William_Donelson wrote: I also have never had any problems with icons before CS6... Are "Windows Thumbnails" on by default in CS6 ? I know they were off in CS5. Perhaps that is a clue? Disabling "Windows Thumbnails" is a superstition. A couple of people have done that and their icon problem has coincidentally ended (because of some change to something else), then they wrongly attribute the change in behaviour to the disabling of "Windows Thumbnails". It's like finding a three-leafed clover then having good luck an hour later, and then forever attributing three-leafed clover to good luck. ... View more

William_Donelson wrote: Perhaps there is another app that can create the icons reliably? As a post-process after editting? I suspect Graphic Converter batch mode will do it, but I'm not sure how. Nothing except Photoshop CS6 can maintain all the data of a CS6-created PSD/PSB. You would want to attach a custom file icon to a file without opening the file in an app then resaving to a new file to which the app will attach a good icon. I can suggest an alternative solution. In the following, notice the essential distinction between preview icon (generated by the OS) and custom file icon (generated by Photoshop). The OS can create preview icons for flattened PSD/PSB, layered PSD/PSB saved with Maximize Compatibility and most of the other file formats to which Ps saves, so they do not need a custom file icon for an icon bearing a file's content to be visible in Finder. Unfortunately, layered PSD/PSB created without Maximize Compatibility do need a custom file icon for an icon bearing a file's content to be visible in Finder. Fortunately, you do not need to use PSD/PSB to store layered Photoshop documents. TIFF can contain a complete Ps document - all the layers, Smart Objects, Shape layers, Type layers, layer styles, paths, etc. TIFF is written with a composite image in addition to all the document data. The OS can create a preview icon from the file's embedded composite image. There's an added bonus with regard to icons when you use TIFF. A preview icon generated by the OS will look correct for a document that has a colour profile other than sRGB. Whereas, when Ps creates a custom file icon, it neglects to take the profile into account and the icon will appear discoloured when the document colour profile is other than sRGB. If you decide to use layered TIFF then set the options to use ZIP compression for both the composite image and the layers. Edit: IMPORTANT: remember to disable icon creation in Photoshop CS6's preferences to prevent icon display problems possibly being triggered on your computer even if there has been no problem so far. ... View more

William, the icons are significantly different. ... View more

Noel Carboni wrote: Now apparently the colorful example is gone, replaced with a smooth gray gradient.  I downloaded the PSD, which displays as smooth as can be expected with 24 bit color.  I see 15 levels of gray in a 200 pixel wide selection, where the ones on the end aren't fully covered. We're all on the same page now. ... View more

OK, I count 14 complete bands and about half of another. You are seeing the correct number of bands for your 16-bit gray gradient being displayed on an 8-bit per channel monitor because the bands are stepped by one 8-bit level. You can hide such banding with low-level noise. Noise will be added as dither by default (the control is in Color Settings) when Photoshop converts a 16-bit (or 32-bit) per channel document to 8 bpc. If you want to camouflage the banding while in 16-bit mode, create a top layer with Overlay blending mode and filled with 50% gray, and apply about 0.25 % Gaussian noise to that layer with the Add Noise filter. Edit: to be clear, that's a quarter of one percent noise. ... View more

Caroline Vanlint wrote: Then why is it that it's never happened before? Well, your display software could be making it look even worse than it should be. Maybe your brother has been messing with the computer. Open the document in Photoshop, make a 200 px x 20 px marquee in the middle of the document and view at 100% or greater zoom. How many bands do you see inside the marquee? ... View more

Caroline Vanlint wrote: http://kitsuru.deviantart.com/art/Test-356440769 Alright, this one should be true 16 bits and I still see the posterization. The vertical lines don't have the same width either (at least on my screen). Even in 8 bits it used to be perfectly smooth Edit: in the .png file (the preview picture on DA) it looks even more posterized than in photoshop, I see darker lines between every band The new PSD - gray gradient - is good. It is smooth and has full 16-bit quantisation. Posterisation will be, and should be, evident on a 8-bit per channel monitor, though. ... View more

Noel, slightly OT, but I think you'll be interested in the pattern in the exposure-boosted difference between the 16-bit PSD and 16-bit PNG. Groovy, man! ... View more

The download page has a PNG display of the PSD. I guess Noel has that. Both the PSD and PNG are 16-bit per channel but do not contain identical pixel values. Your 16-bit PSD is exactly like an 8-bit document which has been converted to 16-bit. We can prove that the pixels in the 16-bit document are exactly as if they have been in an 8-bit document then converted to 16-bit. Use only CS6 for this test because CS5 can produce low level errors in bit-depth conversions which will void the test. Disable dither in Color Settings. Duplicate layer "Laag 3" to a new doc. Convert new doc to 8-bit then convert to 16-bit, rename layer to "Laag 3 16-8-16", duplicate layer to original doc. In original doc, set blending of "Laag 3 16-8-16" to Difference. Add Exposure adjustment layer with +20 stops. Result is solid black. The black result shows that there is zero difference between the 16-bit pixels and pixels which have been converted from 8-bit to 16-bit. Is there any possibility that your 16-bit document has been in 8-bit mode then converted to 16-bit? ... View more

Your 16-bit document's pixels have 8-bit quantisation. It's as if a 8-bit document has been converted to 16-bit. ... View more

Thanks for posting the requested info. A Windows user will help soon, I expect. ... View more

retpgmr05, do the videos play in the Preview panel of Bridge? What OS are you using? What version of Ps is revealed by the About Photoshop command in Photoshop? ... View more

Nancy O. wrote: Sounds like you're trying to import the wrong file type.  You can't import MP4. Video import formats ... MPEG‑4 ... MP4 is MPEG-4, which is on the import list you provided. It's a container format, so I expect whether Photoshop opens or rejects an MP4 will depend on the codec(s) of the contained media. MP4 containing H.264 video and AAC audio, probably the most commonly used codecs in MP4, certainly open in Photoshop CS6 and play for me. ... View more

hanci wrote: I also have problems with the eyedropper in RGB mode. I have a blue background color and when selecting it with the eyedropper I get #244f69 when I'm in RGB mode. And if I use that color in CSS on a website, the color gets darger than the original color in Photoshop. But if I change to CMYK mode and use the eyedropper again, then i get this code on the same background #00516a. And with that code I get the color I want on the website. Adobe Photoshop Version: 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00) x64 Am I doing something wrong? Apart from your Photoshop needing updated to at least 13.0.1, the problem may be that your RGB document, which you're sampling in Photoshop, does not have sRGB profile and/or your Web browser is not colour managed and/or your computer is not using a correctly calibrated monitor profile and/or something else. ... View more

R.S.Khan, here's Opacity 100, 50, 25, 12, 6 % when keeping Spacing at 1% and Flow at 1%. Maybe that'll help if you want to use reduced Flow. ... View more

Here's Spacing at 20, 10, 5, 2, 1% when Flow is 1%. ... View more

Looks like a hard Brush with about 10% Spacing and very low Flow. Try reducing Spacing to 1% in Brush panel. ... View more

"We don't list every single bug fix - that would be insane." Not every, you say? Adobe didn't list even one fix for 13.0.2 and 13.0.3 and 13.0.4 relative to 13.0.1. And I've seen no user mentioning their encountering a fix - just complaints of features going missing and becoming broken. ... View more

Chris, "We don't list every single bug fix - that would be insane." You list one when there's many. That seems closer to insane than listing many when there are many. Maybe you are unaware of what many other software providers do. Especially when the software costs around $1000 and above. They list every bug fix and every change that's in an update. Do I need to spell out the value of such information to users? ... View more

Chris, "13.0.4 fixes the licensing bug," I think everyone knows about that one bug fix which is not a fix relative to 13.0.1. The licensing bug wasn't in 13.0.1, which is the version that I still use. It was introduced by 13.0.2, so a fix for that is irrelevant to anyone who hasn't gone beyond 13.0.1. "13.0.2 and 13.0.3 fix many other bugs." I've seen you write that before, but nobody at Adobe will say what any one of these many fixes are and, as far as I've noticed, no user at the general Photoshop forum has mentioned a 13.0.1 bug being fixed. ... View more

The damned forum software converts my PNG from RGB to Bitmap. The image can still be used, though. First convert to 8-bit Grayscale then try Define Pattern. Then convert to 8-bit Lab then try Define Pattern. ... View more

8-bit Lab and 8-bit Grayscale problem, too. IMPORTANT: Use the attached test image as pattern source. Pattern definition malfunctions in: 8-bit Lab 8-bit Grayscale Open the attached 450 x 400 pixels 8-bit RGB PNG in Photoshop. I used versions 13.0.1 and 12.1.1 on OS X 10.6.8.. Convert to 8-bit Lab. Define Pattern will malfunction, defining only a few columns of the source design. Convert to 8-bit Grayscale. Define Pattern will malfunction as above. ... View more

Chris, "you should be on 13.0.4." I'd use 13.0.4 and risk breaking things that work in 13.0.1 if there was information on the fixes in 13.0.4 or 13.0.3 or 13.0.2 for problems in 13.0.1. (Retina support is of no interest to me.) ... View more

Chris, "And I still can't reproduce that. In 8 bit it still works." I specifically wrote "8-bit grayscale" twice, above. It's not clear whether you've tried 8-bit g-r-a-y-s-c-a-l-e. ... View more

Stan, "you'll need to be very very specific about the pattern and file." Look at the screenshot by mcgraphic in the first post of the thread to which I linked. The document view is zoomed to 100% and shows the design being sourced for a pattern. The document tab clearly says 8-bit grayscale. The resulting pattern definition is shown, too. I was able to replicate that document and resulting erroneous pattern definition in a few seconds with no difficulty. "be specific about the exact Photoshop version you have, and which OS you're running" The error occurs consistently (i.e. at every attempt) in Photoshop 13.0.1 and 12.1.1 on OS X 10.6.8. ... View more

You said the same to me two days ago in the Photoshop forum where I post every day, so I twice provided you a link to a post with a reproducable example of a pattern definition error in 8-bit grayscale mode. Third time lucky, maybe: http://forums.adobe.com/message/5050124 ... View more

kevin4545 wrote: I don't know if I can see the subtelties between those bicubics! Trust your gut then. ... View more

The short side of the original is 3774. If that were spread over 20 inches then the res would be 188.7 ppi. If spread over 24" then 157.25 ppi. You'll be "upresing" to get to 300 ppi for the lab, which requires Photoshop to increase the pixel count in this case. I recommend you set the resampling to plain vanilla Bicubic. Not Automatic, Sharper or Smoother. (Automatic uses Smoother when increasing the pixel count and Sharper when decreasing the pixel count.) Then you can experiment with sharpening filters under your control. The key to learning and understanding Photoshop is experimentation and observation. ... View more

Activate the Eyedropper. If it's still misbehaving then post a PNG screenshot of the entire screen - we need to see the document, Layers panel and Options bar when the Eyedropper is the active tool. ... View more

Good points, JJ. ... View more