Shouldn't this necessary functionality be built into Photoshop. Instead, it is sold as a separate package. Remember?

Bob
Reply to this comment
Elements
by Metalbassist November 10, 2007 8:00 PM PST
ummm...isn't Elements supposed to be the general user interface for Photoshop? I think this guy is just looking for a way to make his job seem needed at Adobe. Hopefully Adobe gets smart and cans him or whomever generated this idea of changing photoshop drastically.

I use Photoshop as a professional tool...that is why I shelled out the bucks for it and for it's subsequent upgrades. If I have to relearn how to use it or lose any functionality I will drop future Adobe releases like a rock, stick with my current version and start using my Corel more frequently if they are the ones upgrading properly with new tools...not total revamps.

I remember when Microsoft killed a really nice Photo editing program called Photodraw and replaced it with their unbelievably dumbed down Picture it. I saw what my dad got with picture it, nice for a non pro, yet it removed Microsoft from my wanting to look to them for photo software.

Give me new tools only...don't screw with how it works or remove stuff.

If you wish to streamline it do as some have said...just make the install or post install let the user themselves turn things on or off at loadup.

Now I say my prayers that Adobe doesn't mess up a good thing.
Reply to this comment
by doctorjoker June 7, 2008 5:41 AM PDT
One thing that really drives me crazy about the history-to-action thing is that in imageready you CAN do it!!
so, what's the matter?
have they forgotten how to implement it in Photoshop?
or have the programmers that did that in imageready left adobe so nobody can do it again?
or, maybe, the PS programming team doesn't know that their collegues at ImageReady programming team had succedeed in that task??? :-D
Reply to this comment
by doctorjoker June 7, 2008 5:46 AM PDT
oh, another thing:
have anyone noticed that in photoshop you can drag a history state? but drag where?
why can I drag something that can't be dropped nowhere?
my opinion is that the started to implement the feature but the gave up for some reason...
Reply to this comment
by NicoleEverson February 1, 2009 6:32 PM PST
Thanks for the info!!

www.nicoleeversonphotography.com

Nicole Everson Photography
Reply to this comment
(25 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.

About Underexposed

This blog sheds light on digital photography subjects such as cameras, photo editing, and Web sites. Shankland joined CNET News in 1998 after a five-year stint as a science writer. He's a lab rat who grew up in Los Alamos, N.M., and graduated from Harvard.

Contact Stephen at Stephen.Shankland@cnet.com

Add this feed to your online news reader

Underexposed topics

advertisement
advertisement