CS4 and LR2?

Bilsen

Hi all,

I tried a search that was unsuccessful so here's a question.

I'm upgrading from PS7 to CS4. I already own LR2 and I actually prefer DPP so I don't use it all that much.

Given the ACR capability of CS4, do I even need LR2 anymore? I pretty much do my own file maintenance and I catalogue as I go.

Thanks in advance for the benefits of your experience.

Richard

JohnGalt_ny wrote:

Hi all,

I tried a search that was unsuccessful so here's a question.

I'm upgrading from PS7 to CS4. I already own LR2 and I actually prefer DPP so I don't use it all that much.

Given the ACR capability of CS4, do I even need LR2 anymore? I pretty much do my own file maintenance and I catalogue as I go.

Thanks in advance for the benefits of your experience.

If you are happy with your catalog solution, then the only thing LR gives you is its print management. LR uses the same RAW conversion engine as ACR.

Bilsen

Richard wrote:

If you are happy with your catalog solution, then the only thing LR gives you is its print management. LR uses the same RAW conversion engine as ACR.

Thank you sir. I thought that might be the case.

One of my reasons for going to CS4 is that I cannot export to pds with DPP (plus I'm going to go with a major computer upgrade when WIN7 goes RTM and probably won't support PS7) so I think CS 4 will give me a pretty complete, one program solution that helps me stay out of jpg until the final flattening.

Richard

JohnGalt_ny wrote:

Thank you sir. I thought that might be the case.

One of my reasons for going to CS4 is that I cannot export to pds with DPP (plus I'm going to go with a major computer upgrade when WIN7 goes RTM and probably won't support PS7) so I think CS 4 will give me a pretty complete, one program solution that helps me stay out of jpg until the final flattening.

Hmmm...you wrote pds, but I'm guessing you meant psd. I don't know what your version of DPP offers, but the one I have does let you convert and save as a 16-bit TIFF. Unlike JPG, this is a lossless conversion, so it should not cause image degradation.

I think you will find CS4 a big improvement over PS7, but FWIW, I would be surprised if you could not run PS7 under Win7. Microsoft may be guilty of many sins, but they have been good about maintaining backwards compatibility. Getting old Adobe software to actually install on a newer OS may be another matter .

Bilsen

Richard wrote:

Hmmm...you wrote pds, but I'm guessing you meant psd. I don't know what your version of DPP offers, but the one I have does let you convert and save as a 16-bit TIFF. Unlike JPG, this is a lossless conversion, so it should not cause image degradation.

You are correct. It's just my transient dyslexia (a medical term for typo) kicking in .

Until I upgrade my computer, 16 bit tiffs are a painfully slow process in PS7 and I end up squashing down to 8 bit to use most of the adjustments in PS7 anyway.

I would be surprised if you could not run PS7 under Win7. Microsoft may be guilty of many sins, but they have been good about maintaining backwards compatibility. Getting old Adobe software to actually install on a newer OS may be another matter .

You're correct but only with several Caveats. Windows 7 will run XP apps in a virtual environment if:

1) The processor supports it (and most Intel or AMD will but it needs to be confirmed inj each machine),
2) The BIOS is enabled for it ( no big deal here)
3) The Windows 7 version is one of their "Premium" versions. Neither Home version will support the Virtual Machine, thus no PS 7 in Windows 7 for me.

Richard

JohnGalt_ny wrote:

You're correct but only with several Caveats. Windows 7 will run XP apps in a virtual environment if:

1) The processor supports it (and most Intel or AMD will but it needs to be confirmed inj each machine),
2) The BIOS is enabled for it ( no big deal here)
3) The Windows 7 version is one of their "Premium" versions. Neither Home version will support the Virtual Machine, thus no PS 7 in Windows 7 for me.

Why would you need the virtual environment at all? If native Win7 can't run XP or older executables, it will make Vista look like a huge success.

pathfinder

I am curious what you prefer about DPP, over Adobe Camera Raw or Lightroom 2's raw processor engine?

The ability to use different profiles in Adobe's RAW engine, or even create a custom camera profile, is really a huge assett, that I use routinely. I rarely use the ACR 4.4 profiles that are the default in Lightroom2, but the Adobe profile that matches the one from DPP, I believe, called "camera standard". I like the shadow tones and the increased contrast in the reds much better, and use it most of the time for landscapes. Not for portraits, there is a separate profile for portraits as well.

The print engine in Lightroom2 is what I use to print with as well. I have not printed from Photoshop for some time.

Like many folks here, if I could only have a single additional piece of software, and already had Photoshop 7, I would strongly prefer Lightroom over CS4. LR2 and ACR 5.5 share the same list of raw files types supported.

MarkR

Richard wrote:

Why would you need the virtual environment at all? If native Win7 can't run XP or older executables, it will make Vista look like a huge success.

. It would be baffling if Adobe couldn't run their most current software in the new Windows OS, and they likely have teams of people testing compatibility as we speak. I believe that the compatibility mode is designed for older or oddball software.

If it runs on Vista it will most likely run on 7 (which is essentially a "fixed" version of Vista.)

Bilsen

Richard wrote:

Why would you need the virtual environment at all? If native Win7 can't run XP or older executables, it will make Vista look like a huge success.

Richard, - I've seen this in various Win7 tech forums but here's one discussion:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/04/windows_xp_mode_release_candidate/

Bilsen

pathfinder wrote:

I am curious what you prefer about DPP, over Adobe Camera Raw or Lightroom 2's raw processor engine?

It may just be a question of learning curve and utilization.

I do my own file management and cataloguing so I don't need it for that and I just find DPP easier for me to use quickly. I concede that I might be proven wrong if I spent a month using LR fulltime, but for me, everytime I fire it up it gives me no decided advantage over plain old DPP.

Richard

John,

I think you are worrying unnecessarily. Virtualization is a concern for large IT operations that have done extensive custom programming. It is simply not necessary for most consumer applications. I would be willing to bet that if you can get it installed, PS7 will run just fine.

Everyone's mileage varies, of course, but if I were you I would get the new hardware and see how you like running LR/DPP and PS7 on it before spending a lot on a CS4 upgrade. If your current machine dates back to the PS7 days, you are in for a treat from the hardware alone.

MarkR

John Galt,

FWIW Here's a link to someone who had problems running PSE7 in Windows 7 RC. Looks like except for a printer issue, he was successful.

Bilsen

Richard to give you some idea, I'm running a single core AMD 1.6GHz with 1.5 MB RAM on XPSP2 with IDE drives. It's older (3 years) but really not a bad machine. However, since I have gotten more involved in photography and work on larger files, it's really not adequate. If I could get dual or quad core with 4MB and keep XP, I would but it's cheaper to buy new than replace the motherboard and processor, and get SATA converters etc, etc. Planned obsolescence did not die with the car industry.

Mark, that article refers to PS Elements 7 which works fine but is also fairly new. PS 7 is the program I use.

Thanks guys.

MarkR

JohnGalt_ny wrote:

Richard to give you some idea, I'm running a single core AMD 1.6GHz with 1.5 MB RAM on XPSP2 with IDE drives. It's older (3 years) but really not a bad machine. However, since I have gotten more involved in photography and work on larger files, it's really not adequate. If I could get dual or quad core with 4MB and keep XP, I would but it's cheaper to buy new than replace the motherboard and processor, and get SATA converters etc, etc. Planned obsolescence did not die with the car industry.

Mark, that article refers to PS Elements 7 which works fine but is also fairly new. PS 7 is the program I use.

Thanks guys.

Oh. Kindly imagine me saying, in best Rosanadana voice: Never Mind.

Richard

JohnGalt_ny wrote:

Richard to give you some idea, I'm running a single core AMD 1.6GHz with 1.5 MB RAM on XPSP2 with IDE drives. It's older (3 years) but really not a bad machine. However, since I have gotten more involved in photography and work on larger files, it's really not adequate. If I could get dual or quad core with 4MB and keep XP, I would but it's cheaper to buy new than replace the motherboard and processor, and get SATA converters etc, etc. Planned obsolescence did not die with the car industry.

Yeah, I hear you. I was perfectly happy with my dual core 2GHz, 3GB XPpro system till I upgraded to a 50D (from a 20D). I don't have any problem with processing time, but the file transfers seem to take forever. I suppose I could upgrade to UDMA flash cards and reader, but then I would hit some other bottleneck. It's always something.

FWIW, I think your current machine is a little wimpy for LightRoom, which is a fairly demanding app. Get yourself a beefy new one and try it again. You may be pleasantly surprised.