[nathancombs]

i am a pro i run my own online news paper The Photograph

windos 2000 pro . i wating till i can get new coputers bilt to up grade os and for what ever comes after Vista. that and i do not fell like reinstalling EVERY thing i have. i have little problems with it.

i use PS CS becuse i not seen CS3 in the price i am willing to pay.

my coputers have ADM chips. my "big" computer has 2 chips NOT 2 core but 2 chips. i had both my lab top and desk top computers bilt about 5 years a go and are well and kicking.

i use Ivew. it is an older version but it works well for my .jpg work flow i have lightroom but i need xp for it so for now i use Raw therapee or the in PS converter for RAW

[stewart_photo]

(snip) Are you an entry-level photographer, a hobbyist or a Professional Photographer? What platform are you using, PC or MAC? What software are you using, and why? What Pentax DSLR are you using? (snip)

In my case, photography has been a hobby or occupation on and off at random periods over the last twenty-five years. But since photography is a primary source of income at the moment, I'm currently a professional in some things photo related and rank amateur in others.

I've also had considerable experience with computers over the years, including roughly fifteen years with various Macs overlapping roughly ten years with various PC's. However, no longer satisfied with the Mac platform, I now use a self-assembled XP-based computer exclusively.

Those years with various computers have obviously led to the use of many different image editing applications. Photoshop CS2 is my current choice and all-time favorite, while my wife, a casual amateur using an inexpensive XP-based laptop, prefers Photoshop Elements 6.0. We both use the Pentax K10D.

stewart

[pentkon52]

I try not to post process my images too much, as I feel I´m creating something that didn´t come out of the shot in the first place, so I use Elements 5.0 (hopped up with Camera Raw 4.2) and that´s fine for me.

// Mats

My D200 and K10D images need very little post processing. How ever, i still use a D1 or D1H or D2H for my equine photos, and i find i have to do quite a bit to them. Mostly levels and white point, as they come out dark in PS.

Thats why i'm waiting for the 60-250 to come out and if it lives up to IQ, i'll just use the K10D.(or find the cash for a D3.)

Dave

[UnknownVT]

I've done photography since the late '60's - used to do all my own processing, darkroom and print work including color slides (at one time notoriously difficult for home processing).

I now do a lot of digital photography -
the two top links in my sig are the photos I have posted in 2007 alone -
that's well over 3,000 photos posted -

Picasa Web Albums - UnknownVincent
http://unknownvincent.shutterfly.com/action/

Most photos do not need a great deal of manipulation - that is not to say some couldn't do with a lot - but most do not.

I am one to start simple - to learn what one's needs are, then if necessary move on to the more sophisticated/complex versions - and Adobe have done that in their PS series -
so I would suggest starting with PhotoShop ELEMENTS -
not even the latest version 6.0 - but a (much) cheaper older version (any after 2.0 will be fine)
- eg: PS Elements 4.0 can be found for $17 as non-retail box OEM without the printed manual
(so buy PS Elements 4.0 for Dummies as the manual).

see the reviews at this really good website for photo editors - Designer-info.com: Photo home page
and specifically - Photoshop Elements 4 review

All of my posted photos have been processed - so I do a lot of processing/editing -
on average 10 a day every single day of the year......
what do I use?
Ulead PhotoImpact version 8.0 that I got Free with a UK PC magazine.

I like PhotoImpact because it is very visually based, and is quick to do the things I use often -
which are mostly -
resize
brightness & contrast
sharpen (occassional USM)
cloning
red-eye removal

and almost any software will have those - including the Free ones.

Please also see my recent Post #11 (link) in the thread - photoshop for K100D

[JCSullivan]

what do I use?
Ulead PhotoImpact version 8.0 that I got Free with a UK PC magazine.

I like PhotoImpact because it is very visually based, and is quick to do the things I use often -
which are mostly -

PI has come a long long way since Ver. 8.
I'm always happy to see when others say they use PI - it is a great piece of software which unfortunately false in the same category as Pentax - good but not recognised for its power.

[UnknownVT]

PI has come a long long way since Ver. 8.
I'm always happy to see when others say they use PI - it is a great piece of software which unfortunately false in the same category as Pentax - good but not recognised for its power.

Thanks for the response - nice to see another PhotoImpact supporter.

Far be it for me to contradict a fellow user - but for a Photo editor PhotoImpact has not advanced that much since about version 3 or 4 - and that's a long time ago -
I agree that they have come a long way in terms of web output and associated/ancillary functionality -
but I don't use those.........

Designer-info.com: Photo home page is a fabulous site for Photo and Graphic editor reviews - they have reviews archive of PhotoImpact from v.3 thru 11

" Extensive image management and an excellent redesign of the traditional paint interface make PhotoImpact the ideal solution for general photo-editing.
.....
It is a cumulative result of all these qualities that makes working with PhotoImpact so refreshing. In the past photo-editing has always tended to be a slow, serious and intimidating affair, but with PhotoImpact it really does become interactive, simple and fun. PhotoImpact offers better image management than HiJaak, more effects than Kai's Power Tools, more processing power than Corel PhotoPaint and a refreshingly modern interface all of its own. It's not often that you feel this about software under review, but by targeting just the Office market, Ulead are seriously underselling a breakthrough product. "
Great review BUT this is from Version 3! - PhotoImpact 3 review

" With its intuitive environment and excellent vector, Web and digital photography features, PhotoImpact comes into its own where it really counts - quickly producing images that impress.
............
The same is true for the PhotoImpact package as a whole. If you need to feel in complete technical control of every pixel in your image, you will be better served by a traditional layer-based editor such as Photoshop or the latest Paint Shop Pro. If you're more concerned with producing creative end results, especially if you're interested in either Web graphics or digital photography, then PhotoImpact is the better choice. It's also a lot more fun. " - PhotoImpact 5 review

But by version 8.0 (the version I now use) - PhotoImpact 8 review
" A more professional and more photo-centric approach but there's relatively little, apart from the ability to write to CD, to make this version stand out.
........
PhotoImpact offers the broadest range of bitmap-based power for its price. If you haven't already got a bitmap editor/photo manager/Web imager, and are ready to tackle its idiosyncracies and accept its odd limitations, PhotoImpact 8 provides the best bang per buck around.
If you're an existing user though, version 8 is a bit of a disappointment. As an upgrade it's rather unambitious, dull and worthy - words you just wouldn't expect to use about PhotoImpact. "

Susequence releases -
"Not an exciting release or upgrade but still plenty for new users to get to grips with. " - PhotoImpact XL review

There was nothing in any later versions since about v 5.0 that I had to have (I used 4 and 5) - I now use 8.0 because I got it for free....

[bobartex]

I use to earn my living from photography over 30 years ago but have always kept in touch with the art. This last year has seen me go digital with the Pentax K10d. I have used windows in the past but due to fustration I now use a mac with ps2.

I would like to see a full frame version of the k10d and more lenses (prime or zoom)

Bobartex

[marcdsgn]

one of the advantages of an older version [of Photoshop] would be that it's probalby faster then CS3.

Correct indeed!

[Redwood10D]

I am an amateur photographer. Have been shooting pics since my first Kodak Medalist in the '50's. Digital started in the late 90's with a Nikon 990. Now I use the K10D. (What a GREAT camera!)

I use two Macs, both with OS 10.5.1, one a desktop, the other a PowerBook G4. I use iPhoto for all catalog work, red eye, and cropping, plus email and movie production. I also have (on my desktop G4) PS CS, iPhoto, Elements 6, plus the Pentax software. I also have an Arcsoft panorama stitcher. I shoot everything in Raw.DNG.

Most of my Pentax shoots seem to need little post production work so far. It all seems to work well. Typing this from a camping trip to the SoCal desert, on my laptop using a Verizon USB720 card. Download my pics daily into the laptop and iPhoto. All very handy

[Italian]

Hallo,
I would like to purchase one the discussed versions of Photoshop - but I am not really sure which one would be the right one.
I have read about different versions of Photoshop CS3 - a standard version and an extended version. Can someone explain the differences between the two versions? Is the extended version generally speaking better? Or do you need it only for special purposes?

Adobe starts to confuse me a little bit I would like to buy one of the software bundles (web / design creative suite standard / premium). Some of the creative suites are bundled with Photoshop standard, some with the extended version.
And so on with Dreamweaver - some of the suites are bundled with a standard and some are bundled with a professional version of Dreamweaver; but the differences between those two is not really explained.

Before I tried to make gimp become my friend (the windows version) - but this attempt failed completely It was unstable and I hate the fact, that every single file opens a new window - a funny game is to work with more than 4 files and menues at once opened. I also found a version of gimp, which tries to copy the standard "one window" style of photoshop (and like the most other software products). It is called gimpshop - and yes, it managed to exceed the standard gimp version in two aspects. 1. It is only one window to avoid a complete chaos on your desktop. 2. It was even more unstable than gimp standard

Now I am working with an trial download version of Photoshop Elements 6. This one works quite fine, uncomplicated and stable. For most of the work it is sufficient. You have layers, you can rotate images, change colors ... and a lot more.

For more complex work I would recommend Photshop CS/2/3. I made a course working with CS2. If you know how to handle the software (what will probably take some time), it is quite powerful.

But now return to my question:
What is the difference between the standard and extended version of Photoshop CS3?
Any idea?

[Duck Dodgers]

Before I tried to make gimp become my friend (the windows version) - but this attempt failed completely It was unstable and I hate the fact, that every single file opens a new window - a funny game is to work with more than 4 files and menues at once opened. I also found a version of gimp, which tries to copy the standard "one window" style of photoshop (and like the most other software products). It is called gimpshop - and yes, it managed to exceed the standard gimp version in two aspects. 1. It is only one window to avoid a complete chaos on your desktop. 2. It was even more unstable than gimp standard

Multiple windows (SDI) is one of the things that endears the GIMP to me. I can keep a window with the original pic open, and have others open depending on what I'm doing. If they are in the way, I can hide them behind my focus window, or put it on another desktop, or on another monitor. Much more powerful than Photoshop's MDI. There is a learning cure, yes, but it's no worse than learning any other powerful app.

I don't know what to tell you about your install being unstable; I run GIMP on a number of Windows and Linux boxes at work, and Linux boxes at home. Sounds like you might have other system issues, perhaps.

[Kiss]

I am a very experienced photographer, have used SLR cameras since the early eighties (DSLR since -03). Developed my first Tri-X about -82, and i still use and develop B/W occasionally. But i do not take photos for a living, though i am selling images through an international stock agency. So i guess i could call my self a half pro.

My image editing programs is mainly: Gimp, Cinepaint, UFRaw (based on dcraw just as most raw-converters are) and Image Magick for automated batch editing. My base platform of choise is Slackware. I also like to use my wacom tablet insted of the mouse when doing heavier work.

[FastPhotography]

My personal opinion:
Save your money for something you can use in the field! You can spend hundreds of dollars on a CS3 license, or you can use that money to get better in the field. Unless you're COMPLETELY set and happy with your lenses and equipment, save your money.

I use the GIMP. I don't know if you've ever used it, but it's free. It's about equivalent to Photoshop Elements 5. Except it's free.

That's just my stance. Suit yourself, though!

[Cloudy Wizzard]

But now return to my question:
What is the difference between the standard and extended version of Photoshop CS3?
Any idea?

There was a post here on the forums a few days ago (Post Processing section I think) from one of the people here who stated :

A photographer would NEVER need Photoshop CS3 Extended

This is because Extended is for animation purposes so nothing a Photographer would need. I guess that a web-developer might want/need thisd feature or an animator.

I've been looking at the Adobe store myself and I'm eighter forced to buy CS3 Premium (not standard) because I would like to have Dreamweaver aswell.

now I can choose to buy Dreamweaver CS3 and Photoshop CS3 seperatly (both are around $800 I think so it will be $1600 for both) or the Web Develop CS3 Premium (or whatever it's called) but this has Photoshop CS3 Extended which I don't need but also stuff like Flash which is kinda nice when building a website.

the Bundle is more then $2000 so way over my budget at the moment but it's a lot cheaper then buying the parts of the suite seperatly (but the advantage of that would be that you can upgrade 1 program in the future without needing to upgrade the entire suite).

Anyways, enough about my own doubt.

bottom line, If you don't need to do animation and stuff, but just for Photography Photoshop CS3 is all you need so no need to pay 200-300USD more for the extended version.

[JCSullivan]

I will let others reply to your question.

However, since I notice this is your first post, I thought I would welcome you to Pentax Forums.