• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Photoshop keeps getting fatter and fatter.

Z

Zucarita9000

Golden Member
So I'm testing PS CS2 for a few days, to see if it's worth the upgrade. Adobe has greatly improved Photoshop, the new filters kick ass and smart objects alone are simply the best part.

Overall, it's a great product, but it seems Photoshop keeps getting bigger and slower on very iteration. The install now takes twice the hard drive space and the UI is a bit sluggish, with lagging menues and palletes. It's just not as snappier as CS or v7.

Has anyone noticed that also?
 
well, for me.. the installation did take longer, but the load up time is a lot faster relative to cs.
 
Originally posted by: itachi
well, for me.. the installation did take longer, but the load up time is a lot faster relative to cs.
Click to expand...

Yes, the load up times are equal or even better. It's the UI that lags a bit. So far, the new features are worth the lag. The new RAW processing and lens distortion correction is very very good.
 
I have version 7...not going to waste my money to go up. But I got a chance to try out CS and even on adual 2Ghz Mac it felt sluggish compared to 7
 
Consider it *CONFIRMED* that the UI is painfully sluggish. Yes, I have a Radeon SDR PCI, but that shouldn't matter, because PS CS was plenty fast enough on that hardware. I'm going to try updating my drivers tomorrow, but from reading other Radeon-using folks' experiences on the Adobe support forums, I don't think it's going to help. 🙁
 
Newer applications generally require newer hardware. Isn't this common sense?

EDIT: And in my experience I haven't really seen a speed difference between v8 and v9 on the same PC.
 
2G is a must for CS2. Depending, of course, on the size of the files you are working with. I end up with 48mb tiffs from my 20D. You can easily hit 600+mb editing just one of those files.

God help you if you try the HDR merge feature without enough memory.
 
Originally posted by: Pastore
Newer applications generally require newer hardware. Isn't this common sense?

EDIT: And in my experience I haven't really seen a speed difference between v8 and v9 on the same PC.
Click to expand...
It isn't common sense when the PS CS2 UI won't perform adequately on an ATI Radeon X850. :roll:

However, I'm not sure if ATI has since fixed the problem in their drivers or not; I've been happily using PSCS2 on Windows XP x64 with an Nvidia 6600-based PCI-E video card and have had minimal UI performance issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top