Anyone using Photoshop CS?

[Jon P. Inghram]

Try looking at a picture with money in it...

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/08/0111228&mode=thread&tid=152&tid=185

I was considering upgrading to CS, but I read lots of reports that it ran far slower than 7 or any other previous version so I decided to hold off... scanning for currency endlessly would explain the poor performace rather well.

[X-Caliber]

It is slower, but it allows you to edit 16bit images, which is why I have it!

[az]

I would be uneasy with a software that analyzes my images to look at the content... it's a tool, not a reviewer, and I don't want adobe to know the contents of my private pictures.

AZ

[Gurm]

I haven't noticed any speed loss versus Photoshop 7.

Then again, they've ALL been slow since 5.5 *sigh*

- Gurm

[GNEP]

This is true. I can't honestly say that using PS 6.whatever and now CS (8) on 1GHz+ machines (now athlon 3200+ equivalent) is noticably faster than using 5.5 on a Pentium 133... of course I do use significantly larger files these days, but still....

[Ribbit]

Hasn't Photoshop checked for watermarks (the digital kind, not the money kind) for a while now?

16-bit support would explain a general speed loss better than the currency check would - the latter is done only at scan-time, while the former potentially has an effect on almost every operation.

[leech]

I do believe Cinepaint supports the 16bit color as well, and that's free

Leech

[Nappe1]

if you want to use Photoshop on fast platform, I'll recomend Power PC based Macs. Photoshop is still primarily developed for Mac OS'es and the difference really is big on speed.

[Kurt]

@Nappe1: I'm not so sure...Adobe is abandoning Apple bit by bit, a bit more every year...

Also, Altivec has sth to do with it too.

[Wombat]

Originally posted by Ribbit
the latter is done only at scan-time, while the former potentially has an effect on almost every operation.

No it's not. It's done during every scan, every cut-n-paste, and possibly resizings. It's always looking for the various currencies.

[GNEP]

I hate to be controversial here, but I'd much rather my ten pound note was less easy to forge than more easy, so I've got no objection - apart from the associated speed loss of course.

[leech]

I don't recall where I'd read this, but if I recall correctly, it's illegal to scan money in anyhow (at least here in the USA) but wouldn't you kind of have to have the right kind of paper (and printer ink for that matter) to even make it remotely believable?

Leech

[GT98]

Originally posted by leech
I don't recall where I'd read this, but if I recall correctly, it's illegal to scan money in anyhow (at least here in the USA) but wouldn't you kind of have to have the right kind of paper (and printer ink for that matter) to even make it remotely believable?

Leech

Well if theres a will theres a way to make it...why make it any easier to counterfit money? I know photocopiers do the same thing...they imprint their serial number onto a photocopied US bill from what I heard. Also head they worked pretty damn good in those Dollar changers you see on Soda machines too

[rubank]

Well it´s fun to make your own money, like this one

(of course there´s no such bill for real)

[GT98]

Originally posted by rubank
Well it´s fun to make your own money, like this one

(of course there´s no such bill for real)

LOL wheres the link with the Porn stars on the Euros? LOL