+ Camera Raw Feature Requests +

[Ian Lyons]

UPDATE:

We're interested in what changes you would like see in our products. Do you have an idea for a feature that would help your workflow? Is there a small change that could be made to make your life a little easier? Let us know!  Share an Idea, Ask a Question or Report a Problem and get feedback from the Product Development Team and other passionate users on the Photoshop Family product Feedback Site on Photoshop.com.

In future it would helpful if you could use this thread as a means to add

"Features" that you would like to see in future releases of Adobe Camera Raw.

Please do NOT create additional new Topics and try not to duplicate requests by other users. Also, be thorough in your description of the feature and why you think Adobe should consider it.

Oh, and if you find it necessary to comment on someone's feature request/suggestion, try not to get into a shouting match. The penalty for doing so is...

b If you're asking that a particular camera is supported in a future release or just taking the opportunity to carp that yours isn't then please do so in another thread!

IanLyons

Forum Host

[_Gretch_]

I have just been doing some research.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08091705canon_5dmarkii.asp

Canon release the 5dMk2 Sept17th 2008

http://news.cnet.com/adobe-sets-date-for-cs4-launch/
Adobe sets date for launch of CS4 23rdsept 2008.

So the Canon 5 d mk 2 was out before CS4 is this correct.

Carl

[_r_c__durston_]

I got one of the first mk2 at the end of November. By that point I already had my cs4 upgrade and was only waiting on the Lightroom one which I use for shooting and converting before importing into PS (it came a day or two later).
I'm not a heavy PS user, only 4 or 5 hours a day everyday for 7 days a week. I do take a couple of days off here and there.
Sorry Carl that you don't feel CS4 is a worth while update. It seems to me at least that it is very worth while to you since you are posting here about it and the relationship with Canon.

The only profession I can that wouldn't see the advantages to a CS4 workflow might be a paparazzi agency.

Carl do you want to confess something?
r

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

Carl,

Double posting is discouraged. I replied to your identical post in another thread:

Ramón G Castañeda, "CS3 convert to DNG with Canon 5D Mk2" #28, 10 Jan 2009 2:04 am

[_Gretch_]

RCThanks for the apology and understanding...
Paparazzi How did you work that one out.....
Anyway guys..I think I expected a little more from this shite..It all seems a bit one eyed and a few control freaks...Who was the famous guy who said..I am not on this earth to meet you requirements and you are not here for mine...this site is a great way to debate and exchange ideas...Too many Rock stars loser types on here for me wont be back, no fresh ideas no challenge to the machine, if you know what I mean... ..Thanks to all who tried to help do well all .

all I asked ids that CS3 be given support just for Camera Raw ..you can have your rotate canvas...I gave the CS4 to all my guys saying, "you find something decent and Ill upgrade".
Nobody wanted the upgrade..there is nothing for us...as I said I will upgrade but I do intend to go the way of Capture One..its my choice I hope thats OK with everyone.

Dont reply I wont be back.

PS I will post this on a few threads..

[troyhark]

>All was going well until someone upgraded their camera to 5d Mk11 .The camera Rawe plug in require to open these files cannot be used in CS3...sure there is a work around ..but come on Adobe A$380 to upgrade 6 machine just for the Camera Raw plug in.Can I say either come up with descent upgrades that are worth while or offer the Camera Raw plug in to CS3 users and future support to the software that made Adobe.

Carl, you just spent a small fortune on the latest camera and expect Adobe to upgrade your Adobe software for nothing as a result!? The 5DII comes with software to process the images, use that.
And $380 for 6 upgrades is not exactly a lot of money and very easily affordable by professional retouchers.
Besides, why not complain to Canon? They are the ones who changed their file formats, not Adobe, yet you expect Adobe to pick up the cost of their unecessary changes. Canon could simply use the open DNG RAW file format.

>It would be a good feature to support CS3 for a year with new Camera Raw..Until Adobe come up with a decent upgrade.

ACR5 is a decent upgrade over 4. No it's a brilliant upgrade, for those who appreciate the RAW workflow, this may be all the justification they need for upgrading PS. Same goes for the improvements to Bridge. Why should you get this hard work for nothing? You would be annoyed if you clients asked for some free retouching for a year after they first used you.
I think PS4 is also waaay better than CS3 particularly on the Mac.

Jeff Schewe has explained at length and on many occasions why you don't get a free version of the next ACR. To summarize, updating old versions of ACR will take time away from developing new versions and you don't have to buy a new camera.
And as you can use DNG convertor for free with one's new camera, you're not exactly locked out. Adobe don't have to do that, which would otherwise force you to upgrade, so why not be gracious and thank Adobe for that.

>I have just been doing some research.
Canon release the 5dMk2 Sept17th 2008
Adobe sets date for launch of CS4 23rdsept 2008.
So the Canon 5 d mk 2 was out before CS4 is this correct.

No. The Canon only came out in November/December.
CS4 was finished before the 5dII was even announced.
Not that this affects CS3 at all, so the point is...??

And if you and your 'experts' cannot see how CS4 is a big improvement, you are not the experts you think you are. Particularly if that's how good you are at research.

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

"Gretch" / Carl,

Clicking on your user name brings up all the other posts you left under the ID of Carl whatever it was ( Stevenson, maybe?). So you're not fooling anyone except yourself.

This shows you're just a troll attempting to hide in cowardly anonimity.

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

Each time a user changes his/her name in preferences, the new name is applied to all his/her past posts as well. Even if you change it several times, a forum search on any one of those names will yield all other posts of yours as well.

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

Correction:
>all the other posts you left under the ID of Carl whatever it was ( Stevenson, maybe?)

Actually, that was Carl Stevens, now "Gretch".

[_Gretch_]

Gretch is a piss take. it has meaning...you wouldnt understand Rambo
Its amazing I placed the same threads on two other sites some days back.U had lots of people in agreement.well irs not amazing.
CS4 is an average upgrade We all agree.

As I said its abit one eyed on here...

Gretch

LOL

[_Gretch_]

PS dont get me wrong Photoshop is brilliant..and the upgrades in the past have been excellent..This Time as commented by many many numerous people..on many different sitesThey seem to be running out of ideas.....I posted on this site out of respect for the adobe team, but I am sure they know.

[MethodPhoto]

CS4 has added tremendous speed and flexibility, they have fixed plenty of annoying bug that have existed for several versions. The interface updates are a huge improvement; it may seem average, but to me ease of use is as important as new features, and CS4 has that in spades.

A retoucher of whatever level should be able to be more productive, so make the upgrade worthwhile.

A photographer can use DNG if they don't upgrade and still retain the benefits of the existing software, not really sure what the problem is?

[_Gretch_]

Thanks for your input Richard.Thats IS your opinion and you are entitled to it and should upgrade because you are happy with the new things in CS4.I bought a copy for review ..not impressed.
My opinion and the opinion of my guys and many others are that CS4 has nothing for us, in what we do.Yet we are forced into the change for one thing, the camera Raw plug in...and many people out there believe the same if you read other blogs.I have been trying to get this through to the people on this site.One thing,and thats it for us...and Yes I know you can use DNG for free......but that is an extra step and clumsy.So I am being forced into the change for one thing...otherwise I would not change...The guys on this site dont seem to get that.

"Just to prove the point...Ask Adobe to give people the option of buying a plug in for CS3 that allows the new Camera Raw plug in to be used....just that one thing...hey charge $50 for the development..GIVE PEOPLE THE OPTION....then you will really see how good the upgrade is..I realise its a one in a million chance..it may happen or even be looked at, but why would they. it allows people to upgrade if they like the changes and not bother if they dont....it gives true feedback about the upgrade."

Believe me if there was something in CS4, one little thing for us other than the RAW plug in .......(.which they always upgrade as new cameras come out,they can do this and have in the past). then I would upgrade with pleasure..I have been using Photoshop since 1.5 and they have done an amazing job..but it is all getting a little stale now, very few new ideas for pure retouchers and I can understand that.
Hope you get my point and the rest on this site get the point....

Carl aka Gretch LOL

[Dennis_1111]

Hey guys. How about giving it a rest? This Feature Request thread gets unwieldy enough as is without these "Adobe is screwing us" vs "Adobe is great" debates. Gretch expressed his request. Let's leave it at that.

[_r_c__durston_]

Yes Dennis you are right, lets give it a rest.
Carl/Gretch should probably see if one of his other software programme makers, produce anything that could help him out; like Quark or maybe Corel has something, Carl.

[troyhark]

>Yet we are forced into the change for one thing, the camera Raw plug in...and many people out there believe the same if you read other blogs.I have been trying to get this through to the people on this site.One thing,and thats it for us...and Yes I know you can use DNG for free......but that is an extra step and clumsy.So I am being forced into the change for one thing...otherwise I would not change...The guys on this site dont seem to get that.

Actually you bought a camera from Canon, not Adobe and it's Canon who have changed their RAW file format yet again for no good reason and now you want Adobe to give you free updates the their software to sort Canon's RAW problem out. Adobe actually offer free software to help you out and yet you even complain about that.
You are the one who seems to be struggling to understand reality it seems. Were you forced to buy the camera? Unless you were, rather unlikely, then there is no coercion on anyone's part, particularly not Adobe's.
Dear me, what a whinger!

Besides, the camera came with software that is very good at developing Canon RAW files, better than ACR according to some, why not use that?

[_Gretch_]

Dennis thanks,

RC
Please read again its not rocket science,

"Just to prove the point...Ask Adobe to give people the option of buying a plug in for CS3 that allows the new Camera Raw plug in to be used....just that one thing...hey charge $50 for the development..GIVE PEOPLE THE OPTION....then you will really see how good the upgrade is..I realise its a one in a million chance..it may happen or even be looked at, but why would they. it allows people to upgrade if they like the changes and not bother if they dont....it gives true feedback about the upgrade."

I am trying to spell it out for some of you.

RC
Quark Corel whats that about...

What i am saying is that If CS3 HAD SUPPORT FOR NEW CAMERAS who would upgrade....10% 20% do you get my point RC, who would upgrade??

Canon upgrade to MK11 is an amazing upgrade??isnt it??

I love Adobe but this upgrade is well below their usual standards and they could find out if they gave the CS3 users the ability to have Camera Raw updates as we have had before. .

Like I said before I expected a forum of intellectual exchange..

[_Gretch_]

PS Troy

Who said I bought a new Camera?

Please read carefully.
I could call names like you but.......my man I an much better than that.

[_AlexW_]

Wow

[_AlexW_]

I am with Dennis.

I have read the threads.
This guys expressed an opinion and wow.
I would be scarred of airing my thoughts.

I am sure Adobe want feedback like this rather than have yes people.

I have a few comments, but I am not going to put them on here.You guys are nasty.

A

[_Gretch_]

Certainly got the juices flowing..Not many fresh ideas though.

[_Gretch_]

Dont be put off.. although I am a little.
If we all just accepted everything and said brilliant wonderful, etc where would we be.

Adobe are brilliant and I just expected so much more..I was hugely disappointed with CS4 and thats the first time since I started using it at PS 1.5.

Maybe we have reached the limit.
I dont think we have, just needs more fresh ideas and people challenge things.Demand the impossible.

I have a couple of ideas which would help my workflow..

[_Gretch_]

Anyway cant be on here all day there is money to be made.

[John MacLean]

>since I started using it at PS 1.5.

Are you sure about that version?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Photoshop_release_history

[John MacLean]

>roland duke - 4:23am Dec 30, 08 PST (#389 of 425)
Wouldn't it be great if ACR could read/use the lens data from Canon lenses in the same way that Canon's own Digital Photo professional can to fine tune peripheral illumination - chromatic aberration - distortion at any setting and distance. It would be even better if the feature could be toggled on and off.
Even with Canon's top L series glass I find for utlimate sharpness there is a real benefit from the peripheral illumination - chromatic aberration - distortion corrections. I have a zillion settings for different lenses/settings combinations as ACR presets and it's still not enough, so this would be really useful and clearly the data is there to use.

Roland, I just bought PTLens for $25 http://epaperpress.com/ptlens/. It's good but I'd love it if Adobe incorporated popular lens/body combos into the lens panel in ACR as you suggested.