If you use any 3rd party plugins that use the CUDA technology, then you will need a NVidia graphics card. NOTE: There are some 3rd party plugins for Adobe Photoshop that use the CUDA technology. There are some things you are going to need to know. This means, you can use pretty much any of the newer video cards from AMD/ATI, Intel and NVidia. All you need to do is setup PhotoShop CS6 to your your video card. Let me repeat that, Photoshop CS6 itself, does not use CUDA, it uses OpenGL and OpenCL for GPU acceleration. Which means, you do NOT need a CUDA enabled video card from NVidia. The best thing about the Mercury Graphics Engine is, it uses both OpenGL and OpenCL. This new Mercury Graphics Engine will provide near-instant results when working with certain key tools, such as Lighting Effects, Liquify, etc. It's just a tool, nothing more.Starting with Adobe Photoshop CS6, there is a new Mercury Graphics Engine (MGE) that will use your video card's GPU to improve Photoshop's performance. I think it is worth reminding oneself that Photoshop will not make you a better photographer, and that most of the really great photographs in photography's history were taken before there was any such thing. Whilst Affinity is not quite a replacement yet, I have bought it to encourage them and hopefully soon it will be. Would I have paid that much for an upgrade to the new features? ROTFLOL. If CS6 is eight years old then to have switched to CC then, would have now cost 8 x $10 x 12 = $960. They could give the development team a year off and it wouldn't affect their income. There is nothing that I need Photoshop for that I cannot do in CS6.This also confirms my initial suspicion that the subscription model would provide no incentive for Adobe to actually make any significant improvements. The key word for the new features is 'convenience' - I am extremely underwhelmed. It confirms my decision to stick with CS6 as the right one. The only way around that is to run antiquated software on antiquated hardware - which doesn't seem very appealing to me. One can use a standalone piece of software for years, but eventually, newer hardware won't be able to run the older software, and the updated software will have to be purchased. In practical terms, all software has a cost in perpetuity. So, does this not make PS and LR more accessible to the hobbyist? I also look at it this way - would most hobbyists shell out $700 for an individual copy of PS plus several hundred for LR? I would venture to say that most wouldn't. use their phones, P&S cameras, etc), but my guess is that the majority of them are not using PS or LR to process their photos, if they process them at all. Obviously, there are not-so-serious hobbyists who spend less on their equipment (e.g. If one considers that most hobbyist photographers spend over $500 for their cameras and lenses (and usually much more), $120 per year for the post processing software, plus storage, is not really that expensive. I prefer to look at it in context of the total cost of photography as a serious hobby. $10 a month is not much to spend for a hobby that one enjoys. To me, it is no different than my monthly Netflix subscription, or the cost of paying for time on a tennis court. And it's not just the single user, it's companies and industries that will need to change, which is a much more difficult thing to do.Īs a hobbyist, I don't mind the subscription model at all. If there is no competition, we will all be paying our dues to Adobe for the foreseeable future. And it's as if Adobe is dominating the industry in Photo-manipulation, video editing, motion graphics and, it makes it possible to work with all these types of media and software together. I don't like renting software, no one does. And the business model Adobe is exploiting makes it possible to develop updates, use AI and integrate into the whole software bundle within Creative Cloud. There have been a considerable amount of updates over the past few years. It was dreadful, and with CS6 it's still the case. If you're starting with Photoshop now, you will never know the time spent on comping and masking out a character's hair to use in a different image. Selection tools in Photoshop have improved over the past few years.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |