Comments on: What’s unique to Photoshop Extended?

By: babar

babar — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 16:46:44 +0000

my dear,
solve my problem,
starting the adope photoshop cs3 options.
adobe photoshop cs3 extended no grace period solve this option

please solve his problume,
Thanks

By: Anonymous Coward

Anonymous Coward — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 08:05:00 +0000

Re: A note about naming.
In Photoshop CS3. Edit > Preferences > Performance > GPU Settings > “No GPU options available on WindowsXP with Photoshop Standard.”

By: Edwin

Edwin — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 08:34:07 +0000

You know we spend $10,000 or so on hardware not to mention the camera gear. $599.00 does not seem all that much. BUUUUT! how about people that dished out $1,800.00 just few months ago on CS3 Design primum. Feeling foolish. Qustion: is there any grace period, for suckers such as I, just wondering. [You can always contact Customer Service to inquire. If it's a period of months, though, I don't think there's much you can do. I empathize with your situation, but I feel I should point out that there's nothing unique about the phenomenon of buying a product, then having an improved version come out later. Apple isn't giving free upgrades to people who bought a MacBook a week ago. --J.]

By: Vince

Vince — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 19:15:01 +0000

So I’m admittedly jumping into this thread late, but anyhoo…
Based on what I’ve read above, it appears that users of the non-Extended CS3 have been shut out of a particularly useful capability (image stack / stack mode), not for any technical reason but based purely on an ill-conceived and short-sighted *marketing* decision. True?
If so, I’d like to think that someone within Adobe would officially own up to the fact that they screwed the pooch on this one and do the right thing. I’d like to think that, but knowing this business, I’m guessing I shouldn’t. (And no, waiting until CS4 to get this as a “new” feature in the standard version isn’t an answer — it’s an epic cop-out, in my opinion, seeing as how the feature already exists in full.)

By: Warren

Warren — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 17:28:02 +0000

I bought the standard version of Photoshop CS3 after checking out the recommendations (by Adobe) for photographers and was pleased with this advice as the lower cost of the standard edition suited me as a student. Then I came across the discussions about the Stack filters for noise (and people) reduction/removal and was amazed (and disappointed) that Adobe could have managed to miss the relevance to still photography.
As others have said, I can’t afford or justify the cost of the Extended version and don’t have the need for any of the other features. Surely since the basic version has the core stack capability it would only be a minor step to include the mean and median filters in a future update or as a plug-in for those of us who have paid some pretty significant cash?
I love the application and it adds a whole new dimension to my photography, but surely leaving this key feature out of the standard edition is doing little more than disenfranchising the existing loyal user base (as it seems to be doing from reading a number of posts on photography forums) and confusing prospective buyers?

By: Simon King

Simon King — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 02:17:13 +0000

The one thing I was really looking forward to in CS3 was better HDR or combining images/exposures.
I sure felt dissappointed that not much surfaced in that sphere (still needed a separate tone mapping app) so to find that one very useful tool for photographers exists in the extended version but has been left out definitely leaves me feeling shortchanged

By: Jonas Eriksson

Jonas Eriksson — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:57:59 +0000

Adding my voice to the disappointed Adobe customers who have spent thousands of dollars (or Euros/GBP) over the years, now upgraded to PS3 (non-extended) after a hot-sales-driven demo in London by Adobe, and then when it comes to the useful feature of image stack – median – bow! Nope. Out of luck. And I can’t even pay the difference to Extended. Come on now, don’t be so lazy/ignorant, give this ONE feature to PAYING customers for a small surcharge. I don’t care about Video in PS3, I simply want the noise reduction/median feature and I am willign to pay for it. But not a ridiculous sum of almost 400 GBP )that’s 800 USD!) for that feature alone. It’s either that, or other software (any ideas?), or an “unlimited demo” from somewhere… but I’d really like to remain loyal – but it is a two-sided operation dear Adobe team.

By: Martha

Martha — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:38:57 +0000

Interesting article, thanks for all but where I can find more information about textures in photoshop?

By: Dan Honemann

Dan Honemann — Thu, 10 May 2007 05:26:43 +0000

I’m also really disappointed that the image stack feature isn’t included in CS3 non-extended. When I upgraded from CS2 via the website, nothing made me aware of the existence of Extended or this feature… otherwise, I’d likely have opted for the upgrade to Extended.
While I realize it adds some complexity, given the confusion around this issue I think it would be helpful if Adobe offered one of the following solutions:
1. A utility download to add the image-stacking feature to CS3 would be most appreciated, even if at an additional cost.
2. Allow non-extended users to upgrade to Extended for the difference in price. Why not? It can only mean more revenue for Adobe, and happier customers.
Thanks for listening!
Dan

By: bill

bill — Mon, 07 May 2007 11:24:40 +0000

John, have you heard anything from the Suites group about best upgrade options? Thanks, bill

By: Lambert

Lambert — Sat, 05 May 2007 07:47:29 +0000

Recently I bought the Adobe creative Suite 3 Design Premium with the PS CS3 extended version included. At least, I thought so.
I’m looking for the Analysis menu but my version does not have one, although the product info on the Adobe website states that in the package the extended version is included !
A mail to Adobe gave up till today no abswer.
Can anyone give me an answer this one ? How can I recognise which version(CS3 of CS3 ext) I have ?
Many thanks !
[Weird; you should see "Photoshop Extended" on the app splash screen. --J.]

By: bill

bill — Fri, 06 Apr 2007 07:34:08 +0000

PS Extended, and the whole CS3 suite has me really wanting to upgrade my stuff, but... I'm just a guy who has purchased a slew of Adobe and Macromedia products, some new, some old, over the years. I have an old pre-Flash Macromedia bundle, an old Adobe bundle (like, 1995 era), many Photoshops up to CS2, PS Album, Lightroom, several Illustrators up to 10, Premier 6, several Pagemakers up to 6.5, and want to upgrade the whole shebang (graphics, photo, illustration, video, page layout), and add Flash into the mix. Since I don't fall into the typical customer profile, the decent bundle upgrades don't match what I have. The cheapest upgrade route looks like $1200 for Photoshop to Production Premium, plus $200 for PageMaker to InDesign. Isn't there a cheaper route for someone who does this mostly as a hobby (i.e. not a design professional), and who's shelled out thousands of bucks over the years, to get things current? CS3 looks so cool and this post has completely sold me. [I confess that I don't have a handle on all the upgrade options. Let me run this by someone in the Suites group and see whether they have any advice. --J.]

By: Bud Turner

Bud Turner — Thu, 05 Apr 2007 18:37:49 +0000

John,
We talked at PS World in Las Vegas last Sept. regarding image stacking of multiple exposures taken through different IR filters of the same subject.
Does the Image Stacking feature of CS3 Extended allow you to align the various layers based on their pixel similarities, but maintain them as individual layers in an “image cube” so the researcher can turn each layer on/off to see what changes in each layer at the wavelength of the filter it was shot through?
Each “image cube” has eight or more layers stacked on top of each other, but manually aligning them is difficult because each wavelength focuses differently and the exposed images are not exactly the same size. To align each pixel on top of the one above & below is necessary so you can see the differences by turning the layers off and on.
This is a critical requirement to be able to identify subtle changes in the image by their absorbance/reflectivity characteristics at different wavelengths. This is similar to what astronomers use to detect subtle changes in star field patterns.
I have already ordered CS3 Extended as part of Design Premium and will upgrade to the Master Collection when it becomes available.
Thanks,
Bud

By: Jeff Wilton

Jeff Wilton — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 06:43:56 +0000

Another voice in the crowd. Thanks to Martin Evening for the technique and now Adobe has to deal with the fallout.
I create panoramas and even though the blending algorithms available today attempt to compare pixels, it would be better to eliminate the problem on the front end, especially for problematic night panoramas.
The image stack feature is, realistically, the only reason I would upgrade to the Extended version.
Perhaps a download to allow those to add the feature after the fact. I’d even pay small change for the opportunity (like the earliest version of Camera RAW).
Regards.
jw

By: James Conner

James Conner — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 12:56:43 +0000

Add my voice to the chorus of those who are exasperated with the omission of the image stack from the standard version of Photoshop CS3 — and with the argument that the function was something that scientists and technical type would employ but that pictorial photographs would not. Photoshop’s great strength is color management. It’s great weakness is the relative dearth of tools such as the image stack and functions for removing periodic patterns. Obtaining that functionality requires either purchasing horrendously expensive third party plug-ins, or trying to work with clunky open source applications such as NIH image.
Adobe is making a mistake if it asks its customer base, which I’m betting is still mostly the creative and pre-press & pre-web community, if image stacks and other allegedly sciencific community functions would be useful. If you ask them, “if we provide it, will you use it?” they’ll probably reply “no, we don’t do that kind of work.” But if instead of asking the question, you give them the functions, you might be surprised by how rapidly they learn how useful something like image stacking is.
From an image processing standpoint, the scientific-creative divide is a false dichotomy. It’s purely a device employed by Harvard MBA types to generate new streams of revenue. Even selling an upgrade to PS CS3 Extended amounts to selling a new application. I work with image stacks and HDR images, so I’ll be upgrading to the extended version, but because it’s a budget bruiser that precludes my upgrading InDesign, it works out to a zero-sum game for Adobe.