What is CS3 "extended"? I want to order CS3 but not sure which one?

MichaelKirk

So I have saved my $$ planning to purchase CS3 when it is released. I am currently using PSPXI so no upgrading - I was just going to buy direct an education version. Looking at the academic superstore list I am confused what exactly to order - does not appear to be a straigt CS3 listing.

http://www.academicsuperstore.com/quick_search.html?qks=1&qk_srch=cs3&x=17&y=5

Any help which one I need to order?

Michael

dogwood

MichaelKirk wrote:

So I have saved my $$ planning to purchase CS3 when it is released. I am currently using PSPXI so no upgrading - I was just going to buy direct an education version. Looking at the academic superstore list I am confused what exactly to order - does not appear to be a straigt CS3 listing.

http://www.academicsuperstore.com/quick_search.html?qks=1&qk_srch=cs3&x=17&y=5

Any help which one I need to order?

Michael

The regular version of CS3 should be fine for a majority of photographers, according to a recent email from Tim Grey-- his website is: http://www.timgrey.com

I've been using the beta of CS3 since it was introduced and other than the usual beta issues, it seems to be a wonderful step up from CS2. I can't wait until April 16th! I'm getting really, really tired of having to use both CS3 and CS2-- but CS3 beta has a bug in resizing (and more than a few in bridge, though I still use it).

dogwood

Aaaahhh, just looked at the link you posted. Based on price, the CS3 Extended looks like the 'normal' version. Education versions of PS tend to run around $300 US.

colourbox

A number of Photoshop sites around the web have covered the differences in detail, so I won't repeat here because you can Google those easily, but the short version is that most photographers are not going to need Extended. It has specialist features for engineering, 3D, video professionals, medical technicians, etc. But not much that would enhance photography. Yes, it does have an interesting stack processing feature and more 32-bit painting features, but most photographers don't shoot in a way that would allow full use of those features.

dogwood

colourbox wrote:

A number of Photoshop sites around the web have covered the differences in detail, so I won't repeat here because you can Google those easily, but the short version is that most photographers are not going to need Extended. It has specialist features for engineering, 3D, video professionals, medical technicians, etc. But not much that would enhance photography. Yes, it does have an interesting stack processing feature and more 32-bit painting features, but most photographers don't shoot in a way that would allow full use of those features.

Colourbox:

I agree-- but the link in the OP only shows the extended version sold as a stand alone. Maybe I overlooked it? And for $300 US, it seems like the cost is the same as previous education versions of PS.

colourbox

dogwood wrote:

I agree-- but the link in the OP only shows the extended version sold as a stand alone. Maybe I overlooked it? And for $300 US, it seems like the cost is the same as previous education versions of PS.

Oh yeah, I see there on the page, there is only Photoshop Extended and no Photoshop. Well, if there is no choice given, at least you don't lose a thing by getting Extended. The Extended features only add to Photoshop, they don't replace or remove anything. Seems like a decent deal. I'd be tempted to get the Photoshop and Lightroom combo, at that price!

DoctorIt

I don't know about academic superstore, but Adobe's own store lists the academic price of CS3 extended at $299

https://store1.adobe.com/cfusion/store/index.cfm?store=OLS-EDU#view=ols_cat&loc=en_us&store=OLS-EDU&catType=DIGITALIMAGING&catID=DIGITALIMAGING&catOID=1657161

For some reason, there is no CS3 (un-extended) version on that site above.

I for one am PSYCHED for extended! Direct image processing capability with Matlab!?! It's like my dreams have come true!!!

dogwood

DoctorIt wrote:

I for one am PSYCHED for extended! Direct image processing capability with Matlab!?! It's like my dreams have come true!!!

Okay, dumb question. Is direct image processing a feature any other photographers should be dreaming about? Can you give an example of how you'd use it for photography?

ginger_55

You all use very "big" words.

I have no idea what Matlab is or means.

I never knew how ignorant I actually am compared to most of you until this CS3/Lightroom thing came up.

I bought CS3 (regular) from Adobe. I loved the beta. I do have a small book on how to use it, so I still don't know if I am vocabulary challenged there, too.

I really wanted lightroom. I asked people what they were doing about buying lightroom along with CS3. People here were very nice and they responded. If they said more than the word "yes", I was totally lost.

I hate to admit it, but I have no clue what a dng is. and that is just the very beginning. Then I went to Adobe frequently asked questions. I didn't understand those either, but I did get enough to know that the word "no" we don't have that yet was being used a lot.

So with my complete ignorance............whatever is not available yet, and no understanding of the vocabulary. Scott Kelby's book not out yet, nor are others. Too hard of hearing to understand videos.

I decided that I didn't really need something if I didn't understand practically any word needed to read about it or use it.

I think I will go to the dentist instead, but I do appreciate all who took the time to respond to me.

How did you all get so smart?

ginger

dogwood

ginger_55 wrote:

You all use very "big" words.

I have no idea what Matlab is or means.

I never knew how ignorant I actually am compared to most of you until this CS3/Lightroom thing came up.

I bought CS3 (regular) from Adobe. I loved the beta. I do have a small book on how to use it, so I still don't know if I am vocabulary challenged there, too.

I really wanted lightroom. I asked people what they were doing about buying lightroom along with CS3. People here were very nice and they responded. If they said more than the word "yes", I was totally lost.

I hate to admit it, but I have no clue what a dng is. and that is just the very beginning. Then I went to Adobe frequently asked questions. I didn't understand those either, but I did get enough to know that the word "no" we don't have that yet was being used a lot.

So with my complete ignorance............whatever is not available yet, and no understanding of the vocabulary. Scott Kelby's book not out yet, nor are others. Too hard of hearing to understand videos.

I decided that I didn't really need something if I didn't understand practically any word needed to read about it or use it.

I think I will go to the dentist instead, but I do appreciate all who took the time to respond to me.

How did you all get so smart?

ginger

Ginger:

The CS3 books will probably start coming out next week, so that part is cool. Should be lots of good help available soon!

I wish I didn't know as much as I do about photoshop (and I don't know much)... it's a lot more fun shooting photos than sitting behind the computer processing them!

A dng is yet another file format-- a digital negative-- that Adobe hopes will become a file standard. So far Canon and Nikon have stuck with their proprietary RAW formats though, so right now, in my opinion, you don't need to know about dng.

Matlab though... that one has me stumped too. DoctorIt?

Andy

DoctorIt wrote:

I for one am PSYCHED for extended! Direct image processing capability with Matlab!?! It's like my dreams have come true!!!

Where's that beanie smilie?

Bendr

Maybe this is it?

--> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MATLAB

dogwood

Bendr wrote:

Maybe this is it?

--> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MATLAB

Uh oh... you know it's something complicated when you can't even understand the wikipedia entry on it!

I think the regular ol' CS3 will do just fine for me.

Bendr

Personnally I'm debating whether to get CS3 design standard, or photoshop extended and save 100 dollars...

DoctorIt

dogwood wrote:

Okay, dumb question. Is direct image processing a feature any other photographers should be dreaming about?

no.

Can you give an example of how you'd use it for photography?

see above

(warning, read further only if you want to geek out)

So here's the short short version: Experimental fluid dynamics depends heavily on optical measurements - movies, series of still images. Lets use one of my experiments as an example. I look at unstable flows of complex fluids. These are seeded with tracer particles, I take movies with a super high-speed digital camera (think 50,000 frames/second). I feed them into Matlab in which I have a code that will compute the velocities in the flow field based on the particles. Matlab(tm), btw, is perhaps one of the most powerful data analysis/computation programs, and most widely used, in the sciences. It crunches huge matrices of data (thats all an image is really, an array of numbers) through some pretty intricate math (think, Fourier transforms, Mueller calculus, just to name a few). In the past, i'd have to write code to help me process my images directly in Matlab before performing computations. Kinda like using the gimp, works fine since, again, images are just a bunch of numbers arranged a certain way, but to be able to do it in Photoshop, the same way I edit photos will be fantastic!

oh, and 3D is good too. this essentially means CS3 will be able to handle a stack of images. So in the previous example, looking at velocity fields, imagine I take a bunch of movies at different planes in the flow. I can stack them and essentially have a 3D movie of the velocity in the flow. You can watch it anywhere, but again, its images, so instead of a 2D matrix of numbers, you have a 3D matrix of numbers (actually 4, with time too, but lets not over complicate ). Being able to use the contrast/brightness tool on a 3D image will be awesome!

As of yet, I don't know the specifics, but simply the hint that CS3 extended has taken the needs of experimental scientists who use images and optical measurements all the time into consideration is a very very cool thing.

dogwood

DoctorIt wrote:

(warning, read further only if you want to geek out)

So here's the short short version: Experimental fluid dynamics depends heavily on optical measurements - movies, series of still images. Lets use one of my experiments as an example. I look at unstable flows of complex fluids. These are seeded with tracer particles, I take movies with a super high-speed digital camera (think 50,000 frames/second). I feed them into Matlab in which I have a code that will compute the velocities in the flow field based on the particles. Matlab(tm), btw, is perhaps one of the most powerful data analysis/computation programs, and most widely used, in the sciences. It crunches huge matrices of data (thats all an image is really, an array of numbers) through some pretty intricate math (think, Fourier transforms, Mueller calculus, just to name a few). In the past, i'd have to write code to help me process my images directly in Matlab before performing computations. Kinda like using the gimp, works fine since, again, images are just a bunch of numbers arranged a certain way, but to be able to do it in Photoshop, the same way I edit photos will be fantastic!

oh, and 3D is good too. this essentially means CS3 will be able to handle a stack of images. So in the previous example, looking at velocity fields, imagine I take a bunch of movies at different planes in the flow. I can stack them and essentially have a 3D movie of the velocity in the flow. You can watch it anywhere, but again, its images, so instead of a 2D matrix of numbers, you have a 3D matrix of numbers (actually 4, with time too, but lets not over complicate ). Being able to use the contrast/brightness tool on a 3D image will be awesome!

As of yet, I don't know the specifics, but simply the hint that CS3 extended has taken the needs of experimental scientists who use images and optical measurements all the time into consideration is a very very cool thing.

Well that actually makes more sense than the wikipedia entry to me. Thanks for explaining. Doesn't sound like a feature I'll be needing, but obviously there is some use for it.