Skip navigation

Photoshop CS6—many problems.  Slow.

Jun 20, 2012 1:20 PM

Tags: #slow #bugs #photoshop_cs6
  Latest reply: Trevor Dennis, Feb 9, 2014 2:37 AM
Replies 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 10, 2012 11:43 AM   in reply to zebra

    Sorry, I think I just didn't make myself clear before.

    Indeed, PS6 just eats all available memory, up to nearly 0. I tried to change performance settings, disable all unnecessary plugins, do different UI tweaks -- it just didn't help. You start working with, say, 4Gb of RAM available, and in 15 minutes end up with just 100 Mb. Purging cached content and cleaning memory (I use Free Memory for mac) obviously doesn't help either.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,514 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 10, 2012 12:23 PM   in reply to AlexAVG

    Alex, perhaps if you would screen grab your Photoshop - Preferences - Performance dialog and post it here, we couild talk about specifics.

     

    As has been stated, Photoshop NORMALLY allocates memory and holds on to it - up to the amount you allow in the Performance preferences.  This is to make further operations in Photoshop more efficient.

     

    Clearly you need to leave some room for your OS and other applications you want to be able to run.

     

    I suggest that if you're using up the RAM space you have and finding your performance to be degraded, that perhaps you're trying to do things that require more RAM overall than you have in your system, which necessitates swapping to disk and causes slowdowns (unless you have lightning-fast disks, e.g., SSD).

     

    That's not to say you might not have a specific slowdown problem, and it may have little to do with Photoshop's RAM usage.

     

    RAM is cheap right now.  As in 16 GB for about a hundred bucks cheap for many kinds of systems. Regardless of whatever Photoshop problems you may be having, it may be a good time to upgrade your hardware.

     

    -Noel

     

     

    P.S., I know precious little about OSX, and I certainly don't know anything about "Free Memory for mac", but I do know something about computer operating systems in general...  I'd say that a tool that claims to "clean" your memory sounds bogus, and can't lead to anything but instability.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 10, 2012 12:35 PM   in reply to zebra

    //I want stability and speed over bells and whistles - I do like CS6 - don't get me wrong... don't need 3D or video editing... isn't that what Premier is for?//

     

    Yes, exactly!!

     

     

    // remember when I would only use version 7 for years because every upgrade was buggy.//

    Exactly.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 10, 2012 12:37 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Thanks for the advice, Noel.

    I woudn't post anything here if I didn't try this and that, then googled the problem, read some forums you know, etc etc.

    Currently (today) I have about 50% memory allocated for Photoshop. The behaviour is pretty much the same: consume all available memory, slow down, crash. The thing is, as mentioned above -- I have exactly the same settings for PS 5.1 and PS 6, but the difference in performance is huge, on the same machine. So there are certain changes in PS6 release that cause it. I understand that this can be related to absolutely anything - it's a huge piece of code after all. So here I am, reporting Worth a try, right?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,514 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 10, 2012 12:39 PM   in reply to AlexAVG

    I think stressing that it's much worse in Photoshop CS6 vs. Photoshop CS5.1 is most important. 

     

    Photoshop CS6 gives almost the same performance on systems that don't have the problem you're seeing.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 10, 2012 12:46 PM   in reply to JOEYOCONNOR19

    The biggest change we made to the application (wrt Performance) for CS6 is that the default tile size on many systems has changed from 128K to 1024K.  To compare Apples to Apples, change the tile size Photoshop Preferences > Performance in CS6 back to 128K (just like CS5 or 5.5) and see if things are the same.

     

    I'm currently putting together a list of things that people are saying run slower in CS6 so if you have a performance problem that doesn't involve moving elements around the document windows with tons of layers, then please let me know.

     

    Thanks,

    Adam

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 10, 2012 12:48 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Well, I'm reporting whatever I've experienced. I've been on CS5.1 for the last couple of years or so. It's just that this knowledge doesn't really help me and other customers in this thread.

    Some people just want to spend their money and purchase the upgrade, but have to wait until maybe there's some clarification about those problems.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 10, 2012 1:20 PM   in reply to AlexAVG

    There won't be any clarification until you tell us what is going on on your system.

    Other users are not seeing such a problem.

    You appear to be seeing a problem, but you haven't given us enough details to even narrow down what you're seeing.

     

    If you want the problem solved, you need to work with Adam to narrow down what you're seeing, and what might be causing it on your system.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 4:11 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    @Noel - It's rather interesting that you have stated a few times that it appears that the majority of the problems being experienced are by Mac users.

     

    I'm curious as to what Macs, OS version, specs, and PS Settings are being used on the Macs that Adobe uses to demonstrate the new features in CS6.

     

    I see nothing other than Macs being used, both on AdobeTV and recently the entire series in London Creative Week. Apparently all of those "Macs" are running PS6 and CS6 perfectly.

     

    Regardless of user preference and statistics that point to Adobe being equally represented on Windows and Mac systems, I think it goes without saying, that the systems being used in top production environments, ad agencies and publishing, are still overwhelmingly Mac OSX.

     

    I don't want to get into a platform war here, but even Adobe... regardless of their disputes with Apple and SJ in particular... still deem it fit to use Macs in their demos, tutorials, promotion materials, etc. It does then "appear" and would be simple "graphic designer logic", that CS6 should likely work very smoothly on that platform.

     

    So, maybe a simple released "spec sheet" from those systems being used on AdobeTV, and any other (if any) add-ons, utilities, software, etc. on those systems might help people for the time being, to build an exact replica for their usage.

     

    I would also like to point out though, that "some" people posting here are being overly-optimistic in their expectations of a so-called "Dot-Zero" software release. And those stating that they are experienced from many years of using PS... haven't learned much IMHO

     

    It's common and "experienced" knowledge, that you NEVER EVER upgrade a system, whether OS or software packages, on a "Dot-Zero" release. You're simply volunteering to be a "Charlie" Tester. Anyway that's what I call them, as in Charlie Brown being continually flummoxed by Snoopy. Yes, someone has to be the Charlie, but certainly NOT some of you folks posting here from a production environment(!!!!)

     

    As for the simple "I'm just a simple graphic designer" and I have no idea what a 3rd Party Utility is, where my plug-ins or fonts are,  etc." people,... that's just plain laziness. Google is your friend in these cases, and might I add, your computer and it's software is a very complicated tool. Was... still is... and will be for some time to come. You might take some time to learn about your "career tool box" a bit more, just as any other professional must in order to have a job, as say a carpenter or a mechanic does.

     

    Saying software of this complexity should "just work out of the box" is just being thoroughly naive.

     

    As for Adobe fixing this, Noel... you said it in a little whisper on page 2, and I think this is the absolute truth and biggest problem of all: management is the problem at Adobe. The engineers WANT to put the brakes on, or tweak a release a little longer, but management wont allow them to, and pushes it out "as is" and worries about the problems later. Why? Because they can, due to their monopolizing the creative software market. Quite simple and logical deduction, wouldn't ya think?

     

    So now that I p***ed everyone off...

     

    Ciau, and have great CS6 day!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,514 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 11, 2012 6:42 AM   in reply to DocPixel-BMW

    A very level-headed view, Doc.  Couldn't have said it better all in one place myself.

     

    It had crossed my mind, yes, that you'd think Adobe would have worked equally hard to make the product work well on Macintoshes.  I think it must be fundamental differences between the platforms that kept them from succeeding in bringing out the product in equal quality for both.

     

    Some interesting thoughts...

     

    Back 30 years, you pretty much expected a brand new car to have a dozen or two problems, many obvious, for which you'd have to take it back to the dealership to be fixed.  Today, getting a brand new car with even one obvious problem is no longer expected, though it still occasionally happens.  Back a few years, you expected a car to start to rust in 5 years.   Now seeing any rust at all is unheard of, possibly even for the life of the car.  My point is this:  Quality expectations for cars has gone up.

     

    Newly release .0 software has always been more prone to bugs, but some years ago it was assumed by everyone that they were unacceptable, and the product should work - have value - out of the box.  Now, with the internet and automatic updates, software is being released 6 months too soon, with manuals not even ready, and we're being gently coaxed to expect less and less.

     

    Let's not fall for it.  Let's all expect 100% functional, valuable software on the first release.  Do public betas for folks who like to tinker and who are early adopters, and wait to bring the product out until all the reported problems are fixed!

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 12, 2012 3:16 PM   in reply to Chris Cox

    OK, you are WRONG (Noel, and everyone else that's seems to shrug off Alex, then giving some "professional" it's YOUR machine BS comment) that these problems aren't happening anywhere else or on other's machines. They ARE. I have been using PS since the VERY FIRST BETA in the '80s while working w/AP and USAToday/Gannet. Apple didn't yet have "tech support" - we just called each other and asked "has this happened to you? How'd you fix it?"

     

    NOW, look at my post count. Yea... so you think everyone runs and reports to Adobe when a glitch comes up? NO. I've got too much work to do and will let the ones who like to do so, get the bugs out. I worked on stable PS builds until it was proven, then movde up to current. With the company now moved to upgrade w/cloud, now that's become a problem. Since it upgraded us, we now have SLOW RUNNING, MEMORY HOGGING, FREEZING, MULTIPLE FONT LISTING... etc...etc...PIECES OF CRAP CALLED CS6 on ALL machines - 6 laptops, 4 workstations (all macs), 5 i7 imacs... they ALL have PS6 problems, and the main one is speed (or lack there-of) on them all. The speed problems in 5.x were fixed by selecting 32bit mode... something you can't do w/CS6 on mac.

     

    I've made the decision as SR.VP/Creative Dir. for the agency for immediate cease of PS6 usage, and if it's not fixed by cloud contract for the year, it will be dropped off our graphics machines. Video department hasn't had issue w/premiere or AE, but do w/PS6. Web says they are not even using DW6 and are using 5 because of issues.

    YES. We expect $1000's of software to run, WITHOUT BUGS OF THIS EXTENT. right out of the box.

     

    I'm setting here waiting for someone to tell Alex something stupid, like "shock the PRam..."

     

    John

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 12, 2012 3:26 PM   in reply to Adam Jerugim

    Thanks, Adam.

    That's actually was the first thing I did when I noticed that PS6 runs slow and consumes memory - changed my performance settings to those I use on PS5. Yet - select a group of 5-10 layers, nudge'em, and voila. More layers you have, worse you do.

     

    Well, CRCJJ, on our side it would not be correct to think that the company of this size and reputation would release a product without a proper performance QA cycle completed.

    However,

    https://www.google.com/search?q=ps6+runs+slowly&sugexp=chrome,mod=10&s ourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=photoshop+cs6+runs+slow ly&oq=photoshop+cs6+runs+slowly&gs_l=serp.3..0i22l2.3585.5553.0.6072.1 4.13.1.0.0.1.107.876.12j1.13.0.les;..0.0...1c.uX6zQvFAaOk&pbx=1&pws=0& bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&fp=cef37e26a3978a7f&biw=1334&bih=726

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 12, 2012 4:14 PM   in reply to AlexAVG

    Please see the previous topics about slowness moving layers.

    There are 2 known problems: layer thumbnails (turn them off for now), and the snap to layer setting (turn it off for now).

     

    This is why it helps to be specific in describing what is slow for your on your system:  you don't have an application wide slowdown, but a very specific and already known slowdown that has workarounds.  And this won't affect everyone, and is only visible on documents with a large number of layers.

     

    With every new release, people complain that the new release runs slowly - and most of the "problems" turn out to be machine configuration or something external to Photoshop (anti-virus, other utilities, sometimes third party plugins, scripts by unscrupulous prepress server providers, etc.).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 13, 2012 6:29 AM   in reply to DocPixel-BMW

    //Saying software of this complexity should "just work out of the box" is just being thoroughly naive.//

     

    Sorry, probably the single most ridiculous thing I  have ever heard.  You're saying that software engineers at Adobe who have made PS all these years, can't or won't release an equally usable product at the ridiculous prices they charge?

     

    I see.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,514 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 13, 2012 7:14 AM   in reply to keltoid

    Software can be released with zero bugs in itself.  On a perfectly functioning digital system, it's actually possible for software to be perfect.

     

    However, in this day and age of the "not locked down" personal computer (whether Mac or PC), not to mention systems built up from various almost interchangeable hardware, it is conceivable that no program can be made robust enough to work equally well on every computer on the planet.  It's a virtual certainty that no two computers, when you consider not only hardware but the software, settings, and data on the disks, function identically.  That's almost scary to a software developer.

     

    We're faced with these facts: 

     

    • The software design may not anticipate all the different things it will encounter out there "in the wild", and so some unlucky folks - or maybe those who have poor hardware or malware or simply have a corrupted system - will find the software does not work.
    • The implementation of the software design may have been done poorly or incompletely.

     

    I believe we're seeing some of both...  The first in that (based on overall traffic here on the forum) Photoshop CS6 seems to exhibit more problems on Mac systems than PCs (implying Adobe expects more of the Mac graphics architecture than it is delivering in the real world).  And the second that there are some definite bugs that have been uncovered (unfortunately by customers) - a few bad ones - that point to flaws in Adobe's implementation of their design.

     

    Both of these point to the development process being rushed (which it necessarily always is), and also that the team is being pushed to develop complexity at or near the limits of their abilities (which they must, to produce state-of-the-art products).

     

    And there is one other thing, which I believe may be more influential than most people realize:  It's version 13.0.  That means there have been 12 major RE-development efforts since the original design.

     

    Any project in a software development organization that proposes to re-write what's already there is almost universally met with negative responses from management.  "Why would you want to do THAT?  It's already working.  People are sending us a lot of money for it, so it must be goodWhy should we spend more money on something that's already done?" 

     

    Problem is, it's often not *quite* good enough to build new things on.

     

    It's clear much of Photoshop at its core hasn't been touched in a LONG time, and further, it's clear that touching old stuff leads to unanticipated problems (the changes to make file saves happen in the background causing the text layer shuffling bug come to mind).

     

    That Adobe has made Photoshop live for literally decades doesn't mean they couldn't do even more to its infrastructure to make it thrive for a long time hence.  It makes a lot of money.  I hope the managers will consider funding the development of it more richly.  Customers are noticing!

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 13, 2012 7:35 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel,

     

    Good points, and well-stated.

     

    I also wonder if the "dual implementation" to include the Creative Cloud, had anything to do with some of the issues that we are seeing with CS6, and not just with Photoshop, but some other programs, as well?

     

    I have no idea how the development teams were structured, whether a whole new Creative Cloud team was hired, or formed by splitting off engineers.

     

    CS6 just seems to have more "issues," than I can recall in a very long time. Premiere Pro CS4 had issues, but I do not recall Photoshop CS4 experiencing the same - different development teams, and different programs with different heritages. Almost every program in CS6 had a dual "front," with the Creative Cloud versions.

     

    Just pondering there, and maybe that new distribution format had zero to do with anything.

     

    Hunt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • JJMack
    5,995 posts
    Jan 9, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 13, 2012 9:35 AM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Chris Cox wrote:

     

    Please see the previous topics about slowness moving layers.

    There are 2 known problems: layer thumbnails (turn them off for now), and the snap to layer setting (turn it off for now).

    Chris seems to be starting a list of what you should to help one circumvent known problems in CS6 lets expand on his list Chris starts with

     

    There are 2 known problems: layer thumbnails (turn them off for now), and the snap to layer setting (turn it off for now).

     

     

    add these till the problems are fixed

     

     

    do not record adding adjustment layer apply to all layers in actions and edit all actions the have been recorded that way if you use newer then CS3

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/photoshop_cs4_c5 _and_cs6_bug

     

     

    Change Photoshop interpolation option from Bicubic Automatic to any other method

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/photoshop_cs6_32 bit_and_64bit_script_bug

     

     

    Do not record selective color adjustment layers in Absolute mode in actions.

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/photoshop_cs6_bu g_while_playing_action_with_selective_colors_adjustment_layer

     

     

    Do not record Save For Web in actions for jpeg images

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/ps_cs6_actions_r ecorded_action_exports_html_instead_of_jpg

     

     

    Do not use the blur tool if you have an ATI video card

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/blur_tool_cause_ cs6_to_terminate

     

     

    Do not use the pen tool it doesn't work correctly

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/pen_tool_in_phot oshop_cs6_keeps_reverting_to_exclude_mode

     

     

    Avoid using the text tool if possible

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/text_corruption_ in_photoshop_cs6_file

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/photoshop_cs6_bu gs

     

     

    Do not import PDF files with images

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/photoshop_cs6_pd f_import_adds_artifacts_to_images

     

     

    Do not attempt to record shape attributes in Actions.

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/_copy_shape_attr ibutes_doesnt_get_recorded_when_recording_an_action

     

     

    Do not use CS6 from Acrobat

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/offset_raster_ob jects_in_acrobat_after_editing_in_photoshop

     

     

    Do not use CS6 on uncompressed PNG files created with libpng

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/photoshop_cs6_st ill_cannot_load_uncompressed_PNG_files_created_with_libpng

     

     

    Do not un-check the Photoshop preference "Open Document in Tabs" on PC if you want Actions and Scripts to work.

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/actions_do_not_w ork_properly_while_open_documents_as_tabs_are_not_selected

     

     

    Do not try to change a set current layer name step to be interactive

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/actions_ignoring _modal_control_for_layer_renaming_photoshop_cs6

     

     

    Do not install the Scriplistener plug-in if want to use " Allow Tool Recording"

    http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/cs6_conflict_pro blem

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,514 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 13, 2012 10:21 AM   in reply to Bill Hunt

    Bill Hunt wrote:

     


    CS6 just seems to have more "issues," than I can recall in a very long time.

     

    Interesting that you would say that, because I sense a disparity.

     

    My own personal experience with Photoshop CS6 is that - for what I do, which is primarily photo editing, some web design, and experimentation in support of my participation on the forum - I've found Photoshop CS6 the most functional and stable version yet.  I dabbled with 3D Saturday all day - with zero glitches.  It just worked.  Whatever I try, it seems to work.  Unlike Photoshop CS5, which crashed more often for me than Photoshop CS6 does.

     

    This does not square well with the many reports of problems we read here, from other professionals who know what they're doing.

     

    In my opinion, based solely and directly on my own use, this is the best .0.0  release of Photoshop yet, no kidding - and you know I know what I'm doing with computers and Photoshop.  Yes, I realize that I may be lucky in that I use the portions of Photoshop that don't happen to be buggy, and that my PC workstation is particularly well-suited to run Photoshop CS6. 

     

    But it's difficult to read that many other good folks are finding it to be outright bad for them.  I trust what they're saying.

     

    It seems that the computing world has grown so much lately in diversity and complexity that it's just that much more difficult to make software that works right everywhere.  More people are having more trouble than ever keeping their computers working properly and stably.

     

    And beyond all that - with more computer power comes the need for even higher quality software...  I enjoy thinking about this:  Back in the earliest days of Windows, if it would run for 8 hours before crashing on a PC XT - the most powerful computer available - that would equate to just a few moments on a modern computer.  Think about that.  The same thing applies to GPU-accelerated operations today, right?  Ten years ago, moving stuff around in a hundred megapixel image was almost inconceivable.  Now we expect to be able to Liquify such an image in real time, using a 15,000 pixel brush.

     

    Having released a few OpenGL-accelerated products myself recently, I can say from personal experience that releasing a product to work everywhere in today's computing world is a fair bit more difficult than you'd think - and more difficult than we originally thought when we did our designs.  We ended up having to have configuration options not unlike Adobe's that people (or our startup profiler) could exercise to make things work when they don't work as expected with everything turned on.  We had to spend more time instrumenting the software to self-diagnose than we thought we would.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 13, 2012 10:15 AM   in reply to vikki_w

    I can understand your frustration Vicki, but CS 4 came out ... what...4-5 years ago? 

    Win7 wasn't even out till fall 2009 and most Win customers were using 32-bit XP.

    Now, the majority of new systems are 64-bit and 4-6 cores are standard.   Running

    Win7, I can say with confidence, that a Core-Duo couldn't cut it -- too many Windows processors are often running -- from their malware -- (I only have it do weekly scans, but those take ~12 hours and notably impact system performance due to their constand I/O load (~usually about 40-100MB/s in background).  %wise, they only use 30-40% of 1 core, But I note the indexer runs more when it's scanning, and have noted other resource usage anomolies during those scans), so it's real impact on my system might be at least 1 full core, + the I/O load which isn't negligible considering it's going ~12 hours.   I DON'T have it doing constant (real-time) scanning, as the performance hit was too great (I have a 6 core processor, my local disk max R/W is ~400-600MB/s, and my network disks (where most of my data is) while benched at 125/119MB/s W/R, 80-100MB/s is more typical of Windows's usage.

     

    That said -- Photoshop has 'grown' to use more processors (though it's still

    single threaded for many operations, I have seen it use at least 3-5 cores for a *very few* specific functions...

     

    Soooooo....you didn't say if you were running 32 or 64bit (i don't know -- maybe mac version was always 64?), but if not -- well, I get horrid perf on CS5 when editing one key file -- it's only ~ 300-400G, but if you count each effect as a separate layer -- it probably has about 5000-6000 layers.   There's a HUGE difference in speed if I turn off all effects display -- just in doing vector editing with the pentool -- otherwise, with

    effects on -- moving a dot can take >30 seconds.

     

    It doesn't matter if the effects are "hidden" by other layers -- or constrained by 'masks' -- they still seem to be computed -- only by turning them off does their hit on performance disappear.

     

    You might think wanna put "new HW" on your "major expense want list" -- to be filled

    whenever you get around to items on that list! (might be a while for many people)...(*sigh*).... you might also strongly look into the performance/price ratio of, say, a Dell workstation Vs. Apple -- IF you are fluent in both and can tolerate Win, (else forget I said anything about it).  I'd found buying lowest configs from Dell, and upgrading slowly over time as budget allows and prices decline give me my best value.  Trying to buy a fully configured system on day 1 means a huge outlay -- and over the life of the system, those same parts will likely drop by a large amount.  But a basic config (but high end) workstation that you can expand might meet your needs now, and be expandable to 2-3 times the number of cores over the life of the machine (when I bought my current workstation, Duos were the default and cheapest option...I now have a 6-core processor.

     

    That's not to say that PSCS6 (at least based on my PSCS5 experience) couldn't be using resources much more effectively than it does (using multiple cores on parallel operations -- like updating each layer when you move a mask -- could be done in parallel, but cpu usage shows only 1 processor doing most of the work (others are <3% of each...)....Good luck -- I'm sure Adobe will do some tuning too in the ".0.1" release --- guess they already found a knarly thumbnail problem (what's new in CS6 that causes it to be a big prob in CS6, or is that a prob in CS5 as well?)...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 13, 2012 10:59 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    You are assuming that their machine is upgradable -- not just in terms of max memory, but also in terms of memory slots.  It's unlikely many here have empty memory slots -- so that entails replacing 8 or 6-12 RAM chips.  Though memory is inexpensive 12 x a 4->8GB

    chip would still be a bit, as well as 6x 8->16...

     

    That's presuming their MoBd  handles the extra memory. 

     

    That said, and some indicate this to be the case -- they are running with 32-bit versions

    of the tools, so it's not clear how useful going from 8G->16G would be.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 13, 2012 5:48 PM   in reply to ladri-bici

    UPD

    So, this time I've removed all PS settings that I had, set cache tile size to 128K, turned off layer previews, turned off snapping, set 50% of ram available for the app. 4 hours, so far -- works better, not perfectly fine, but much better. Wondering what else could that be. Anyways, I can just confirm the problem with layer thumbnails. Also, app slows down when I use new feature - text styles. Takes it a while to process any change.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 7:41 AM   in reply to AlexAVG

    So about "slow photoshop CS6 " , and freezing up some times..

     

     

     

    So i updated my workhorse machine to Mountain Lion, so that i had the most modern drivers for my graphics card..

    I also added more RAM memory..


    That worked fine, a few hours, and i thought that i 've solved the problem, ( as adobe people told us that it's probably the graphics card driver ).


    But today, i remarked the same things happening again, freezing while using cloning or healing bursh, slow respons..
    I thought this is strange.

     

    So what i discoverd, is that also yesterday, suddenly my HD was running low on space, strange as i store nothing on it except the apps, so i dit a litle search of the biggest folders on my HD in the terminal,

    And found it was the /private/var/log, folder...  so went to take a look and emptied it..

     

    PS CS6 worked fine again; Today again same problem it started to freeze up again ...
    So went to the /private/var/log/asl folder again, an sure it was filling up with log files again ( heavy ones 15mb 20 mb's a piece even 2bm's and so on) ...  So deleted them, and now it works fine again

     

    I made a litle automator action to empty the ASL folder or /privat/var/log/asl folder every time PSCS6 start to freez,

     

    I'll keep you guys updated if this works out..

     

     

     

     

    S

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 9:06 AM   in reply to Chris Cox

    Hello Chris,

     

    From being a Photoshop power user since CS2, I can say CS6 as got lots of great performance improvement while saving files and working from a network. For the rest, I've stoped using CS6 and switched back to CS5 for speed issues. It's just impossible to work in CS6 in a situation where you have many layers. CS5 is double of speed if not more. I'm on a quad-core machine that as enough RAM to boost my car in a cold morning. I frankly admire you level of effort to find solutions for people, but at some point you'll have to admit that CS6 is slower in general if you're outside of retouching an images with 10 layers or less.

     

    No, it doesn't chance anything (or not enough to make it enjoyable to play around in CS6) to disable thumbnails in layers, nor to disable most of your fonts.

     

    For those who work with Photoshop for website mockups, I'm afraid you'll have to seperate everything in multiple PSD's or simply use CS5 if you're having speed issues.

     

    All the additional features being implemented in each newer version of Photoshop are always well tough and are VERY useful. Still, they should NEVER be implemented in the detriment of performance.

     

    This is a very generalized issue over people who use PS CS6, I just hope Adobe will learn from this and honnor it's reputation by fixing those issues.

     

    Fred

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 9:16 AM   in reply to fredaudet_

    WTF is a Photoshop Poweruser ?

     

    And that Log file problem i had once before with PS CS5.5, but then it got updated and never happend again.

     

    and thus for now Yes PS CS6 is much slower, and no excuses to find, as it's not only on my machine but even on 12core 64GB Mac Pro's that are 1 week old ( yes we tried it out, )


    Don't know why, but for thing that have to be finished fast i still use PS CS5.5

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 9:25 AM   in reply to julienlanoo

    and i can imagine there's a lot of work gone in to performance and so on , but at the moment, it's not yet fully working, it might be soon with an update.

     

    I am not pointing to any one, cause any way we can't use anything else... But it might be said that no one can find on the internet 1 blog with 100s of posts saying: "waaw PS CS6 is fast" , ...  But one can find thousants of Posts saying " damned why is it slow ? " ...


    So ok it can be PS CS6 will be much faster but it isn't at this moment not even on a 5500 euro machine ( not mine), ( or what is the " lab-perfect" machine Adobe uses ? to test , i have no problem i'll buy/build exactly the same one ?..  )

     

    greets

    ju

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 9:27 AM   in reply to julienlanoo

    lol at power user too.

     

    BUT

     

    //I can say CS6 as got lots of great performance improvement while saving files and working from a network. For the rest, I've stoped using CS6 and switched back to CS5 for speed issues.//

     

    ^^ THIS is the crux of the biscuit of this entire thread.  This is what Adobe needs to focus on and figure out WHAT is happening with PS CS6, because This Is The Issue.  Not the graphics card, not the RAM, not the systems. Because generally speaking, these people here can use CS4, CS5 etc. etc. just fine -- but can NOT work in the same manner as CS6.

     

    No more needs to be said. Adobe -- if you are at all interested in your consumers, the people who have spent so much money on your product, who need to use your product every single day,  then FOCUS ON THIS.

     

    FIN

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 9:44 AM   in reply to keltoid

    Very sorry for not using the same language you would in this case guys, I see saying poweruser caused some issue here (what is the point?).

     

    I meant : I've used Photoshop for 10 years as a daily job and probably 5hrs per day. I'm not just using it occasionally from home to retouch the photos I took of my dog (not that I never do it too ).

     

    Well said :

    keltoid wrote:

     

    No more needs to be said. Adobe -- if you are at all interested in your consumers, the people who have spent so much money on your product, who need to use your product every single day,  then FOCUS ON THIS.

    Fred

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 10:37 AM   in reply to fredaudet_

    No prob, fredaudet -- I think its just we all probably use PS CS6 professionally - I don't know that many who would purchase it for home use to (just) retouch Fido.   Not that we all haven't done it! 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 11:17 AM   in reply to keltoid

    keltoid -- understand the questioning of word 'power user', that is  to say:  how would a power user

    differ from a normal user?  Given how much PS costs to buy and how much more to continue to try to get the best product for our work, how 'casual' can a 'casual' user of photoshop be and yet not care about the price (there are likely some, but likely a minority).    

     

    Paying for a premium product one might have some expectations of quality going up with each successive release -- both in terms of new features, but as well as the product takes advantage of new developments in hardware & software, as well as staying abreast of state-of-the-art image research and processing.   That's where Adobe has posititioned themselves by their desires and policies -- to be a premier leader -- but with that mantle also comes customer expectations.    So it is inevitable, that there will be tensions between how much Adobe wants to invest in product development and research (and does, as measured by quality of product output) and what customers want and fee is reasonable, given their proportionally and, relatively, equal  investment in the product.

     

    The volume of feedback is a natural consequence of how well Adobe met customer expectations.

    It will always be there and can only be looked at in terms of 'doing better, or doing worse'...

     

    It sounds like PS6 has made a few (though limited), advances in adding vectorization advances to photoshop (like being able to have layers default to being created as vectors and gradients when possible vs. bitmaps, and/or allowing a gradient layer to remain so, even though you wish to draw on it (add a separate layer on top of the first automatically!.. it's what the user most likely wants instead  of  turning a canvas sized area into a bitmap just for the sake of adding, say a 100² pixel overlay in one area of a 4500² canvas. 

     

    It seems like this is an area that needs more work -- since having a picture with many vector-based layers with vector-based effects is ideally suited to parallel processor rendering -- something that isn't being taken advantage of in PS5 or PS6....   Given the direction of hardware from Dual core to 6-8core machines from PS5->PS6, PS6 needed to be positioned ~ 3 times more parallel to take advantage of HW advances IF, they are going to add anything that results in a speed drop...   I.e. if they had full advantage of the extra cores, algorithms that were 30% slower would still be a net win on current generation machines, but hearing of results on 12 core 96G Macs described as 'disappointing' certainly doesn't show needed attention was given in those areas.   Maybe this might be a key element of feedback (not giving any less attention to regressions, of course...)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 1:15 PM   in reply to keltoid

    Alright. So, being "politically correct", let's assume, the subject of this discussion is just an issue that appears only in some "misfortunate" software/hardware configurations at only a certain (maybe, low) amount of users. However, can we count on any kind of software update with some kind of fixes related to the given issue? i.e. should those people with CS6 trials plan to spend a few hundred dollars on an upgrade, or should they save this money for something else, say, some vacation fund?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,514 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 1:15 PM   in reply to keltoid

    Anyone who's serious or passionate about photography, even if they haven't turned it into a money-making profession, and assuming they've spent thousands of dollars on camera equipment (as many have), would consider buying the best software available to support their hobby.  Photoshop may seem expensive, but it's in the same ballpark as a modest digital SLR.

     

    Even considering people's complaints about bugs in Photoshop CS6 it is the best software for photo editing available today.

     

    There are always people who have problems with a new release when it first comes out.  There are also a lot of people who find it to work just fine, and it's clear that those folks don't post online nearly as often to say "Wow, it works just as advertised!".  You hear primarily about problems here on the forums.

     

    That's not to say I believe the Photoshop 13.0.0 release to be of acceptable quality. The one thing Adobe did that they COMPLETELY fell down on was to hold a public beta, then not feed fixes for at least the most serious the problems reported back into the release (yes, the release code was actually built a week before the public beta started).

     

    I personally don't approve of releasing software before it's "done" (and especially not before the documentation is done), but it's entirely plausible that even a well-funded development team and test lab with the whole 9 yards of gear and hundreds of people can't possibly test for and anticipate how software will run for hundreds of thousands of users across the world.  Some manager therefore has to balance how "done" the software is in-house

     

    A business-oriented manager might say that the decision was the proper one, given that to this day Adobe doesn't seem to have ferreted-out all the new bugs, and some income is necessary to keep the lights on while the bugs are being fixed.  Of course, a good engineering leader might point out in return that development of new software done right doesn't mean new bugs have to be introduced in the first place...  It could go round and round.

     

    For those of you experiencing problems:  Hang in there!  The longer it takes for Adobe to release Photoshop 13.0.1, the better it's going to be!

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • JJMack
    5,995 posts
    Jan 9, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 1:22 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    IMO CS3 is better then CS6

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 1:27 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Have had this same argument, pushing the product out the door and fixing bugs later - but you have to do the math to see what is the more econimical approach in the long term. When I was in the IT world, one of our post incident reviews for a major release showed that over a two year period fixing bugs post release was way more expensive than getting a good product out the door. Staff were diverted from new products to fix bugs, regression testing was a nightmare, documentation never caight up and it whacked the developers morale.

     

    That said, with many of the latest development techniques, Scrum type approach, there is much more of a willingness to get the product out the door and damn the torpedoes and fix the bugs on the fly - and to hell with customer satifaction - which in the long term can have a revenue impact, users that have been bitten will delay upgrades which will delay revenue which hits the near term bottom line. This can turn into a downward spiral as the impact to revenue drives a need to reduce costs whic means cutting corners, outsourcing etc, which in turn can either signifcantly delay new product releases, stick to the model and push sub-par products out the door faster - so continuing the spiral.

     

    So the advice of "Getting It Right The First Time" really rings true

     

    Just my 2 cents

     

    Mike

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 1:38 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    @ Noel,  i did never say PS CS6 haven't got good features,
    I love the work environment, i love the new cropping tool, etc etc..

     

    But as you said  your self, it isn't a finished APP yet;.. Now the argument is ok why didn't you do a trail.. Well i downloaded the Beta test, and i had some trouble with it, at the end of the Beta trail the only way to use the "official" version was buying it so i did hoping the Beta bugs were gone... ( no trail any more for the official version after using the Beta)... ( actually PS is not that expensive, seriously, for a professional and a tool one uses every day come on..

     

    so PS 13.0.1 should have been PS 13.0,  as it should have been good from the start...  Now any way i am waiting hopefull it will get better

     

     

    On the same matter,

    I can not get my head around one thing, one "strategy" ,.. What is the use of filling up Photoshop with (on first glance i might have missed some thing) 3D and Video option, that's not what it's for.. For 3D you have Maya or 3Ds for Video you have Première or After effects...  The only use for this is in elderly people evening classes.

     

    I am scared ( as a long time Photoshop user ) that PS is evolving slowly from something that did 1 thing extreamly well to something that does 50 things mediocerly well...  And that doing so much extra code work and adding so much "non" photographic options clutter a app that shouldn't be 2 GB but only 95mb ( it's an example not the real numbers)...

     

    That's what i am scared of, that it's always more difficult to run because it doesn't only do photography anymore and the "non photo" stuff needs more power to run, but absolutely don't care about the other stuff..

     

    Be honest, when i open PS 4 or PS  5 on my old G3 or G4, i can work on an image just as fast as in PS CS5.5 and faster than on PS CS6, that isn't normal we should be able to win time ... And OK Bridge is fantastic litle app , and the newer PS versions have usefull tools i can not do without, but basically we are going from a "Concorde" to a "Boing 747" because the strategie wants to put to much jabber in one app..

     

    Where *** a workflow should consist from many apps working verry well together, so that every one can build his own way to work...  ( like before )

     

    My dream / solution is thus having a Photoshop / app, that does ONLY photography, thus is small and nimble to run but has the same tool functions ( for photography) as PS .. All those  extra "useless" stuf gan be "plugins" to add to  your Photoshop core ( ofcourse with payment ), just like 3D max does or maya does.

     

    but that a Photo soft is a photo soft and basta

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 1:43 PM   in reply to julienlanoo

    By the way, the bes memory i have from a Photoshop version was V4,  and V7,
    But it might be nostalgia

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 2:07 PM   in reply to julienlanoo

    Also i don't understand why they were in such a hurry to release... As basically they have the market monopoly ( i am testing several other "Prof" photo editing app's, but at this moment, they only are limited soft and/or older versions, non as usefull as PS CS5.5 ),  So when you"re the only player on the field, why not take your time to do things well..

     

    Can't get the point..

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,514 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 2:22 PM   in reply to julienlanoo

    You make a good point - it's not like they didn't already have a product available for sale.

     

    There is a school of thought that says the planned release date is king, and everything else is secondary.  This belief is generally held by business administrators.

     

    Note my mention of "business administrator" as a fundamentally different thing from "engineering leader".  A business administrator will say having an engineering leader in charge is bad because the product will never be shipped and too much will be told to the customers.  The engineering leader would prefer to just make the product right to where the customers wouldn't need to be shielded from the truth, and that might take longer than expected (but probably not longer than the original estimate that the business administrator shortened) because some things just take time to do right.

     

    Anyone who's worked in the high tech corporate world knows just how very right Scott Adams has it in his comic strip "Dilbert".

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 2:44 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Yeah only the situation with users have changed now.
    Buisness guys didn't look at the long run , but wanted my buck's ( euros ) fast ..

    Only one thing, they would have got my buck's ( euros ) any way, as i Always update,

     

    so if they get them now, and i am not happy, or they get it within 6 months or a year, and i am happy,  That's a hole difference,

     

    As i am, for my studio, looking to other software or solutions than photoshop now, ( being fed up and maybe having the idea that something is out there i don't know about that's extreamly good or can be tweaked to extreamly good ) - as we have to streamline our workflow better to keep up with the workload... - A thing i would have never thought to do 2 versions a go , or even with previous version.

     

    Actually we started testing other app's with the 5.5 version, this for an ergonomic point of view, as a "darker" workspace creates less fatigue on eyes ( better for my assitants ); But when CS6 came out i thought why not stay,  and now i think OK lets continue our search..

     

    So Buisness admins are idiots, you get the users bucks ( euros ) anyway when they're happy and become fans ... ( certanly when you're the only big player)

     

    For example it has been years and years that our small format 35mm cam's are Canons, Our Midformat are Phase one,  . I never drove any thing else than Merc, from my first car at 300 euro's to my actual car now, they have all been Merc , and i am not thinking of changing at this moment..

     

    Even Look at what Canon is doing now, the sales person of Nikon is bugging us to buy Nikon the D4 or D800, don't care..
    It has been YEARS , YEARS, YEARS now the 1dsmk3 is on the market, and it's still the flagship at canon, why change ? we're happy now we'll w8 untill canon makes something good before changing the older 1dsmk3's,  they're taking there time to do it good... Idem at Phase one, ..

     

    Quality lasts

    ....

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 2:49 PM   in reply to julienlanoo

    >> a "darker" workspace creates less fatigue on eyes ( better for my assitants )

     

    This is only true if you work in a darkened room.

    You need to match the brightness of the UI to the target output (lightest for print, medium for galleries and general purpose, dark for video, darkest for film).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 3:05 PM   in reply to julienlanoo

    And yes 1 photographer leaving might not be a big deal to a mega company.. But we talk to each other, a lot , and some are curious and try it out ( if something is found),  and with the internet, a rumour can become a "hype" real fast...  just twitter it

     

     

    Warren buffet: " you need a life time to build a reputation, you need 5 minitutes to loose it "

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11 Previous Next
Actions

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