Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

Where has all the 'help' gone?

Aug 7, 2012 11:41 PM

Tags: #cs4_help #photoshop_online_help

I just commented on an earlier thread about the sudden disapearance of  online "help" from within Photoshop CS4. Why?

 

Now when I click on Help I get routed to a generic Adobe page where I have to burrow down through newer versions to find CS4, then have to guess how Adobe has described and categorized the subject. And then I often get routed to another site that is happy to solve problems, for a fee.

 

Sure, I can download the PDF, but it's much more cumbersome and less help-ful than the old system.

 

I suppose the intent was to make CS4 less attractive over time and drive more business to newer versions?

BALawson

 
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 12:13 AM   in reply to BALawson

    So the problem is that they've moved or hidden the help files for older versions?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 12:34 PM   in reply to BALawson

    Upgrading will solve all your problems.....

     

    Sing the song of six.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,513 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 12:59 PM   in reply to Mike Ornellas

    Hardly.  It's the same help for everyone.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 1:04 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    A good rule of thumb is to never question authority because they know more then us. It's the way of the future so just go with it.

     

    Right?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,513 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 1:31 PM   in reply to Mike Ornellas

    Nah.  Question everything.  Make them work for their money.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 1:40 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    I have learned to question nothing after questioning everything. They get paid if they pay attention or not. They usually do whatever they wish regardless of what is best for all and not the one.

     

    Learn to live with human stupidity and politics and you shall go far my friend.

     

    Celebrate monocracy and you shall do well in life.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 4:53 PM   in reply to BALawson

    Read the forum instead of ranting and you'll find that the Photoshop team does care.

     

    But Adobe is a large company, and we can't always get other groups to do what they should.

    But we'll continue to try and get better documentation.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,513 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 6:16 PM   in reply to BALawson

    The ironic thing is that Chris is actually on your side on this.  It's plain to see he's not particularly happy with the current state of affairs either.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 7:01 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Chris, there is appreciation for your contributions to the Photoshop community and your efforts to get the other groups to do what they should, but is there not a guy within Adobe with the title of "Customer Advocate" surely this would be in his domain, and with that title I would hope he had the clout to make things happen, after all is he not the "voice of the customer"?

     

    Mike

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 7:18 PM   in reply to MikeKPhoto

    If you whittle everything down to the lowest common denominator, you will never be disappointed.  Lower your expectations and life shall be swell.

     

    Meritocracy is a obtainable goal and should be celebrated at every occasion.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 7:21 PM   in reply to MikeKPhoto

    Yes there is such a person, and we're working on it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 7:29 PM   in reply to MikeKPhoto

    MikeKPhoto wrote:

     

    ...there not a guy within Adobe with the title of "Customer Advocate" surely this would be in his domain, and with that title I would hope he had the clout to make things happen, after all is he not the "voice of the customer"?

     

     

    Yes, there is, and I suspect you know it too, Mike, but neither you nor I will break anybody's confidence by revealing the identity of said advocate.  Unfortunately, it's obvious that within the Adobe bureaucracy no one, absolutely no one has "the clout to make things happen". 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 7:30 PM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Great.

     

    So when will Adobe start working on having color management work between more then one person or is this too difficult to manage.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,513 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 7:42 PM   in reply to Mike Ornellas

    Mike, what the heck are you talking about?  None of your comments are making much sense to me tonight.  That's probably my fault.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 8, 2012 11:22 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel,

    to those of us who have known/interacted with Mike for a decade or longer, his posts are making all the sense in the world, as they will do for anyone who has read the Mike Ornellas Case History on page 417 of Andre Rodney's 2005 book "Color Management for Photographers. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 9, 2012 12:37 AM   in reply to BALawson

    BALawson, you summed up the ultimate answer to your own comment in post#7:

     

    I have to agree with Noel, however, that everything should be questioned but I doubt it will do any good.

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 9, 2012 1:22 AM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Yes they hidden the old version help. We must pay money for the update Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. I lose my CS4 series no in my computer and can not auto update.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 9, 2012 1:35 AM   in reply to BALawson

    BALawson wrote:

     

    …they wouldn't have gutted CS4 help...

     

    You know, until just now I was not aware that they simply deleted the CS4 online Help! 

     

    I had only seen the abomination they came up with CS6 release, but assume CS4 Help remained as it was.  This is a travesty.

     

       I would advise any and all CS4 users to download the CS4-specific Help PDF while it is still available.  

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 9, 2012 1:39 AM   in reply to teribithia

    teribithia wrote:

     

    …I lose my CS4 series no in my computer and can not auto update.

     

    I assume you mean upgrade. as you do not need a s/n to auto update once you're running and activated.

     

     

    If you were using CS4 legitimately, then it had to be activated and, I assume, registered.

     

    You can retrieve that serial number by logging in to your Adobe account.

     

    Alternatively you can call Adobe customer support for help in getting you that number.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 9, 2012 8:36 AM   in reply to station_two

    Good ideas alter the power balance in relationships, that is why good ideas are always initially resisted. Good ideas come with a heavy burden. Which is why so few people have them. So few people and companies can handle it including Adobe.

     

    Color manglement idiotology is over 10 years old and has pretty much made more confusion then solve problems for the masses. Other then that, It's a beautiful day in the Bay Area.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,513 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 9, 2012 8:47 AM   in reply to Mike Ornellas

    Adobe is not at the heart of color-management issues, Mike.  They use what's provided.

     

    Now, if Adobe wants to get into the operating system business (and I wouldn't blame them - the traditional vendors of such things are going elsewhere) then perhaps they could make things better.

     

    And as far as it goes, color-management really isn't for the masses - the data consumers.  It's more for the content creators, and for them it works just fine.

     

    I really don't get all this "give in and be happy" stuff you've been spouting.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 9, 2012 9:40 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Software is sold to the masses.  Therefore, so is color management. It's been very clear to me for a long time that what's provided is not working for said true color control. There are two things that drive industries. What the files are and what the intended use of the files are. If you can't control the files for the masses, then you have very little chance of controling the intended output(S).

     

    I find it ironic that I make an excellent living off the backs of others mistakes, yet I taunt Adobe for years to become a better company, but they are too busy making toys in the woodshop.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 9, 2012 9:56 AM   in reply to Mike Ornellas

    And yes - color management works great.  We agree.  It's the implementation that is broken.  But like all things, it's a work in progress that has reached a dead end development so in reality all the hard work that has been put into the topic only helps the few when the many need a better solution.

     

    Realistically, we can have the best of both worlds - free form mess as well as an Adobe Administered workflow for the masses. It's really not hard once you understand from a production standpoint.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,513 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 9, 2012 12:25 PM   in reply to Mike Ornellas

    Well, don't look now but (good intentions aside) the industry is moving away from "precise" and toward "close enough" for commercial use (read:  Not working badly enough for the user to sue).

     

    Try to color-manage display on a tablet, for example.

     

    The world doesn't think it needs precise.  Trouble is, "close enough" doesn't cut it in the digital world...  "Close enough" gets you "yes, that's a red flower".  "Close enough" gets you cars with drive by wire AND commercial-quality software.

     

    Microsoft half-implemented color-management in their browser, then stopped. If you don't have an sRGB monitor then it's always wrong. And guess what - almost no one complained.

     

    Funny thing...  I always thought we needed precision, and it was just the training/instruction/documentation that was lacking.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 9, 2012 1:29 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel -

     

    I understand and agree with most of what you are saying. There are many schools of thought about color accuracy, but what is really needed is more of color consistency regardless if it was right or wrong.

     

    The other thing is -  because of human nature and the various levels of understanding, our expectations have gone way down due to the complexity of said subject.  So to say that people really don't care about color accuracy is somewhat untrue. Many people have given up on accuracy BECAUSE of the complexity, not because they don't want it. And this is the whole point all these years beiotching.

     

    Just look at the cluster F Adobe offers now since CS5.  We now have a separate print application to print null or the mis-named feature of printing with no color management for test targets. That is itself is a good sign Adobe has truly lost their way in creating user friendly solutions to problems. Just make a new app.  You have got to be kidding me... 

     

    They do this because their own stew is so spoiled rotten now that we have to create a new fix due to the level of confusion created by their own creation.  Give me a break...

     

    All the great minds believe that you keep building this crap that people will keep on drinking the kool-aid. No, what is happening is people are giving up on the technology and accepting garbage as good enough.

     

    Seems like a waste of energy to keep developing inside this box folks, buy then again if crap is king in your kindom, you learn to eat what you make.

     

    Again, half the problem is color tracking of files.  The other half is what you are sending to an output device. Adobe has neither science working correctly for the masses.

     

    Adobe is lost at this point and so are the majority of its users.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 5:45 AM   in reply to Mike Ornellas

    I nominate this for POST OF THE YEAR AWARD!!!! The last 2 sentances are so conscise and dead on... just WOW and clapping my hands #ff0000 raw!

    Mike Ornellas wrote:

     

    Noel -

     

    I understand and agree with most of what you are saying. There are many schools of thought about color accuracy, but what is really needed is more of color consistency regardless if it was right or wrong.

     

    The other thing is -  because of human nature and the various levels of understanding, our expectations have gone way down due to the complexity of said subject.  So to say that people really don't care about color accuracy is somewhat untrue. Many people have given up on accuracy BECAUSE of the complexity, not because they don't want it. And this is the whole point all these years beiotching.

     

    Just look at the cluster F Adobe offers now since CS5.  We now have a separate print application to print null or the mis-named feature of printing with no color management for test targets. That is itself is a good sign Adobe has truly lost their way in creating user friendly solutions to problems. Just make a new app.  You have got to be kidding me... 

     

    They do this because their own stew is so spoiled rotten now that we have to create a new fix due to the level of confusion created by their own creation.  Give me a break...

     

    All the great minds believe that you keep building this crap that people will keep on drinking the kool-aid. No, what is happening is people are giving up on the technology and accepting garbage as good enough.

     

    Seems like a waste of energy to keep developing inside this box folks, buy then again if crap is king in your kindom, you learn to eat what you make.

     

    Again, half the problem is color tracking of files.  The other half is what you are sending to an output device. Adobe has neither science working correctly for the masses.

     

    Adobe is lost at this point and so are the majority of its users.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 8:34 AM   in reply to DocPixel-BMW

    I'm not proud of my comments. It's sad actually. All I ever anticipated from Adobe was solutions for the masses.  What we have is everyone working independently STILL after millions of dollars invested in a technology that works, but falls flat on its face when people try to work together.

     

    There are solutions to the problems, but Adobe does not believe in offering the public global workflows, just suggestions on how things should be done with loose ended tools.  They do this because of the diversity of image processing, but can't seem to wrap their heads around understanding the industries they serve except for photography - and even then, it's a mess there as well. Most people want direction, not a bizillion options. The two schools of thought CAN be implemented.

     

    Generally color management implementation is a joke and I'm disappointed in the best hope to fix global challenges every industry faces.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,513 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 8:45 AM   in reply to Mike Ornellas

    Trouble is, people are quick to throw criticism, but I don't see even a tiny bit of suggestion how to "fix" it.

     

    A.  There's not a "kingdom".  The reality is that one vendor makes the computer, another makes the video card, a third makes the monitor, a fourth (for the majority of computers) makes the OS, a fifth, sixth, seventh, ad infinitum make the applications...  We're kind of lucky anything actually works.

     

    B.  Most people who really know how color-management works aren't saying that things are badly broken - they have found ways to make it work for them.

     

    As far as color-management for the masses, unless one vendor provides a soup to nuts system it's just not going to get any better, because SOME of the vendors I mentioned just don't give a damn about color-management.  Microsoft clearly wants little to do with it.  Apple seems to think the status quo is good enough.  Maybe a few high-end monitor and application makers care enough to even address it.  And frankly the users don't care much either - as long as apples are red and mountain lions are tan they don't care.  More saturation is better (vibrant! rich!) and much more is much better.

     

    Maybe if one vendor supplied an entire solution - e.g., an Adobe brand content creation workstation, complete with base unit, monitor(s), printer(s), Adobe OS, etc. this could be solved.  Side note:  This may not be a complete fantasy - Microsoft and Apple are both moving away from the kinds of systems content-creators need.

     

    But no, at this moment color-management is not solely an Adobe thing and they really do have to work within the landscape that's there.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 5:42 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    They can implement their own color management system based upon preserving the color perception for RGB working spaces. That in itself would be a huge move forward.  This has little to do with hardware. Output devices shall still be subject to variations like monitors and printers. If we can get more consistant color control at the file stage - that would be half the battle. The current ideology does not work well for repurposing files for many users and various outputs. Device N color fill layers need to be implemented for RGB and CMYK cross conversions. Smart Objects need to become more reliable in color conversions with a new working ideology   CMYK tools need to be implemented in RGB color spaces through proxy previews - ( not the current proof set-up or preview for other color spaces.) A color tweener for cross rendering to other CMYK color spaces.  All these things that solve problems are scalible besed upon a users understanding and comfort level.

     

    Clearly a free for all works for individuals who are willing to learn this stuff. What's not working is when you take this methodology and give it to the masses and tell them to figure it out.

     

    My criticisms are well grounded, tested and proven in real world situations with many years in the field in MANY different kinds of production environments. I see how people work.I see how groups of people work. I see the chaos. I see the levels of understainding and the color frustration.

     

    Adobe has much to gain from a cohesive color workflow and they are pretty much the sole company that could implement such environment. To offer color consistancy across the majority of their suite of applications WILL put them in a position of power and that is what industry control is all about.  How will they do it?  They know where to get a hold of me, but I highly doubt any light bulbs shall glow since it takes an interested group effort to understand that the current engineering ideology ain't working.

     

    Maybe another 10 years of cifering will change things. Or maybe I may not care anymore since my beach house is paid off now in Asia.

     

    Oh well...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 7:17 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel Carboni wrote:

     

    Most people who really know how color-management works aren't saying that things are badly broken - they have found ways to make it work for them...

     

    That's understood, and, merely as an example, I haven't had the slightest problem since I grasped the concept years ago.

     

    However, the masses still have no clue, and many of the characters that post here because they have "color issues" would rather argue than make an effort to learn.  Mikes encounters these types routinely in his business.

     

    It's hardly an issue for those of us who are lucky enough to have control over the whole process, but others have, like Mike, have to deal with files generated by others, and from that point of view, I fully sympathize and agree with Mike.

     

    Yes, he has had plenty of suggestions to offer over the years (witness the publication I cited), and frankly I thing he deserves the thanks and support of all of us who wish Adobe would take a leadership role (as much as I detest the linguistically idiotic terms "proactive" and "proactively") in introducing standards that would provide considerable relief.

     

    Adobe is in a position to effect change.  That would be a productive way of taking advantage of their de facto monopoly.

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,513 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 7:37 PM   in reply to station_two

    Problem is the industry is simply not moving in that direction.  For a while there was some light at the end of the tunnel.  But forward motion has stopped.  Adobe would have less chance of being able to effect industry-wide standards and practices now than 10 years ago.

     

    Not that this is healthy.  It most certainly is not.

     

    I don't know "Mike Ornellas" from Adam (and no, I have no interest in buying Jeff's book).  What do you do, Mike, that you have such exposure to the unwashed masses?

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 9:27 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    I must agree with you about Adobe having a more effective means of change 10 years ago. No one wanted to hear the hard core truth as I pushed many boundaries that made many people uncomfortable and at times irritated. The big barriers I see now is that so many things have been developed since then, that there comes a point in time that it may be too late due to the amount of crap that has been added to an application.

     

    Then there comes the coding challenge to make change. Photoshop has been written in many different versions of architecture as new technologies develop in programming. On top of that - while some things may seem simple from a user interface stand point, may in fact be VERY difficult to change a behavior or structure of how things route. Basically, Adobe has made their own prison in some regards. The biggest bug that kills color accuracy and the processing of files is the oversight of being able to assign a color space to an image PRIOR to viewing it for untagged images  - depending upon your color settings. That is for sure a bad state of affairs. From my understanding, it would be difficult to fix this without some ground up rebuild of the application.

     

    I do see some of the challenges Adobe faces and it just frustrates me that key important things just get overlooked or shoved under the rug without a fix.

     

    Been working in the graphics industry since Photoshop 2.0  - long enough to know better is the short answer to your question. I have been in the commercial print industry, the wine label industry, point of purchase displays, Multimedia, Semi professional product photographer, Web and Video post production processing, IT development at HP trying to fix the unfixable mess with their phone and tablet division and generally studying my back side off learning how screwed up the Planet is when it comes to file processing and color reproduction.

     

    As far as the book goes, it was Andrew Rodney and not Jeffs book. I stopped listening to Jeff, because he is a snob....;o) The information I spoke about is somewhat outdated, but the concepts are still very valid in trying to get users on the same page when it comes to color communication for all parties involved. As of now like I have said - color management is for individual use with very little assurance for consistency once files are passed onto others. Coming from many production environments  - some very unhealthy - has given me a true global perspective on how screwed up things are with no help in sight with the current so called state of the art software development.

     

    So in essence, sadly to say, I was always right about my assumptions in regards to color management - most of which Adobe turns a blind eye to because they too know how screwed up things are and don't know how to fix it or don't care to.  Cool huh?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 9:43 PM   in reply to Mike Ornellas

    And Station_Two.

     

    I wish I had control over my environment. It's far from that. I know what I need to do so I don't choak on my own barf, but other then that, I swim like the rest of us.

     

    I do remember about 8 years ago when I was working on a huge GAP job - files came in from New York that were totally hammered from some other vendor.  I spent 10 minutes writing a custom color space to fix the train wreck and got about 85% of the way to acceptable color and then converted the file to Adobe 1998.  From there it was color tweaks.  So I spent a total of about a half hour to fix one file.  We had some 50 images to fix between a team of 40 retouchers and I showed the management what I could do to images.  Unfortunately, they pretty much sidelined my idea and had the entire shop manually whack the files into shape that took not only hours and hours to fix, but weeks.

     

    Why?  Because that's how business works in the land of retards. Now that company is gone with the majority of the workers getting sucked up into Schawk.

     

    Sometimes you are so far ahead of the curve that you are seen as a reject. 

     

    I kind of like to be different.

     

    ;o)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,513 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 9:45 PM   in reply to Mike Ornellas

    Mike Ornellas wrote:

     


    Sometimes you are so far ahead of the curve that you are seen as a reject. 

     

    Wow, can I ever identify with that statement.

     

    I think I like the way you think, Mike.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 9:47 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    well that's a first on this forum.

     

    geez...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 12, 2012 2:29 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel Carboni wrote:

     

    …I don't know "Mike Ornellas"…

     

    That's what I keep trying to tell you.

     

     

    Noel Carboni wrote:

     

    …(and no, I have no interest in buying Jeff's book)…

     

    A quick search of the thread confirms that this is the first reference to "Jeff" in this thread.

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next

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