I've been learning about luminosity masks which are best used with Photoshop. I'm considering upgrading to photoshop from elements and am wondering what advice those who use PS might have for me and how steep a learning curve it would be. I'm also totally confused re C5 vs CS6 vs creative cloud and what might make sense for a person like me.
@jgpittenger tx for asking this question! i've been using PSE10, but just today downloaded a trial version of photoshop CC because i wanted to try out the warp tool... i will be curious as to what sort of feedback you get... i am also confused between CS6 and CC - altho' i thought i'd read that you can only get it thru creative cloud now...
@jgpittenger I primarily use CS5 and will probably upgrade to CS6 soon when I have more time. I use all 3 components...Camera Raw, Bridge and Photoshop. I did take a photoshop class and learned the basics but I feel like I only scratched the surface so I see another class in my future. For me, the learning curve has been steep. I don't have the patience for online tutorials but I know others swear by them. I don't know about anything about the Creative Cloud.
P.S. Go Cardinal!
I might ask what do you want to do that you can't in Elements? It's a huge and expensive upgrade, as well as a mind-numbing learning curve. You don't just jump in and learn by doing. That can be a very frustrating route to try to take. I speak from first hand experience.
@frankhymus I'm interested in using it for luminosity layering. Thanks for the learning curve alert! I'm just in the considering phase...not ready to put $ down yet at least
I recently upgraded from PSE to PS creative cloud. PS cc is mind blowingly awesome if you are willing to learn the program. It really depends on what you want to do. If you are interested in compositing or really advanced editing that PS cs6 or cc is want you want, but as others have said there is a learning curve. If you are more interested in normal photo editing than Lightroom is the answer. I have spent the last 2 months watching probably over 100 hours of video tutorials on Lynda.com and PHLEARN. Lynda.com has some great tutorials covering about 60% of PS but it does cost per month so I paid for 1 month and watched about 50 hours of tutorials then cancelled my subscription. Then I found PHLEARN which is awesome. There is a ton of 10 to 15 minute tutorials on their website for free and some Pro Tutorials that you have to pay for. You need to have a good working knowledge of PS to follow the Pro tutorials. I would highly recommend PHLEARN.
What you can do in PS is mind-blowing but it is not intuitive, you have to know how to do it to make it work. If you are only interested in Luminosity masks then I wouldn't upgrade, but if you want to have complete control over your images that PS cc or cs6 is the way to go.
Also, to get the most out of PS I would highly recommend a Wacom Tablet. It is not necessary but it make many things easier. If you have any specific questions I would be happy to try to answer them for you.
The one part that has me wondering about moving up from PSE is that elements only does 8bit. I've been told I should be working in 16 bit to make full use of my raw shooting.
Could someone talk about that please?
@tigerdreamer in my opinion it is always best to edit in 16 bit. The difference between 8 bit and 16 bit is 8 bit gives you about 16 million colors and 16 bit give you about 281 trillion colors.
Why is it better to work with a 16-bit image? One word – flexibility. When you’re editing an image in Photoshop, sooner or later, if you continue making edits, you’re going to run into problems. The most common problem is what’s known as "banding", where you’ve lost so much detail in the image that Photoshop can no longer display smooth transitions from one color to the next. Instead, you get an ugly stair-stepping effect between colors and tonal values. In a 16 bit image this takes much longer to happen so you can push your images further.
@tigerdreamer Do you have your images printed up with a professional service? If you do, then 16 bit might, note only might, be worth upgrading to. Your printing service has to support TIFF or DNG to get benefit from more than 8 bit color as they convert to CYMB. Most do not support proprietary raw formats. JPEG of course only is 8 bits wide. If you print them yourself, it is unlikely that your home printer can take advantage of the added depth.
The "banding" and other artifact problems Jake talks about above are if you only use Camera Raw to convert your files and then take them into Photoshop for tone adjustments. You should do all your adjustments in Camera Raw (or Lightroom which is really Camera Raw under the covers). Provided you stick to non destructive edits, banding should not be an issue. If it shows up, it really shouldn't, just kill all the edits and start again from scratch with the raw file.
@frankhymus@tigerdreamer you are correct that if you use camera raw to do all of your adjustments to the image than you will not have much of a problem with banding, but this is because of the fact that camera raw is editing in 16 bit. Raw files from your camera are 16 bit files (they actually really only have 12 bit information but that is a different conversation) So in camera raw while editing a raw file you are working in 16 bit. If you like to do a lot of editing out of lightroom or camera raw then editing in 16 bit is a better choice. If you do all of your editing in camera raw or LR then you don't need PS or PSE so it is kind of a mute point.
As for printing you can convert you image to 8 bit for printing without having the same destruction as you would have if you made all of your edits in 8 bit.
@soren Right. Yes, only ever convert to JPEG at the end of the process. Many cameras also deliver 14 bit raw data, but as you say, another whole conversation.
@frankhymus@soren Ok ... Thanks....
I started out reading the link and Franks statements and thinking, "well I will probably be ok. I don't do anything too extreme"
Then you guys went right over my head and lost me.
But I know a whole lot more than I did when I started almost two years ago now. I couldn't have asked that question even six months ago.
So thanks for the info and I will keep listening and pick up what bits I can each time.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
P.S. Go Cardinal!
What you can do in PS is mind-blowing but it is not intuitive, you have to know how to do it to make it work. If you are only interested in Luminosity masks then I wouldn't upgrade, but if you want to have complete control over your images that PS cc or cs6 is the way to go.
Also, to get the most out of PS I would highly recommend a Wacom Tablet. It is not necessary but it make many things easier. If you have any specific questions I would be happy to try to answer them for you.
@northy PHLEARN. com is a really great resource
Could someone talk about that please?
Or any one else with a thought
Forgot to put the tags in my post
Why is it better to work with a 16-bit image? One word – flexibility. When you’re editing an image in Photoshop, sooner or later, if you continue making edits, you’re going to run into problems. The most common problem is what’s known as "banding", where you’ve lost so much detail in the image that Photoshop can no longer display smooth transitions from one color to the next. Instead, you get an ugly stair-stepping effect between colors and tonal values. In a 16 bit image this takes much longer to happen so you can push your images further.
Here is a great article about 8 bit vs 16 bit
http://www.photoshopessentials.com/essentials/16-bit/
The "banding" and other artifact problems Jake talks about above are if you only use Camera Raw to convert your files and then take them into Photoshop for tone adjustments. You should do all your adjustments in Camera Raw (or Lightroom which is really Camera Raw under the covers). Provided you stick to non destructive edits, banding should not be an issue. If it shows up, it really shouldn't, just kill all the edits and start again from scratch with the raw file.
IMO, of course.
As for printing you can convert you image to 8 bit for printing without having the same destruction as you would have if you made all of your edits in 8 bit.
I started out reading the link and Franks statements and thinking, "well I will probably be ok. I don't do anything too extreme"
Then you guys went right over my head and lost me.
But I know a whole lot more than I did when I started almost two years ago now. I couldn't have asked that question even six months ago.
So thanks for the info and I will keep listening and pick up what bits I can each time.