Skip navigation
Eden Gotterr Cyan
Currently Being Moderated

What is missing from Photoshop CS6 ???

Apr 16, 2012 11:39 AM

Tags: #feature_request #missing_features

     I tried the new PhotoShop CS6 (beta) but aside from some innovations of which my favorite is the interface (The interface is one of the best innovation that Adobe have made finally an interface that does not make you eyes hurt) and content aware move tool (content aware is definitely the best technology in Photoshop, may in the future in Photoshop CS20 will be voice-activated and will do exactly what you say even to draw for you) and maybe the new brushis, nothing that new, especially for those who draw in Photoshop concept artists, Ilustrators and so on ... etc

      In my opinion what is missing from the famous Photoshop CS 6 and should have been is :

     1 : Live symmetry drawing (horizontal and vertical) even the simplest programs like Alchemy / Sketchbook Pro and new Painter 12 has the function they have gone beyond the horizontal and vertical with the function of Kaleidoscope. I really like how the brush works in Alchemy especially in symmetry, in Sketchbook Pro are not so good in symmetry, unless thei are round but if you have a strange shapes thei tend to function as a parallel very strange but it is ther why the famous Photoshop does not have this function ??? I hoped that in PS CS6 (beta) to be, but no, I do hope maybe in the CS7 will be,

     2: I would like to make several sets of brushes, but in different windows on the screen at the same time not only a big one something like Corel Painter 12

     3: If you put a 3d function why do you tried to do something like the Google SketchUP fast, simple to use and easy to learn, or a simplified version of ZBrush sculpture in 3d clay ???

     Ok now let's talk about Bridge CS6: same functions, nothing so new, I hope that in the cs6 to implement something like the function of ACDSee Photo Manager 12 for example:

     Preview Thumbnails in a files, shortcuts that can be modified, such as double click I want to open fullscreen preview not send in photoshop or Camera Raw etc, why not the same as Photoshop, to make what I want to what I want, preview window to have the option of framing the image even if it is small or large (fit image, reduce or enlarge) the same for full screen mode the image will be framed by the edges of the screen (fit image height or widthand reduce or enlarge) from there if you want 100%, 200% etc. and many others

 

     What is right, there are many other features that I like and love in Bridge much more than ACDSee 12 such as preview multiple images at the same time in preview window and Review Mode (one of my favorite) and many others but ...   ... What was more important to me I said maybe for someone else is something else missing ...

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 15, 2012 6:09 PM   in reply to Eden Gotterr Cyan

    Photoshop CS6 is probably one of Adobe's best releases in a few years, and not necessarily because of the 'showcase' features, but the massive amount of JDI's* that have been included. Workflow and usability will benefit tremendously from these features.

     

    As you can imagine, a lot of work goes into a release like this. Adobe has a boat load of feature requests that they prioritize for future releases. Some of your ideas make sense, but they are not 'top of the list' features. If you'd like Adobe to consider them for future releases, please post them at http://feedback.photoshop.com/

     

    *JDIs in Photoshop CS6: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4223572#4223572

     

    PS: Comic Sans hurts my face.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 15, 2012 6:26 PM   in reply to Eden Gotterr Cyan

    Good luck with that.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 15, 2012 6:49 PM   in reply to Eden Gotterr Cyan

    Eden,

     

    what may be important to me or to you will vary much between us, as it will between many others here.

    Photohop is for a vide varity of interest groups, in the graphics field...  so as Howard says good luck with that. Sure it could be interesting to be a fly on the wall during that discussion where they select what to include and what not to. Never the less, i think you will only get a whole lot more frustrated knowing what just didn;t make the cut and what did...because to you this is just pathetic to include because you wouldn never use this, but to others this could be a time saver.

     

    So, if your favorite thing isn't in,...get creative!

     

    Henrik

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 15, 2012 7:03 PM   in reply to tived

    tived wrote:

     

    …what may be important to me or to you will vary much between us, as it will between many others here.

    Photohop is for a vide varity of interest groups, in the graphics field…

     

    Very well said, Henrik.

     

    I found little or no interest in any of the features desired by Eden.  I certainly hope that Adobe does not plan to bloat the application even further by adding features suitable to a drawing or painting program, which Photoshop is definitely not as far as some of us are concerned.  As far as the recent additions to the interface, I have already posted in praise of Adobe for giving us the option to step away from the dreadful dark interface, so that's definitely another subjective opinion not applicable to all users.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,496 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 15, 2012 7:23 PM   in reply to Eden Gotterr Cyan

    What's missing?

     

    So far, I've discovered these things missing from Photoshop CS6:

     

    • Crashes, for example on exiting CS5.
    • Bugs, such as the rulers not updating on zoom operations.
    • Frustration when trying to get the controls in Camera Raw 6.x just right to develop a stunning image without artifacts.
    • Chromatic Aberration in images converted in Camera Raw.
    • Most of the Adjustments panel, which is now replaced for the most part by the more functional Properties panel.
    • Eye strain.
    • Time to go get coffee while running a lot of features that now use the GPU.
    • Time to go get coffee while big files are saving.

     

    In terms of negatives, there are very few, especially for a beta.  Here are those that I've run across, personally:

     

    • A few actions don't work quite the same as with predecessor versions.  In the only case I've seen personally it's because of a small bug in legacy Brightness/Contrast steps that may be fixed by release time.

     

    I honestly couldn't come up with more than one negative, and I thought about it for a while before posting this message.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 15, 2012 7:36 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Nice summary, Noel. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 15, 2012 10:52 PM   in reply to Eden Gotterr Cyan

    Eden Gotterr Cyan wrote:

     

    when you say thet Photoshop should not be for drawing then I think someone was sleeping under a rock for some time,

    Indeed! Are you kidding me, "station one"? Try lightroom if you don't want brushes and drawing tools to bog you down.

     

    Photoshop is one of if not THE heavyweight in painting/drawing digitally. Painter is woefully slow on a mac (not 64-bit) and continues to lag in performance compared to PS(I had so many color management - Painter issues- work arounds over the years to paint in Painter, then edit in PS, I could wirte a book!). I'm very much enjoying the speed boost in CS6. I was hoping for brush controls in mixer burshes, that each bristle can have a saturation, hue, type jitter in the stroke. This can be done in Painter(CS5 new mixer brushes gave me the ability to paint "tradigitally" now in PS) and it really adds to the realism of, say, a wet smeary oil brush look. The direction mixer brush was going I thought for sure this ability was going to show in CS6?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 2:43 AM   in reply to tim3308

    tim3308 wrote:

     

    …Are you kidding me, "station one"?…

     

    Why would I want to "kid" you, dear tim3308?  I was simply expressing my opinion, to which I have as much right as you do to yours, of course.

     

    I am neither a painter nor a draftsman, but I do work with some of them, and somehow they give me the impression that they don't seem to hold the skills of practitioners who limit themselves to drawing and painting exclusively with Photoshop in particularly high regard.  But to go into further detail would expose me to the justifiable charge that I was drifting into unfamiliar territory.

     

    Succinctly, I am no more kidding you than I assume you would be presuming to be kidding me. 

     

    Just imagine the possibilities if Adobe were to create a dedicated, kick-a$$ painting application at the same professional level as Photoshop.  You might even buy such a program.

     

    On the other hand, I did try Lightroom and did not buy it, but thank you for your kind suggestion. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Trevor Dennis
    5,905 posts
    May 24, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 3:23 AM   in reply to station_one

    OT: but I always wonder about folk who jump on the 'Comic Sans is the work of the devil' bandwagon. I am convinced that in most cases it is peer pressure, and the desire to be a way cool graphic designer dude, rather than original thought from the protester. OK it is overused, but it is not such a terrible font as such.

     

    @ Station One... Why on earth would you want to restrict Photoshop? I suspect there are a great many features in existing versions of Photoshop that you don't use, but they are there for when you need them, and take the time to learn how to use them. There is a lot of satisfaction to had in creating illustrations entirely with Photoshop, and with no photography involved, and many of the skills involved can be taken back to photo editing.

     

    A quote I heard this week: "I should have been Prime Minister when I was 21, because I knew everything when I was that age.".

     

    
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,496 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 4:02 AM   in reply to Trevor Dennis

    Trevor.Dennis wrote:

     

    OT: but I always wonder about folk who jump on the 'Comic Sans is the work of the devil' bandwagon.

     

    It does seem like there are a lot of things more difficult to read in the modern world.  Microsoft's forums, for example, presented in 7 point Segoe UI, and degraded by the inferior font smoothing used by IE10...  Ugh, don't get me started.

     

    We've been through the golden age of computing.  Trust me, Comic Sans is going to be the least of your worries!

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 4:09 AM   in reply to Trevor Dennis

    Trevor.Dennis wrote:

     

    …Why on earth would you want to restrict Photoshop?…

     

    Because I may consider it to be bloated already?

     

    Because I don't need to be driving around in a motor home when my car fills my needs?

     

    Because I don't need a hammer that doubles as a screwdriver or water-heater when I need to drive a nail?

     

    Because a scalpel may be more useful for my purposes than a Swiss-army knife?

     

    Because I would prefer the engineering team to work on refining existing features and improving stability rather than add features that are better served in drawing and painting applications?

     

    Because I'm not particularly impressed by some of the new "features"?

     

    Because I would prefer to see improvements to the History panel as have been suggested and requested over the years?

     

    I could think of many more such reasons why.

     

    Trevor.Dennis wrote:

     

    …I suspect there are a great many features in existing versions of Photoshop that you don't use…

    

     

    Duh!    Precisely! 

     

    Software bloat adds to the cost of developing and maintaining an application, delays the release of bug fixes and genuine improvements of existing features and eventually demands greater hardware resources.

     

    I have no clue as to what the he!! your "Prime Minister" quote is supposed to mean in the context of this discussion, unless you're implying that you feel like a 21-year-old whippersnapper who knows everything.  From your avatar picture you look younger than I am.  Besides, I know of very few "prime ministers" who are, were or have been particularly knowledgeable about "everything", so that may not even be a requirement for the job. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 4:11 AM   in reply to Trevor Dennis

    Also, please note that I had nothing to do with the comment on the Comic Sans font. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,496 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 4:34 AM   in reply to station_one

    Photoshop is first and foremost a photo editor - that seems to be its design center - though it certainly extends into a number of other areas, for which it generally does a passably good job.

     

    Of course, Adobe wants to add as much (perceived) value as possible so as to sell the product to more people.  But they must balance that against being able to continue to engineer it with necessarily limited resources.  Somewhere someone chooses what Photoshop DOES and what it WILL NOT DO (read this as what development they will fund and what they will not fund, if you like).  In fact there have been a number of someones, over a multi-decade 13 major version lifetime.  It's amazing that it still works at all!

     

    To be a great photo editor, it does things in ways that might not make it that great a painting tool.  For example, the display you see is color-managed, but a painter who just wants to choose from a palette and put pretty pixels on the screen may not need that overhead.  Even making color-management optional adds some complexity.  A dedicated painting program that by design may choose to do no color-management might seem faster.  Likewise, assuming some complexity has been added to support painting, it's reasonable that people who want the best possible photo editing might prefer fewer painting facilities to make it do their work faster and more reliable.

     

    It's not wrong for people to want to influence the product development to go "their way".  Lobbying s a powerful thing.  But let's all try to be tolerant of one another (this is not directed to anyone in particular).

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 5:28 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    That's a very constructive exposition, Noel.  Thanks for that.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 9:47 AM   in reply to station_one

    station_one wrote:

     

     

    Just imagine the possibilities if Adobe were to create a dedicated, kick-a$$ painting application at the same professional level as Photoshop.  You might even buy such a program.

     

     

    W/ Painter changing hands over the years(rumors persisted Apple might buy their brush engine --looks like that will stay as a rumor only) and w/ the digital painting in PS increasing, I would have thought that maybe the case ("Artshop CS6"?), station one? Of course this kid of the 70's thought we'd be flying jet packs in the 2000's. So, yeah, I 'd like to see it. The most impressive digital watercolor brush engine most of us have ever seen(clips on the net) was snatched up by microsoft a few years back... sad as it has not seen the light of day in an app. Maybe they will sell it to Adobe's "Artshop"?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 12:25 PM   in reply to Eden Gotterr Cyan

    Is there a way to make your layer masks visable in the layers panel? I really liked that in the old version. I feel like I'm flying blind here. Isn't there a way to get them up there so you can hold option and click them to make the layer mask visable for editing in the viewer?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 3:09 PM   in reply to Eden Gotterr Cyan

    Please I love PS6 just why you removed- moved from top bar: Bridge, view extras, arrange documents and screen mode ?

    Can you also do something with with moving layers from tab to another tab
    Thanks

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Trevor Dennis
    5,905 posts
    May 24, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 3:30 PM   in reply to dublbz101

    dublbz101 wrote:

     

    Is there a way to make your layer masks visable in the layers panel? I really liked that in the old version. I feel like I'm flying blind here. Isn't there a way to get them up there so you can hold option and click them to make the layer mask visable for editing in the viewer?

    You can't see any layer masks?   If you use the drop down top right corner of the Layers Panel, and choose Panel Options, you can chose between three sizes or NONE  It sounds like you have None selected.

     
    |
    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