PS CS3 vs. CS5

[flyinion]

Need some convincing that CS5 is worth it. I mean I know it will give me full 64bit support but as an amateur photographer I'm trying to convince myself it's worth upgrading. I'm currently running CS3 Web Suite but only using PS out of it and thinking of grabbing PS CS5 on education discount for $199 before I finish my last class. It's coming out of my tax return if I do it and I've got CS5 and one other item (new video card) that I'm debating between. I can't do both because I need to use most of the return to be responsible and pay off some credit cards. What do you guys think? Will I see enough of a difference between the two versions to make it worth it?

[GB1]

I have CS5. I haven't used CS3 but I did have CS2 which was becoming obsolete.

I'm not a good PS user and still have a ways to climb, but I think the two most important differences on this version are its HDR refinement and Content Aware fills. I think there's various fixes and improvements here and there in the other areas.

Content Aware: at first I really felt Adobe pulled a fast one on us. I still do to an extent, as it works no where near as good as that demo they gave us about two years ago. If you look close (and all serious photographers will), you will easily be able to see where it was post processed. You need to work on it some more afterward to hide that. However - I've since learned that it works a lot better in small increments, and I've gotten some useful fixes out of it.

HDR: it works Ok and is light years better than CS2's, which was s***. Still not as good as Photomatix IMO, but some may argue on that as its results are different.

Don't know what to say on the video card, other than I slapped a super video card in a new computer two years ago and didn't notice any difference right off (I later fried the video card and hence never got the opp to really test it out).

G

[Grandpaw]

I have CS5. I haven't used CS3 but I did have CS2 which was becoming obsolete.

I'm not a good PS user and still have a ways to climb, but I think the two most important differences on this version are its HDR refinement and Content Aware fills. I think there's various fixes and improvements here and there in the other areas.

Content Aware: at first I really felt Adobe pulled a fast one on us. I still do to an extent, as it works no where near as good as that demo they gave us about two years ago. If you look close (and all serious photographers will), you will easily be able to see where it was post processed. You need to work on it some more afterward to hide that. However - I've since learned that it works a lot better in small increments, and I've gotten some useful fixes out of it.

HDR: it works Ok and is light years better than CS2's, which was s***. Still not as good as Photomatix IMO, but some may argue on that as its results are different.

Don't know what to say on the video card, other than I slapped a super video card in a new computer two years ago and didn't notice any difference right off (I later fried the video card and hence never got the opp to really test it out).

G

Greg, when you use the delete content aware if you haven't tried it back off just a little on the opacity to maybe 95% or so and see if you don't like the results a little better, Jeff

[flyinion]

Yeah I'm having a tough time deciding. Other than the 64bit capable and maybe taking better advantage of my newer PC hardware, I don't know that I necessarily need the new features like that fill thing. Since I use my PC for gaming too, I'd see a good use for that new video card. Of course, my last class starts next month so I've got till the end of April to take advantage of the student price on PS and I can buy the video card for the same price any time.

[Liamrob]

The newer versions of Photoshop are much more better on multi-core, and on x64 systems. And I stick with CS4.

[flyinion]

Well, I think I decided to go with the new video card after all for now. Hopefully I'll come up with raw cash to get PS CS5 by itself (no suite package) in the next two months before I finish the final class for my degree and lose the education discount. I also checked again and it's only about 170 not 199 which should be pretty easy to come up with. I think I decided that at this point in my photography experience, CS5 is a nice to have but not really a need. For the other ways I use my computer, the new video card is going to be much more useful.

[Anbesol]

The brushes all have a preview of the effect, makes cloning and healing a lot easier.

And the printing utility has improved dramatically, with an instant preview available and much more intuitive print placement options.

But ehhhh, wait a minute, I'm talking about the difference between cs2 and 4, I've seen very little difference between 4 and 5, but haven't used 5 a whole lot yet. The difference between 2 and 4 was huge. No clue about 3, and of course thats all my personal way of using it the differences I've noticed, you may use it differently.

[GB1]

The brushes all have a preview of the effect, makes cloning and healing a lot easier.

And the printing utility has improved dramatically, with an instant preview available and much more intuitive print placement options.

But ehhhh, wait a minute, I'm talking about the difference between cs2 and 4, I've seen very little difference between 4 and 5, but haven't used 5 a whole lot yet. The difference between 2 and 4 was huge. No clue about 3, and of course thats all my personal way of using it the differences I've noticed, you may use it differently.

Well, they added that Content Aware feature in 5, but as my other posts have alluded to that thing was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay oversold. Adobe ought to be ashamed of itself on that one. Not that it doesn't work at all, but it produces embarrassing results sometimes and only seems effective if using on a very small area. That (in)famous demo they had leading up to its release was smoke & mirrors in a major, major way.