CS2
Blog › Forums › Photography › CS2
- This topic has 11 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated Nov 8, 2006 at 9:27 pm by
Zach Matthews.
-
AuthorPosts
-
Nov 6, 2006 at 2:56 pm #7136
Eric WellerMemberI’m really debatiing making the purchase for this software.
Nov 6, 2006 at 3:04 pm #60720Zach Matthews
The Itinerant AnglerCS2 is a Professional level piece of software and it’s mostly only useful if you expect to be working with layers a lot, like to mess with histogram curves, or expect to be processing a large number of images.
Nov 6, 2006 at 3:41 pm #60721
Eric WellerMemberThanks Zach, that is why I posted this.
Nov 6, 2006 at 5:46 pm #60722prairiespey06
MemberI use combo of Silkypix for Raw(only shoot Raw) processing and Picture Window Pro for
Nov 7, 2006 at 12:15 am #60723
Ben CochranMemberI have been reading along here for many months, really like the site Zach: Great job!! I wanted to respond to this thread as I am a HUGE fan of CS2. It is a very complex program and requires study as though it is a college course. Almost everything can be done in this program and the calibrations are compicated but there. Like Zach, I use many different programs including Lightroom Beta which I am still not completly sold on. One can basically do everything in CS2 but it requires more study than just the owners manual, there are shelves of books on this software at B&N, Amazon and so on. It really isn’t all the web friendly, as Zach stated, but for print it is fantastic!
I took the liberty of posting a terrible picture to illustrate how even a bad photograph can be saved into an OK print… IMHO: If one is willing to study several books on CS2, you will be amazed at what it does.
Nov 7, 2006 at 12:22 am #60724
Ben CochranMemberThe post edited CS2 file from above: I have got to figure the multiple pic functions here lol.. As Zach stated again. The program isn’t the best for down sizing to the internet and most of the data is lost this way. The original picture is about 9.7mg and it really looks terrible at 180kb.
Nov 7, 2006 at 12:55 am #60725Zach Matthews
The Itinerant AnglerYou’ve done a very nice job with that, Ben.
Nov 7, 2006 at 1:28 am #60726
Ben CochranMemberThanks Zach :)! The frustrting part is that I do all of my work on a lap top and a touch pad mouse…Actually this picture looks terrible in the post as it really degraded in the down sizing. I used more layers than I can remember and as far as tools, I used a lot of them as well. I had to carry in the shadows so I cloned some areas and used the healing brush as well as gradiant maps in certain areas. I also had to use the selection brush to tone the selected colors in selected areas only. multiple mask layers were also used as well as careful crops and paste. If you notice in front of the mill, on the primary water side, I also carried the plants to the front and then had to mask the shadows onto the water so that they would blend naturally. Removing the sign was the easy part but blending the shadows and tones were more deficult. A lot of this was perfomed by the selection tool and adjusting exposure values.
The actuall print is pretty good but this downsized copy really fell apart as it lost vital data.
Nov 7, 2006 at 6:50 am #60727John Pavoncello
MemberZach,
If you are having color management problems, make sure that you have your color preferences for your camera, monitor, Adobe and Lightroom all set to the same balance. I shoot everything in Adobe 1998, have my monitor, Photoshop and Lightroom all set to the same. It makes a world of difference when you’re not converting your colors every time you open a new program.
Also, I have a MacBeth color checker file somewhere on my computer, as soon as I find it, I’ll post it here. It’s a great way to calibrate your monitor, especially if using two different systems and you can make a print and calibrate your monitor to your printer.As for the CS2 on the new intel based macs, I know a ton of people using that platform (I really want a MacBook Pro) and have no problems runing CS2.
Nov 7, 2006 at 1:06 pm #60728Zach Matthews
The Itinerant AnglerThanks John, I am glad to hear that.
Nov 8, 2006 at 9:17 pm #60729
noneMemberDid you consider the 24 inch iMac too Zach?
What made you go for theNov 8, 2006 at 9:27 pm #60730Zach Matthews
The Itinerant AnglerJay –
See my reply in the Classifieds.
I got the 20″ because of the cost/benefit analysis.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.