Photoshop 2021 "Novelties"

[LongLensPhotography]

Photoshop 2021 is out and you can upgrade right away via Creative Cloud.

It brings out a few rather quirky new features which I'm not sure how to react to. What are your thoughts? Is it just gimmicky show off and marketing ploy against the likes of Luminar or something about to become much bigger in time?

"As supplied today" I find the cloud replacement very buggy and unusable although it can make a very good selection and at least saves it all as separate layers. Supplied stock skies are very noisy and poor in general, not that anyone in their sane mind use the for final image. I can do a 1000x better job by hand. In not much more time but it can be a while to discover matching sky in the library.
The portrait neural plugin appears to be just something to have fun with friends and family for a day and then forget. Skin smoothing AI looks like it improves things a bit without at least messing it up but then I'm not big on my portraits. I am just not sure these were the things that needed creating the most.

Most of the rest is entirely unchanged since 2020, which is also the case against a much more stable and faster 2019.

 

[Bristolian]

I did the updates today but aside from opening them up to check they're working haven't done anything with them.

Need to get out and take some pictures this weekend

I did notice that PS didn't open any quicker than the previous version - I'm glad I have a fast PC

 

[Retune]

What are your thoughts? Is it just gimmicky show off and marketing ploy

Like everything since CS6?

 

[Brian G]

The problem is that all Adobe software is fully mature, and it is very difficult to add worthwhile features, so in order to justify the continued rental charge Adobe are forced to add "Upgrades" to their software, whether they are useful or not.

It's just a matter of adding something, whether the user needs it or not.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Photoshop is getting too cluttered. There should be tick boxes to clear away things you don't want completely, and hide every trace of them in a vault that does not use any resources, until such time that you may want to dig them out.
The raw processer is now totally over blown.

 

[twist]

The problem is that all Adobe software is fully mature, and it is very difficult to add worthwhile features, so in order to justify the continued rental charge Adobe are forced to add "Upgrades" to their software, whether they are useful or not.

It's just a matter of adding something, whether the user needs it or not.

And bug fixes for premature updates.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

The problem is that all Adobe software is fully mature, and it is very difficult to add worthwhile features, so in order to justify the continued rental charge Adobe are forced to add "Upgrades" to their software, whether they are useful or not.

It's just a matter of adding something, whether the user needs it or not.

I could in fact give them an itemised wishlist, one item being a proper integration of LR + PS where you can edit everything in a single app and don't have to create a separate phyiscal PSD file... And much needed improvements in all kinds of photomerges, focus stacking, etc.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I could in fact give them an itemised wishlist, one item being a proper integration of LR + PS where you can edit everything in a single app and don't have to create a separate phyiscal PSD file... And much needed improvements in all kinds of photomerges, focus stacking, etc.

They are far from having the best offerings when it comes to merging and panoramas, they are absolutely blown away by the likes of PTGui and even PTAssembler.

 

[Dave Canon]

The raw processer is now totally over blown.

What does this mean?

Dave

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

What does this mean?

Dave

it now has layer over layer of options many of which are far more technical than are often needed. and are more post processing functions than raw processing.

 

[Brian G]

They are far from having the best offerings when it comes to merging and panoramas, they are absolutely blown away by the likes of PTGui and even PTAssembler.

Or even Microsoft ICE.

 

[gremlin16]

I did think the neural filters were a bit of a gimmick, however.... I needed to correct a portrait of 2 siblings where one was predictably not looking at the camera. It actually performed really well moving the face angle and also the eye position. You would not be able to tell if you didn’t know. Honestly, it was that good.

Ageing and sky replacement and other jazz, I can’t see me using very often. It’s a bit ‘teenagerish’ to me.

 

[Deleted member 34016]

I find when I tried to use the Neutral filters my PC just stopped working- I'm now looking at loosing Photoshop all together - just need a suitable replacement prior to renewal in January 2021
Any suggestions greatly received

Les

 

[darkroom12]

Photoshop is getting too cluttered. There should be tick boxes to clear away things you don't want completely, and hide every trace of them in a vault that does not use any resources, until such time that you may want to dig them out.
The raw processer is now totally over blown.

I will go along with you on that score. To be perfectly honest it wasn't until I had it installed for a few days did I realise what more there is out of sight. One tool I had not seen before in the raw toolbox and if it was on the 2020 version I missed that as well, is the auto button right near the top. I was working on a very difficult old colour negative with extreme contrasts and I had 4 perhaps 5 attempts to get something decent out of it and failed each time. I clicked on the auto button and - bingo - there it was - almost as I wanted it apart from a few additional tweaks to the sky that were soon sorted out

It felt a bit like cheating but that particular negative was a link in a series of perhaps another 120 or so to make up a story of a holiday in Europe so it saved the day.

 

[darkroom12]

What does this mean?

Dave

I have noticed that some of the new RAW adjustments are duplicated in the main body of Photoshop but the main adjustments are better and more subtle than the RAW versions. So I just ignore them.

 

[darkroom12]

I have been asked a few times can I tell people what are the differences between Photoshop and the 'dumbed down' version of PS called Elements and to be honest I have been at a loss to tell them. I did have a very early version of elements that came bundled with another piece of equipment, possibly my Epson flatbed scanner which I bought in Windows XP days (But still works with Windows 10) I think that was version 2 or perhaps 3, I cannot remember.

So the question is, what can be done on Photoshop now that cannot be done on Elements or for that matter what can be done on Elements which is the equal of full blown CC?

 

[Brian G]

I have been asked a few times can I tell people what are the differences between Photoshop and the 'dumbed down' version of PS called Elements and to be honest I have been at a loss to tell them. I did have a very early version of elements that came bundled with another piece of equipment, possibly my Epson flatbed scanner which I bought in Windows XP days (But still works with Windows 10) I think that was version 2 or perhaps 3, I cannot remember.

So the question is, what can be done on Photoshop now that cannot be done on Elements or for that matter what can be done on Elements which is the equal of full blown CC?

One thing that Elements cannot do is 16-bit Layers.

 

[darkroom12]

I don't actually use layers except when they come with say clearing vignetting or altering/correcting perspective. I have never found a need for them, I am mainly darkroom based so layers are an alien concept to me. Dodging, burning or brushing on neat developer to bring out highlights - yes but layers I have never found the need,

 

[Brian G]

I don't actually use layers except when they come with say clearing vignetting or altering/correcting perspective. I have never found a need for them, I am mainly darkroom based so layers are an alien concept to me. Dodging, burning or brushing on neat developer to bring out highlights - yes but layers I have never found the need,

Elements is a severly crippled program and these days Affinity Photo offers much better value, being virtually as comprehensive as the full Photoshop, and priced the same as Elements.

 

[Dave Canon]

Photoshop is getting too cluttered. There should be tick boxes to clear away things you don't want completely, and hide every trace of them in a vault that does not use any resources, until such time that you may want to dig them out.

It seems that many do not need all the functions. I am happy with the complexity of functions myself though I do not need the functions for Illustrators, The idea that some menus or sub menus could be hidden is a good one. On my TV set top box and can see 999 channels and have access to most but can also create a Favourites list which just shows say 20 channels. It is rare that I step outside those 20 but can do so if I wish but I do not have to search through the 999 for my wanted channels.

I note that several have had problems with the recent update almost certainly because their graphics card or driver is out-of-date. I was pleased to find that my 6 year old PC is OK and all the new functions work OK.

Dave

 

[darkroom12]

Elements is a severly crippled program and these days Affinity Photo offers much better value, being virtually as comprehensive as the full Photoshop, and priced the same as Elements.

I have just had a look at the website for Affinity and the price seems less that Elements by about 50%. I am not so convinced ti will do everything that PS does. I cannot see any reference to RAW conversion , or have I simply missed it?

 

[darkroom12]

What does this mean?

Dave

It looks like to me that some of the sliders gimmicks if you want to use that word are duplicated in the main system. In other words overkill.

 

[Retune]

I have just had a look at the website for Affinity and the price seems less that Elements by about 50%. I am not so convinced ti will do everything that PS does. I cannot see any reference to RAW conversion , or have I simply missed it?

Affinity Photo Tutorials (V1)

A playlist containing all our tutorials for version 1 of Affinity Photo for Mac and Windows.

affinity.serif.com

I think there are better options for raw conversion, though. As a Nikon shooter, you can use the free Capture NX-D or Capture One Express packages:

index.html

nikonimglib.com

Buy Capture One: Professional Photo Editing Software

Discover Capture One’s complete suite of photo editing software, trusted by professionals worldwide. From Capture One Pro to our mobile app, Live, All in One bundle, and Studio solutions, explore pricing options that suit your creative workflow. Enhance your photography across desktop, mobile...

www.captureone.com

 

[Brian G]

I have just had a look at the website for Affinity and the price seems less that Elements by about 50%. I am not so convinced ti will do everything that PS does. I cannot see any reference to RAW conversion , or have I simply missed it?

You simply missed it.

Affinity is available on a 30 day trial.
If you don't think Affinity Photo will do what PS will do, why don't you download the trial and see for yourself - you'll be surprised at its capabilities.
At one time all the tutorials used to be for Photoshop, but with its popularity, Affinity is rapidly catching up.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I have just had a look at the website for Affinity and the price seems less that Elements by about 50%. I am not so convinced ti will do everything that PS does. I cannot see any reference to RAW conversion , or have I simply missed it?

While lots of things are very good about Affinity.
Their attempt at a raw processor is dire. And anything at all is better.

 

[darkroom12]

While lots of things are very good about Affinity.
Their attempt at a raw processor is dire. And anything at all is better.

I always use RAW even when scanning through my Nikon Scanner so it is not a great deal of use to me .

 

[Brian G]

While lots of things are very good about Affinity.
Their attempt at a raw processor is dire. And anything at all is better.

That's a little unkind, but having said that, I don't use Affinity for raw development either.
On1 is my replacement for Lightroom, which, with layers, means I don't use Affinity very often.

 

[Retune]

I always use RAW even when scanning through my Nikon Scanner so it is not a great deal of use to me .

The NEF files from a Nikon scanner aren't really raw files in the sense that their dSLR files are, even though they use the same file name extension. You're probably better off saving as a tiff.

 

[darkroom12]

I also use RAW with my D700 so it is not only when I scan Negs so an up to date version of PS is essential.

 

[Retune]

I've never been that bowled over by Adobe's raw conversions of Nikon files, and end up using mostly Capture NX-D for NEFs (which gives me colours I prefer without a lot of fiddling). Photoshop's Adobe Camera Raw plugin is pretty good at highlight recovery, though. Elements also uses ACR, but a cut down version with fewer controls.

 

[Dave Canon]

I bought Affinity at a special half price offer just to evaluate it; I guess I could have done that with the trial but as I am involved in training at my Camera club, I thought it might come in useful. It was a good value substitute for PS but did not compete with PS in a few areas. I could not manage without LR but could have managed with Affinity, if I had to. But I will continue with the market leader; the Adobe package unless they increase to price significantly.

Dave

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

That's a little unkind, but having said that, I don't use Affinity for raw development either.
On1 is my replacement for Lightroom, which, with layers, means I don't use Affinity very often.

It might seem unkind but is the worst raw processor I have ever tried out. They would be better off to start again with a different engine, rather than try tinkering with it.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

It might seem unkind but is the worst raw processor I have ever tried out. They would be better off to start again with a different engine, rather than try tinkering with it.

I have just had another play processing Fuji X files. and it is much improved, however I just can not get the colours how I like them. but no signs of worms or the like.
Though it is still slow, and worst of all you can only develop one image at a time. no way to synchronise a set of images, which is my normal practice, then just go through them and tweak where necessary.

 

[darkroom12]

Does anyone find that opening a picture in CC RAW it takes quite a bit of time on my desktop it is about 15 seconds and the laptop can be up to 30 seconds.

 

[darkroom12]

It might seem unkind but is the worst raw processor I have ever tried out. They would be better off to start again with a different engine, rather than try tinkering with it.

I don't have a problem with Adobe RAW, but it is getting a bit complex with some of the tools being replicated on the main Photoshop screen - Is that really necessary?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I don't have a problem with Adobe RAW, but it is getting a bit complex with some of the tools being replicated on the main Photoshop screen - Is that really necessary?

Adobe raw has always been a separate program since they bought it. It is still developed by the original owner and team. It is used with both lightroom and Photoshop.
Unlike Photoshop the changes you make in it are not at pixel level. They are non destructive.
There are some similarities in what can be done In the two programs, but they function very differently.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Sky replacement feature....

That's quite a big new one. Don't use the stock skies as everyone other f****r will. Actually don't use it - try actually getting the right light and sky.

A feature that kills the magic of outdoor photography.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Sky replacement feature....

That's quite a big new one. Don't use the stock skies as everyone other f****e will. Actually don't use it - try actually getting the right light and sky.

A feature that kills the magic of outdoor photography.

What is does give you is a quick and accurate selection of the sky to filter as necessary. but you still have to capture enough detail to work with .
Or exposure bracket and use a better exposer of itself.

 

[Retune]

I'm thinking of replacing Sky with Netflix.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

What is does give you is a quick and accurate selection of the sky to filter as necessary.

That may be true if you have retained some sky in the first place. Good feature. In simpler cases the sky is near white, so all you have to do is just adjust the blending options and then slightly tweak with a layer mask. Multiply works really well as blend mode retaining all the fine details in transition area. This works so much better than this new fancy thing that I have to say they have totally wasted their time coding.