CS4/ACR 5.2 is a HUGE advance over earlier versions and comes with a series of Camera Profiles for individual models (four different ones for the D3, for example, to emulate the different rendering settings available in the camera itself) in addition to the old ACR 4.3; ACR 4.4 and the new Adobe Standard camera profiles.
The whole tool set has been updated and new ones have been added too.
I have CS3. Not sure which version of ACR I have ... let me see if I can figure it out ... sec ... ahh, I see on the title of the ACR dialog box that I am using version 4.6 and it also says Nikon D70. I presume that means it understands, by itself, that my files were from my D70?
I'll go and see if there is an update for my version of ACR for CS3.
Thats how I got the profile in my CS3 version. I found the betas listed in the Lab and downloaded them. I heard they are no longer Beta but I do not know if they updated the profiles or that only applies to CS4.
The profiles are no longer beta. They come with the DNG Converter 5.2 and an installer, even for CS3. The version number of the DNG Converter is totally independent from the version number of Photoshop.
The profiles are camera model specific, so you will only see those for the camera that generated the raw file you open at any given time.
Hopper, if you do not plan to upgrade to CS4, consider getting a second-hand version of Jeff's book
Real World Camera Raw CS3. Now that the new edition for CS4 is out, many of us are getting rid of the old edition for CS3. If you plan to upgrade, then get the new version.
I would recommend that if anyone is planning to buy "Real World Camera Raw", that they get the CS4 version (whether or not they think that they will be upgrading to CS4 immediately) because that book will give you some idea of the greatly improved capabilities of ACR 5.2 over previous versions.
To my mind, ACR 5.2 and the new version of Bridge are reason enough in themselves to buy the CS4 upgrade.
If you're using a Windows OS, I'd strongly recommend downloading the trial before buying. A number of Win users (myself included) are experiencing serious problems with CS4. Adobe engineers have posted that they are working on a fix for
some of the problems, but they insist that other problems are caused by drivers and third-party software. So, it remains to be seen if/when the problems will get fixed.
My problems appear to be OpenGL-related, as do many of the same problems other users are seeing. I'm willing to accept that something about the machine that I'm seeing the problems on (my main XP work machine) are related to something about my system. I've tried everything that's been suggested in the forum, including updating my video drivers and various other things. Part of the problem, IMO, is that video card makers are geared strongly toward gaming, and don't really care about PS users. Adobe tells me to contact ATI, which I did. ATI tells me it's Adobe's problem. Go figger.
main problem is this: When I open a file in PS and then drag the window to a different location, the content of the window disappears, letting the background show through. Adobe says that they haven't been able to reproduce the problem, but it's been reported by some other users. Makes it kinda hard to get any work done!
On my other machine, which is used mainly for surfing, I recently did a clean install of Vista 64-bit, and CS4 works fine on it. Hence, I'm pretty sure my work machine is fouled up some how, I just don't know where to look for the problem.
Yes, in fact, it is. However, if you've been keeping up with the various threads in PS Win, you will see that the same problems are experienced by both AMD and Intel boxes. Adobe has never said that AMD was not supported.
I should add that, on that machine, if I turn off OpenGL CS4 works well, for the most part.
>if you've been keeping up with the various threads in PS Win
Not at all. I rarely venture there.
>Adobe has never said that AMD was not supported.
As a practical matter, however, the creator of both ACR and Photoshop has publicly admitted on the cross-platform ACR forum that certain inadvertent oversights regarding AMD machines have slipped through Quality Assurance in the past and adversely affected ACR. I was just extrapolating in the way of speculation. :)
OK, thanks for that information. I didn't know that was the case.
I would add, though, that ACR has worked perfectly for me in all of its previous versions, and works fine in CS4 on that machine. It's the main CS4 program that is causing me (and many others) problems.
With that, I would say that this discussion should probably be taking place in a different forum. :)
Now you guys have me curious: what, really, is the advantage to DNG formatting?
I understand that it's a universal format, that *should* carry into the future, BUT, if I convert my files from NEF to PSD, that's saving twice, if I add DNG in there, that's 3 versions of the same file. Is it really needed?
Pros, cons, thoughts?
oh and as far as purchasing CS4, right now, I can't see how I will be able to afford it. I am still in the thinking stages about a new camera. A new camera *and* CS4 will break my little piggy bank! ;)
Speaking just for myself, I have played around with different versions of the DNG Converter, but I have decided not to adopt a DNG workflowpretty much for the reasons you cite.
Proponents of the DNG format point out that you can use the DNG Converter to get your raw files from the camera and to automatically save a set of DNGs as well. They claim that there is a greater likelihood that DNGs will be supported longer than the proprietary raw format for your camera model.
Just to clarify, you DO NOT need to convert your files to DNGs just to use the new Adobe profiles that get installed with the DNG Converter. You only need a shot taken with your camera of a Gretag Macbeth (now X-Rite) Color Checker converted to DNG in order to use the DNG Profile Editor. But the resulting custom profiles you may make with it will be available to all raw files from that camera you open in ACR.
The supposed advantage of dng is that it is a universal format not tied to any proprietary manufacturer's format like Canon's cr2 or Nikon's nef raw format.
It's conceivable that sometime in the future that support for older versions of these proprietary formats might be discontinued, making it difficult to re-process older raw files.
Making psd files from your raws is not the same. The psd files are processed from the raws and are not raw anymore, even though your raws are still there. The advantage of keeping the raws around is that you might want to be able to re-process your raw files again as better raw conversion software becomes available. In the last year alone we've seen big improvements in raw processing technology. We can only guess what might be in store down the road.
As far as CS4 is concerned, I wouldn't worry about it unless there is a specific new feature you just can't live without.
>As far as CS4 is concerned, I wouldn't worry about it unless there is a specific new feature you just can't live without.
For me CS4 in general, and especially Bridge CS4 and ACR 5.2, are STUFFED with features which I cannot live without!
Chalk from Cheese (fine St. André at that!) I haven't fired-up CS3 for work-purposes in the last six months.
The point about .dng is not only are your RAW files no longer tied to a particular manufacturer (and in this climate even Nikon or Canon could conceivably go bust let alone the lesser players) but the .dng files also encapsulate your sidecar data.
I am just beginning to consider archiving in .dng for the first time.
As far as I'm concerned, my raw files are
in no way tied to the camera manufacturer, they're just tied to Adobe Camera Raw. As long as Adobe software is around, I don't need DNGs. And if Adobe is not around, then DNG won't help me either.
Whether the sidecar resides just next to the raw file or encapsulated in the DNG makes absolutely no difference to me.
Actually, I bought a whole lot more C41 recently just in case they stop shipping it!
Re the .DNGs:
DNGs may seem like a good idea and they do seem to compress losslessly to use half the disk space but they are February-molasses to both save and re-open so I guess I will dismiss the DNG idea. For now, anyway.
I download my RAWs directly from the card; edit in ACR and then use DNG Converter to convert copies of the whole folder which I can then burn to a DVD for archiving.
That way, all of the edits in the side-cars get embedded with the original raw file (which is itself unaltered from the way it was shot) and included in the DVD.
(My Sidecars are stored in a separate ACR Cache folder on my HD separately from the RAW files themselves.)
You can then either keep the DNGs on your HD for current access instead of the ACR-edited NEFs (the DNGs take-up less HD space but open a little more slowly in ACR than the originals); or trash the DNG folder and keep your original ACR-edited RAW files.