Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

Don't see Lighting effects filter in PS CS5

May 9, 2010 5:15 AM

I've installed CS5, and, although the Lighting effects filter seems to be in the plug in folders, it doesn't show up in the menus. I've removed PS and reinstalled, but still no go.

 

I have this: "/Applications/Adobe Photoshop CS5/Plug-ins/Filters/Lighting Effects.plugin" and a Lighting Styles folder in the same path.

 

PS 12.0 x64,

Mac OS 10.6.3

MacBook Pro Intel Core 2 Duo

 

 

Any ideas what to do?

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 9, 2010 7:50 AM   in reply to John_Nolan

    .....and why, I might ask, in software used by Photographers around the world are picture package and contact sheet OPTIONAL.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 9, 2010 11:29 AM   in reply to DKCMO

    The Contact Sheet and Picture Package functionality has moved to Bridge and the AOM (Adobe Output Module). We still provide the plugins as an optional install.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 9, 2010 2:21 PM   in reply to barry young

    This may sound crazy but if those plugins are working for 64-bit Windows, does the Photoshop team plan on making them 64-bit Mac compatible during the CS5 release?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 9, 2010 2:32 PM   in reply to SnakEyez02

    Those apps in Bridge aren't as user friendly.   In filling orders and preparing proofs I need to be able to move fast within Photoshop... and to print at 360 dpi for Epson....  can't do that in Bridge apps.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 9, 2010 2:50 PM   in reply to SnakEyez02

    On Windows, we didn't have to rewrite the plugins to work with a completely new API -- so it was easy to port to 64 bit (only minor changes were needed).

    On Macintosh, you pretty much have to rewrite the UI code to work on 64 bit.  That's more work than we had time for in the case of some plugins (especially a few with ugly UI code).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 9, 2010 4:04 PM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Chris Cox wrote:

     

    On Windows, we didn't have to rewrite the plugins to work with a completely new API -- so it was easy to port to 64 bit (only minor changes were needed).

    On Macintosh, you pretty much have to rewrite the UI code to work on 64 bit.  That's more work than we had time for in the case of some plugins (especially a few with ugly UI code).

     

       Since I can't afford a new machine in order to upgrade to CS5, I don't know whether to sigh in relief and revel in Schadenfreude over this shortcoming, or to gasp in astonishment.

     

     

     

    Plug-ins supported in 32- and 64-bit Windows, and only 32-bit Mac OS:

     

        * Lighting Effects

        * Extract (Use Refine Mask under the Selection menu)

        * Variations

        * Web Contact Sheet II (Web Photo Gallery)

        * Layer Comps to WPG

        * PatternMaker

        * PhotoMergerUI

        * Picture Package

        * Embed / Read Digimarc Watermark

        * Firewire

        * Firewire DLL

     

     

    Ouch!  

     

     

     

    Wo Tai Lao Le

    我太老了

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 9, 2010 5:21 PM   in reply to Tai Lao

    Looks like I'll be running in 32-bit most of the time.  That's a shame.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 9, 2010 10:59 PM   in reply to DKCMO
    Those apps in Bridge aren't as user friendly.   In filling orders and preparing proofs I need to be able to move fast within Photoshop... and to print at 360 dpi for Epson....  can't do that in Bridge apps.

    If you are concerned about efficiency you should definitely look into Scripting.

    Printing is, as far as I can tell, unfortunately not good/easy to Script; but if you should have a hotfolder-setup with your RIP-software Scripts can be fairly useful.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 10, 2010 6:29 AM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Chris,

     

    Thanks for the explanation.  But on a more  basic level you are saying that the features weren't ready for the CS5 launch but will still be developed,  ie: a download later through an update during the CS5 lifecycle.  Just as long as they were not being deprecated, that's all my concern was.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 10, 2010 7:10 AM   in reply to SnakEyez02

    I think I will look into scripting.... although I'm pretty sure my brain is full.....

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 10, 2010 11:11 AM   in reply to SnakEyez02

    We probably won't offer those plugins as downloads - the update represents too much work, and after a short time we run into revenue recognition problems (thanks FASB).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 10, 2010 12:12 PM   in reply to John_Nolan

    The fish always rots from the head first.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 13, 2010 8:42 PM   in reply to John_Nolan

    here's a question for you because i'm also running mac OSX and cs5 had been working just fine - all of my filters, including lighting effects, showing up and then one day it stopped showing up. i've reinstalled three times and it won't come back... so... what do i do now?!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 15, 2010 9:27 AM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Bit late and anyway it might not be any of my business, but could you explain what »revenue recognition problems« means here?

     

    Personally I consider Lighting Effects as no big loss and I don’t especially miss Contact Sheet or Picture Package either (in contrast to PDF Presentation), but obviously there are a few customers out there who do – so how much complaining to whom would they have to do to justify the expense?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 15, 2010 9:39 AM   in reply to c.pfaffenbichler

    Adobe just spent $223,000 on one full page ad in the Wall Street Journal.... so don't talk to me about expense    I still like CS5... just not the incompatibility of the mentioned plug ins with 64-bit....  I also get the feeling they are on the way out.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 15, 2010 12:19 PM   in reply to c.pfaffenbichler

    Bit late and anyway it might not be any of my business, but could you explain what »revenue recognition problems« means here?

    In a nutshell:  We can't add functionality after we ship without charging more for it (at least not without changing half our corporate accounting and scaring investors, or running afoul of accounting standards, auditors, regulators, etc.). 

     

    FASB changed rules several years back to try and halt bad practices by a few software vendors, and ended up hurting everyone else in the process.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 16, 2010 12:15 AM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Yeah, well, that sounds annoying.

    Thanks for the explanation.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 16, 2010 12:47 AM   in reply to c.pfaffenbichler

    Penny wise, pound foolish. When you only look at numbers and models, you wind up screwing the pooch.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 16, 2010 6:15 PM   in reply to John_Nolan

    >In a nutshell:  We can't add functionality after we ship without charging more for it (at least not without changing half our corporate accounting and scaring investors, or running afoul of accounting standards, auditors, regulators, etc.).


    hi chris, I'm not picking on you, I actually think this is kinda cool that this was actually said "out loud", I do appreciate the honesty.


    >FASB changed rules several years back to try and halt bad practices by a few software vendors, and ended up hurting everyone else in the process.


    if a company releases new features that they don't charge for, it hurts everyone else?  yikes!

    This is just a decision that Adobe has made, I have plenty of software from companies that offer new features during updates and don't charge for them. They are just on a different level of the food chain. Let's be honest, Adobe is sitting in a pretty good place with little to no competition. Adobe should be applauded for playing the game well and having a great product. But industry standards are man-made creations, unlike gravity and therefore can be changed.

    regards,
    j
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 16, 2010 10:57 PM   in reply to - JM -

    if a company releases new features that they don't charge for, it hurts everyone else?  yikes!

    Read again: the FASB rule change is what hurts everyone, by forcing bad changes in revenue recognition.

    This is partly an Adobe decision (in that we can't just change accounting rules mid-stream without causing other problems), and mostly a FASB decision.

    We have been trying to get the FASB rules changed for a while, without success.

    I wish things could be changed so we could deliver more for our customers mid-cycle, but we're constantly hamstrung by the new revenue recognition rules.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 16, 2010 11:15 PM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Chris Cox wrote:

     

    …wish things could be changed so we could deliver more for our customers mid-cycle, …

     

    If that ever happened, it would be such a shocking surprise that it would induce a heart attack in me.  

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 17, 2010 12:22 AM   in reply to Tai Lao

    I hope your cardiac situation is not as bad as all that.

     

    And anyway, the Adobe Labs are, it seems, able to fly under the radar 

    occasionally and provide stuff like Configurator, which I consider 

    quite a beneficial feature.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 17, 2010 5:07 AM   in reply to John_Nolan

    adobe labs probably avoids the problem because it falls under R&D and doesn't generate any real $$.

     

    But this whole thing is sounding way more complicated than it is. FASB is not a government organization and revenue recognition is just a fancy way of determining what's left in your wallet at the end of the month. The bottom line is that customers generate the bottom line not investors.

     

    I'm not an accounting whiz by any stretch of the imagination but I would guess that this FASB hocus pocus is about the contract that is established with the customer at the beginning of the product cycle. And I can't imagine that updating the Mac to fully 64bit would contradict this?  Or is the Mac version CS4.9 and the PC version is 5.0? This seems to be more about choice than law.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 17, 2010 10:56 AM   in reply to - JM -

    If you think it's about choice, I welcome you to take it up with the CFO of our company (and all the other affected corporations).

     

    We want to do more, but we can't because of the revenue recognition rules set by FASB.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 18, 2010 6:12 AM   in reply to Chris Cox

    >If you think it's about choice, I welcome you to take it up with the CFO of our company (and all the other affected corporations).

     

    well, I didn't say it was your choice : ) 

     

    >We want to do more, but we can't because of the revenue recognition rules set by FASB.

     

    FASB seems to be bent on establishing a consistent point to book revenue based upon a vendor customer contract?

     

    The example that I like is an airplane ticket, you purchase the ticket, the revenue is booked but the work has not been delivered. So, it seems that work does not necessarily have to be completed when you stick the DVD in the box. Consider all of the following up work, fixing bugs, customer support etc. this is just written into the customer contract, and I would doubt that your contract is the same as Microsoft, or even your new best friend Apple. Adobe writes the contract..... and therefore choice.

     

    The original question in this discussion is circling around some features ( 64bit plugins ) that exist in the PC version but not the Mac and were excluded because it was too much work to complete by the time the product was deemed ready to ship. That was a choice.

     

    Or, just give away new features in a similar fashion as Adobe Labs, or call it beta. That would be a choice.

     

    ( btw how do software companies hire beta testers but don't pay them? even interns can no longer be hired for free )

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 16, 2010 1:25 AM   in reply to John_Nolan

    Hi,

     

    New to Adobe with CS5 and working on a 64 bit Mac. Do not have the checkbox above "Locked" that says "Open in 32 bit". Mine says "Shared Folder." Shared Folder is the only box I have the option of checking. I do not seem to have any way to get to my lighting effects! I have an assignment due tomorrow evening, so can anyone help me figure out what to do? I am new to this Mac and new to Photoshop with CS5. Thanks. P.S. I am using the Student Version of CS5 Design Premium which I called on about ten times and was assured by Adobe ten times that it was exactly the same as the non-student version.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 16, 2010 2:19 AM   in reply to China Carnella

    China Carnella wrote:

     

     

    Hi,

     

    …Do not have the checkbox above "Locked" that says "Open in 32 bit". Mine says "Shared Folder."

     

    China,

     

    It sounds like you are selecting the Photoshop folder in the Finder.  You need to highlight the Photoshop application icon, not the folder that contains it.

     

     

     

    China Carnella wrote:

     

     

    … the Student Version of CS5 Design Premium which I called on about ten times and was assured by Adobe ten times that it was exactly the same as the non-student version.

     

     

     

    It is.  Absolutely identical, except for the price. 

     

     

    ____________

    Wo Tai Lao Le

    我太老了

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 2, 2010 8:42 AM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Maybe I'm late to this 'party', but I've recently upgraded to CS5 and went to use the Lighting Effect and was bewildered it wasn't there...then I came across this thread and thought "WHAT?!  This won't be fixed until the next version release (which is my own conclusion from the posts by Chris)".  Here's the deal, they were available in the LAST release and now they're gone...how can that not be addressed in an 'update' for free?  Or as one post put it, at least release a 'beta' version of the missing plug-ins/filters until then for our sake, the users.

     

    BTW, no offense is targeted at you personally, Chris .

     

    Overall, really liking CS5.  But hey, it'd be a perfect world if I didn't throw a complaint! Again......

     

    Thanks!

    George

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2011 3:04 AM   in reply to John_Nolan

    "Lighting Effects" is a tool I have come to rely on periodically in PS. 

     

    And I am appalled that Adobe is hiding behind this obviously bogus rationale, which conveniently limits their responsibility to deliver a fully functioning product.

     

    Perhaps if the Windows version of CS5 had also shipped without the feature, that might have opened the argument that Lighting Effects was outmoded.  But alas, that is not the case. 

     

    No, Adobe chose to withhold this feature in the Mac version to hit a self-imposed deadline / budget.  And rather than integritously complete the job at some expense to the company and issue it as a delinquent - free - update, they are feigning a rather weak "hands-tied" rationale.

     

    "We can't add functionality after we ship without charging more for it (at least not without changing half our corporate accounting and scaring investors, or running afoul of accounting standards, auditors, regulators, etc.). "

     

    With all due respect Chris - Adobe already charged for it. You charged all these Mac users the same price as the Windows users who have this functionality - so either way you slice it, you unfairly charged the Mac users for functionality that you chose not to deliver.

     

    No challenge Adobe may have faced behind the scenes - either internal accounting effort, or technical rigor - can rationalize this fact away.  Adobe's budget and / or timeframe were not adequate to complete the product, and the company chose profit of X over X minus the work to do the job right. 

     

    So the customers have every reason to expect Adobe to cough up an update - free of additional charges.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 20, 2011 6:51 AM   in reply to John_Nolan

    Its ridiculous to pay what we pay for this software and you just "take out" something that obviously a lot of people use!!  There is NO EXCUSE for it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 20, 2011 7:00 AM   in reply to keltoid

    You can still use Lighting Effects if you run Photoshop in 32bit mode.

     

    Here are instructions on how to run Photoshop in 32bit mode. http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/828/cpsid_82824.html#main__How_to_run_Photosh op_CS5_in_32_bit_and_64_bit_modes

     

    Lighting Effects is an aging plug-in that did not make the transition to 64bit. We plan to replace it with newer, better technology in the future - similar to how we stopped development on the Extract filter in Photoshop CS4 in order to focus on replacing it with the newer, non-destructive Refine Edge technology in Photoshop CS5.

     

    It was one of those tough decisions. Not ideal for everyone in the short term, but I'm hopeful that people will see greater benefit in the long-run.

     

    While I'm commenting, one other workaround I've heard people use is to keep CS4 around and launch it side by side (at least on the mac) so they don't need to tinker with the 32bit mode switch and keep CS5 running.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 20, 2011 7:06 AM   in reply to Jeffrey Tranberry

    Actually, no I can't.  It worked before, but it is still checked to open in 32 bit and L.Effects is grayed out. So... I have no clue why it won't do it now.  You?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 20, 2011 7:07 AM   in reply to Jeffrey Tranberry

    And I tried it in my version of CS4 too and same thing.  No option to open in 32 bit - and no Lighting effects.

    Which surprised me.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 20, 2011 7:13 AM   in reply to John_Nolan

    I also don't have Artistic, Brush Strokes, Texture, Sketch, Video, Lens Correction, Filter Gallery or Vanishing Point... all greyed out.... I guess I should be happy I have gaussian blur because I'm gonna need to use it to do all these things, I guess.  lol.  (not really funny)

     

    Probably because I AM opening in 32 bit. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 20, 2011 7:13 AM   in reply to keltoid

    any chance your image is in CMYK color mode?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Oct 20, 2011 7:17 AM   in reply to - JM -

    Jeff, you totally rock, I'm so embarassed.  I thought to check that and just went to my color and it was in RGB, but the file IS in CMYK.  I was on the right track but didn't check correctly - and you just made me check it again -- thank you so much!  I couldn't imagine why it worked before and not now.  THANK YOU.

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points