Adobe Creative Cloud a request to any user

Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
3,902
Location
UK
I am aware that a few forum members have adopted Photoshop CC to see how it goes?

I am sure that all of you are aware of the misunderstandings surrounding psd file compatibility going back to non CC versions of Photoshop. So I would like to request a favour if you have the time and inclination to run a little test.

Would anyone be prepared to make available two layered psd files prepared in Photoshop CC?

I would suggest that one file be layered using the new features in CC applied to standard layers and the second one to be the same but the new features applied as smart objects.

The main purpose being to prove that a standard layered psd without smart objects can be read and interpreted correctly in older versions of PS. The secondary purpose to demonstrate what happens to smart objects with new functionality in older versions.

I would suggest that any adjustments made should not be subtle but rather gross to demonstrate clearly the new features.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
15,253
Location
Marysville, WA
Tony, I am up for doing this. I also have no problems hosting some of the PSD's, as they are going to be VERY large, on my FTP site. I can create a specific FTP user for this if others are game to try.

Do we have any volunteers with older versions of PS, or any other programs that can open layered PSD's? The oldest I have is CS5, in the "pre-cloud" version.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
3,902
Location
UK
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #4
Bill, thank you for stepping up to the plate :biggrin: Kinda hoped you would :wink:

I will certainly give it a whirl but like you I only have CS6 and CS5(I think) although I am sure I could dig out an older version 3 or 4 maybe and load it up?

PSD's can get rather big as you say. What about resizing the whole psd image to say 2 - 2500 pixels on the longest side? This should make no difference to what we should see IMO and save you uploading the larger files and us download time.

I wonder if you should post a Save for Web version here to compare or if it should be left until others have participated to see what difference? What do you think?

I suspect that there will be absolutely no difference from what you see with CC with a normal layered file to what we see on our monitors. No idea what will happen with smart object though other than our older versions will not be able to use them as intended. My assumption is that a layer will be there but it will be ignored and unusable
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
15,253
Location
Marysville, WA
No problem, Tony, I think this will be worthwhile, and hopefully will help to dispell some fears and some FUD. I suspect that those of us who have a perpetual license version will be fine for opening the files, the ones who will have issues are those who start "in the cloud". Looking at Photoshop Elements as an alternative, I see that there is something called "elements+" that looks like it enables a lot of the layer and Smart Object functionality back into Elements. This may be worth a try if we can also find some folks with Elements willing to participate.

Size of files is not an issue for me, no limits on my server for hosting, just a matter of upload/download times. We can go from there as to seeing if there are any viewing issues.

I'll set up the FTP exchange tonight, no time like the present to get started, eh?
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
3,902
Location
UK
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
Not as much interest as expected considering the noises made about losing image data or being stuck with unusable etc. :smile:. The only thing that may worry some is starting in CC and not having a previous version to rely on should they decide to quit

Perhaps not worth pursuing any further but FWIW have played with CS6 saving images as normal layered and smart objects and also loaded up an old CS2 application that does not understand either smart objects or certain filters.

Here is what happened.

Starting image into PS CS6


Filters applied directly to layers (gross changes!). Lens correction Barrel Distortion -48, USM 126% 4.0 Pixel


Same filters as above but applied as Smart Objects


Now into CS2
First standard layers. Note: clicking on each layer reveals the particular filter has been applied and rendered as intended


Now the images saved in CS6 with layers as Smart Objects. First a warning dialogue. Two options here click 'Ok' and the image will be loaded as layers, these appear to be rendered but obviously unable to click and run as Smart Object. Clicking on 'Read Composite Data' will load a flattened background object


Clicked on OK. Note that there is the smart object symbol and the image has rendered correctly for each layer but you cannot action as smart objects not understood in this version


So CS6 shows backwards compatibility other than newer features when used as smart objects in this case with CS2 and there is no reason to suspect that this is not still the case with Photoshop CC
 
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
6,711
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Not as much interest as expected considering the noises made about losing image data or being stuck with unusable etc. :smile:. The only thing that may worry some is starting in CC and not having a previous version to rely on should they decide to quit

Perhaps not worth pursuing any further but FWIW have played with CS6 saving images as normal layered and smart objects and also loaded up an old CS2 application that does not understand either smart objects or certain filters.

Here is what happened.

Starting image into PS CS6
[URL]http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm256/TonyWarrington/CS6_StartImage.jpg[/URL]

Filters applied directly to layers (gross changes!). Lens correction Barrel Distortion -48, USM 126% 4.0 Pixel
[URL]http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm256/TonyWarrington/CS6_Standard-Layers.jpg[/URL]

Same filters as above but applied as Smart Objects
[URL]http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm256/TonyWarrington/CS6_SmartObjects.jpg[/URL]

Now into CS2
First standard layers. Note: clicking on each layer reveals the particular filter has been applied and rendered as intended
[URL]http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm256/TonyWarrington/CS2_StandardLayers.jpg[/URL]

Now the images saved in CS6 with layers as Smart Objects. First a warning dialogue. Two options here click 'Ok' and the image will be loaded as layers, these appear to be rendered but obviously unable to click and run as Smart Object. Clicking on 'Read Composite Data' will load a flattened background object
[URL]http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm256/TonyWarrington/Unknowndata.jpg[/URL]

Clicked on OK. Note that there is the smart object symbol and the image has rendered correctly for each layer but you cannot action as smart objects not understood in this version
[URL]http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm256/TonyWarrington/CS2_SmartObjects.jpg[/URL]

So CS6 shows backwards compatibility other than newer features when used as smart objects in this case with CS2 and there is no reason to suspect that this is not still the case with Photoshop CC
Thanks for doing this, Tony. I did a couple of quick comparisons with CS3 and CS6 with similar findings.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
15,253
Location
Marysville, WA
Tony, thanks for the test. The results are exactly what we expected, not sure we need to go any further, what do you think? By the way, I don't want to sound, er, blunt here, but geez, I think you need to read some books on post-processing. I think you are going just a little bit overboard ..... :wink::wink::tongue:

Great way to test, the modifications were very obvious.

Thanks to Doug as well.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
3,902
Location
UK
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
Tony, thanks for the test. The results are exactly what we expected, not sure we need to go any further, what do you think? By the way, I don't want to sound, er, blunt here, but geez, I think you need to read some books on post-processing. I think you are going just a little bit overboard ..... :wink::wink::tongue:

Great way to test, the modifications were very obvious.

Thanks to Doug as well.
Bill, no problem I thought that as I had opened my mouth I should run an initial test as well. I agree that there does seem little point in going any further with this as the results were at least what many of us expected.

How very dare you suggesting my post processing overboard as I think this will be a future trend setter I now just have to add some blur and completely drop any pretence about colour management and everyone will copy my look :biggrin:
 
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
6,711
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Tony, thanks for the test. The results are exactly what we expected, not sure we need to go any further, what do you think? By the way, I don't want to sound, er, blunt here, but geez, I think you need to read some books on post-processing. I think you are going just a little bit overboard ..... :wink::wink::tongue:

Great way to test, the modifications were very obvious.

Thanks to Doug as well.
I don't know, Bill. Tony's adjustments are kinda' working for me. Garish and over-the-top. That's the ticket. :biggrin:

I all seriousness, it is a great way to make differences glaringly obvious.
 
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
6,711
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Bill, no problem I thought that as I had opened my mouth I should run an initial test as well. I agree that there does seem little point in going any further with this as the results were at least what many of us expected.

How very dare you suggesting my post processing overboard as I think this will be a future trend setter I now just have to add some blur and completely drop any pretence about colour management and everyone will copy my look :biggrin:
The Tony Method. I like it.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
3,902
Location
UK
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #14
Doug I am sure you will be interested in this as I am close to finalising the 'look' which when first released will also include an excess of grain to give some street cred.

Future releases are planned with new features but of course you will have to sign up to my service called CS (Create Stink - had to modify the last word for the more sensitive) as there will not be a perpetual licence. This will be at a bargain price of less than $1 per day in the USA and I will of course jack the price in the UK and Europe. In the event of you ever stopping subscription your camera equipment will become mine and the rights to all your work will also be granted to me. Still a pretty rounded and fair contract dont you think :biggrin:
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
15,253
Location
Marysville, WA
Doug I am sure you will be interested in this as I am close to finalising the 'look' which when first released will also include an excess of grain to give some street cred.

Future releases are planned with new features but of course you will have to sign up to my service called CS (Create Stink - had to modify the last word for the more sensitive) as there will not be a perpetual licence. This will be at a bargain price of less than $1 per day in the USA and I will of course jack the price in the UK and Europe. In the event of you ever stopping subscription your camera equipment will become mine and the rights to all your work will also be granted to me. Still a pretty rounded and fair contract dont you think :biggrin:
If you add to that a bit of over-the-top HDR I think you might have a winner. I'll even give you THAT idea for free. Hmmm, now that I think about it, I wonder how many NIK/Topaz/onOne filters I could layer in together to get a "signature" look of my own. I could maybe call it Washington Mud :wink:
 
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
6,711
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Doug I am sure you will be interested in this as I am close to finalising the 'look' which when first released will also include an excess of grain to give some street cred.

Future releases are planned with new features but of course you will have to sign up to my service called CS (Create Stink - had to modify the last word for the more sensitive) as there will not be a perpetual licence. This will be at a bargain price of less than $1 per day in the USA and I will of course jack the price in the UK and Europe. In the event of you ever stopping subscription your camera equipment will become mine and the rights to all your work will also be granted to me. Still a pretty rounded and fair contract dont you think :biggrin:
Implement it as a EULA. No one ever reads those.

(Edit) to wit: http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1997-01-14/
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom