Photoshop CS3 vs. Camera Raw

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Netman, Dec 25, 2009.

  1. Netman

    Netman Guest

    Hello!

    I want to buy earlier version of Photoshop and I cannot find answer on the
    following question:

    Will the newest Camera Raw plugin (5.6) run on Photoshop CS3?

    Thank you in advance for help
    netman
     
    Netman, Dec 25, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Netman

    nospam Guest

    In article <hh37rn$tf7$>, Netman <>
    wrote:

    > I want to buy earlier version of Photoshop and I cannot find answer on the
    > following question:
    >
    > Will the newest Camera Raw plugin (5.6) run on Photoshop CS3?


    it will not. cs3 uses camera raw 4.x.

    did you not notice the cs4 requirement for camera raw 5.6 on adobe's
    web site?
     
    nospam, Dec 25, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Netman

    Netman Guest

    Uzytkownik "nospam" <> napisal w wiadomosci
    news:251220091624515628%...
    > In article <hh37rn$tf7$>, Netman <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> I want to buy earlier version of Photoshop and I cannot find answer on
    >> the
    >> following question:
    >>
    >> Will the newest Camera Raw plugin (5.6) run on Photoshop CS3?

    >
    > it will not. cs3 uses camera raw 4.x.
    >
    > did you not notice the cs4 requirement for camera raw 5.6 on adobe's
    > web site?


    Thank you for answer.

    No, can you paste a link to these requirements?
     
    Netman, Dec 25, 2009
    #3
  4. Netman wrote:
    > Hello!
    >
    > I want to buy earlier version of Photoshop and I cannot find answer on the
    > following question:
    >
    > Will the newest Camera Raw plugin (5.6) run on Photoshop CS3?
    >
    > Thank you in advance for help
    > netman
    >
    >

    Depending on what you want to do in post processing, Lightroom may be a
    workable solution for you. It uses the equivalent of the latest ACR
    plugin- it's built in in the case of LR.

    If you care to outline what you want to do, several suggestions maybe
    forthcoming.
    --

    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Dec 25, 2009
    #4
  5. Netman

    nospam Guest

    In article <hh3bom$62h$>, Netman <>
    wrote:

    > >> Will the newest Camera Raw plugin (5.6) run on Photoshop CS3?

    > >
    > > it will not. cs3 uses camera raw 4.x.
    > >
    > > did you not notice the cs4 requirement for camera raw 5.6 on adobe's
    > > web site?

    >
    > Thank you for answer.
    >
    > No, can you paste a link to these requirements?


    <http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html>
    This powerful plug-in has been frequently updated to support more
    cameras and include more features, and is available as part of Adobe
    Photoshop CS4.

    <http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4621>
    <http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4622>
    The Camera Raw 5.6 plug-in is not compatible with versions of Photoshop
    earlier than Photoshop CS4.

    SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
    See the system requirements for Adobe Creative Suite 4 software or
    Photoshop CS4
     
    nospam, Dec 25, 2009
    #5
  6. Netman

    Tim Conway Guest

    "Netman" <> wrote in message
    news:hh37rn$tf7$...
    > Hello!
    >
    > I want to buy earlier version of Photoshop and I cannot find answer on the
    > following question:
    >
    > Will the newest Camera Raw plugin (5.6) run on Photoshop CS3?
    >
    > Thank you in advance for help
    > netman


    The latest camera raw plugin will only work on PCS4. There is a work around
    that is pretty easy. As outlined in this website:
    http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/dng/ps_cs.htm

    you can use the latest DNG converter with an older camera raw compatible
    with your version of Photoshop.
    Search on Adobe's website for the correct versions of camera raw for each
    version of photoshop.
     
    Tim Conway, Dec 25, 2009
    #6
  7. Netman

    Rock Guest

    On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 17:12:19 -0500, nospam <> wrote:

    >In article <hh3bom$62h$>, Netman <>
    >wrote:
    >
    >> >> Will the newest Camera Raw plugin (5.6) run on Photoshop CS3?
    >> >
    >> > it will not. cs3 uses camera raw 4.x.
    >> >
    >> > did you not notice the cs4 requirement for camera raw 5.6 on adobe's
    >> > web site?

    >>
    >> Thank you for answer.
    >>
    >> No, can you paste a link to these requirements?

    >
    ><http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html>
    >This powerful plug-in has been frequently updated to support more
    >cameras and include more features, and is available as part of Adobe
    >Photoshop CS4.
    >
    ><http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4621>
    ><http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4622>
    >The Camera Raw 5.6 plug-in is not compatible with versions of Photoshop
    >earlier than Photoshop CS4.
    >
    >SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
    >See the system requirements for Adobe Creative Suite 4 software or
    >Photoshop CS4


    Or you could get Photoline from www.pl32.net for far less than you'd pay
    for any upgrade and plugins from Adobe. Photoline supports RAW file formats
    that even Adobe doesn't support today. Plus you'll have an editor that does
    more and does it better than Photoshop has ever been able to do. Adobe has
    yet to even learn of the benefits of Lanczos resampling algorithms for all
    rotations and resizings. You're still stuck with rudimentary bicubic in
    Photoshop, leaving you with photo detail resolutions of one-half of what
    you paid all that money for in camera gear to obtain in the first place.
    What fools.
     
    Rock, Dec 26, 2009
    #7
  8. Tim Conway wrote:
    >
    > "Netman" <> wrote in message
    > news:hh37rn$tf7$...
    >> Hello!
    >>
    >> I want to buy earlier version of Photoshop and I cannot find answer on
    >> the following question:
    >>
    >> Will the newest Camera Raw plugin (5.6) run on Photoshop CS3?
    >>
    >> Thank you in advance for help
    >> netman

    >
    > The latest camera raw plugin will only work on PCS4. There is a work
    > around that is pretty easy. As outlined in this website:
    > http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/dng/ps_cs.htm
    >
    > you can use the latest DNG converter with an older camera raw compatible
    > with your version of Photoshop.
    > Search on Adobe's website for the correct versions of camera raw for
    > each version of photoshop.
    >

    The key site is http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/ for the free DNG
    converter.

    --
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Dec 26, 2009
    #8
  9. Netman

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Rock
    <> wrote:
    >
    > Or you could get Photoline from www.pl32.net for far less than you'd pay
    > for any upgrade and plugins from Adobe. Photoline supports RAW file formats
    > that even Adobe doesn't support today.


    wrong.

    > Plus you'll have an editor that does
    > more and does it better than Photoshop has ever been able to do. Adobe has
    > yet to even learn of the benefits of Lanczos resampling algorithms for all
    > rotations and resizings. You're still stuck with rudimentary bicubic in
    > Photoshop, leaving you with photo detail resolutions of one-half of what
    > you paid all that money for in camera gear to obtain in the first place.
    > What fools.


    nonsense.
     
    nospam, Dec 26, 2009
    #9
  10. Netman

    ray Guest

    On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:38:05 +0100, Netman wrote:

    > Hello!
    >
    > I want to buy earlier version of Photoshop and I cannot find answer on
    > the following question:
    >
    > Will the newest Camera Raw plugin (5.6) run on Photoshop CS3?
    >
    > Thank you in advance for help
    > netman


    You might look at ufraw to do the conversion prior to importing to ps.
    ufraw will also do basic changes to exposure, etc.
     
    ray, Dec 26, 2009
    #10
  11. Netman

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, ray <>
    wrote:

    > > I want to buy earlier version of Photoshop and I cannot find answer on
    > > the following question:
    > >
    > > Will the newest Camera Raw plugin (5.6) run on Photoshop CS3?

    >
    > You might look at ufraw to do the conversion prior to importing to ps.
    > ufraw will also do basic changes to exposure, etc.


    camera raw does a *lot* more than 'basic changes' and he wants to use
    photoshop, not something else. plus, it can be converted to dng for
    free with adobe's dng converter, and processed in any recent version of
    photoshop, as well as other apps.
     
    nospam, Dec 26, 2009
    #11
  12. Netman

    ray Guest

    On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:40:23 -0600, nospam wrote:

    > In article <>, ray <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> > I want to buy earlier version of Photoshop and I cannot find answer
    >> > on the following question:
    >> >
    >> > Will the newest Camera Raw plugin (5.6) run on Photoshop CS3?

    >>
    >> You might look at ufraw to do the conversion prior to importing to ps.
    >> ufraw will also do basic changes to exposure, etc.

    >
    > camera raw does a *lot* more than 'basic changes' and he wants to use
    > photoshop, not something else. plus, it can be converted to dng for free
    > with adobe's dng converter, and processed in any recent version of
    > photoshop, as well as other apps.


    OK - so I'm not stopping him from using photoshop. And chances are pretty
    good that ufraw will do most if not all of the changes he needs to make -
    working from the raw data.
     
    ray, Dec 26, 2009
    #12
  13. Netman

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, ray <>
    wrote:

    > OK - so I'm not stopping him from using photoshop.


    you're suggesting a completely incompatible solution.

    > And chances are pretty
    > good that ufraw will do most if not all of the changes he needs to make -
    > working from the raw data.


    maybe yes, maybe no. the point is that he wants to use camera raw and
    photoshop.
     
    nospam, Dec 26, 2009
    #13
  14. Netman

    ray Guest

    On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 09:54:21 -0800, nospam wrote:

    > In article <>, ray <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> OK - so I'm not stopping him from using photoshop.

    >
    > you're suggesting a completely incompatible solution.


    Guess I'm rather dense - you'll have to explain to me how that solution
    is any more incompatible than yours.

    >
    >> And chances are pretty
    >> good that ufraw will do most if not all of the changes he needs to make
    >> - working from the raw data.

    >
    > maybe yes, maybe no. the point is that he wants to use camera raw and
    > photoshop.


    And I guess the point is that he can't. So it's only going to take a free
    download for the OP to decide if what I propose will work for him/her. I
    don't see that ufraw and photoshop is any more or less 'incompatible'
    than dng converter and photoshop.

    Have a nice day.
     
    ray, Dec 26, 2009
    #14
  15. Netman

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, ray <>
    wrote:

    > >> OK - so I'm not stopping him from using photoshop.

    > >
    > > you're suggesting a completely incompatible solution.

    >
    > Guess I'm rather dense - you'll have to explain to me how that solution
    > is any more incompatible than yours.


    camera raw is a photoshop plugin. ufraw is not. camera raw is invoked
    automatically when opening an image in photoshop. it 'just works.'

    to use ufraw, it's a multi-step process that loses a substantial amount
    of functionality.

    > >> And chances are pretty
    > >> good that ufraw will do most if not all of the changes he needs to make
    > >> - working from the raw data.

    > >
    > > maybe yes, maybe no. the point is that he wants to use camera raw and
    > > photoshop.

    >
    > And I guess the point is that he can't.


    of course he can.

    > So it's only going to take a free
    > download for the OP to decide if what I propose will work for him/her.


    camera raw is free. he only needs to download the appropriate version,
    or use the (also free) dng converter if he wants to use a later version
    of camera raw than what is supported by the version of photoshop he
    wants to use. or, he can get a later version of photoshop.

    > I don't see that ufraw and photoshop is any more or less 'incompatible'
    > than dng converter and photoshop.


    then you are unaware of what they can do, and it's quite a bit more
    than ufraw/gimp/etc.

    > Have a nice day.


    thanks, you too.
     
    nospam, Dec 26, 2009
    #15
  16. Netman

    ray Guest

    On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:55:38 -0800, nospam wrote:

    > In article <>, ray <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> >> OK - so I'm not stopping him from using photoshop.
    >> >
    >> > you're suggesting a completely incompatible solution.

    >>
    >> Guess I'm rather dense - you'll have to explain to me how that solution
    >> is any more incompatible than yours.

    >
    > camera raw is a photoshop plugin. ufraw is not. camera raw is invoked
    > automatically when opening an image in photoshop. it 'just works.'
    >
    > to use ufraw, it's a multi-step process that loses a substantial amount
    > of functionality.


    I see - but to use dng converter is not.

    >
    >> >> And chances are pretty
    >> >> good that ufraw will do most if not all of the changes he needs to
    >> >> make - working from the raw data.
    >> >
    >> > maybe yes, maybe no. the point is that he wants to use camera raw and
    >> > photoshop.

    >>
    >> And I guess the point is that he can't.

    >
    > of course he can.
    >
    >> So it's only going to take a free
    >> download for the OP to decide if what I propose will work for him/her.

    >
    > camera raw is free. he only needs to download the appropriate version,
    > or use the (also free) dng converter if he wants to use a later version
    > of camera raw than what is supported by the version of photoshop he
    > wants to use. or, he can get a later version of photoshop.


    That seems to be the crux of the matter doesn't it? Either break the flow
    or spend money.

    >
    >> I don't see that ufraw and photoshop is any more or less 'incompatible'
    >> than dng converter and photoshop.

    >
    > then you are unaware of what they can do, and it's quite a bit more than
    > ufraw/gimp/etc.
    >
    >> Have a nice day.

    >
    > thanks, you too.
     
    ray, Dec 26, 2009
    #16
  17. Netman

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, ray <>
    wrote:

    > >> Guess I'm rather dense - you'll have to explain to me how that solution
    > >> is any more incompatible than yours.

    > >
    > > camera raw is a photoshop plugin. ufraw is not. camera raw is invoked
    > > automatically when opening an image in photoshop. it 'just works.'
    > >
    > > to use ufraw, it's a multi-step process that loses a substantial amount
    > > of functionality.

    >
    > I see - but to use dng converter is not.


    you can batch convert the raws to dng and then use them as you would
    any other raw file. there are no intermediate files.

    although it is is another step, it's easy to batch convert them and
    from the dng, you can do anything you want as if it was still the
    original raw. with camera raw, you can even go back and re-adjust the
    raw conversion *after* retouching and cropping the image.

    > > camera raw is free. he only needs to download the appropriate version,
    > > or use the (also free) dng converter if he wants to use a later version
    > > of camera raw than what is supported by the version of photoshop he
    > > wants to use. or, he can get a later version of photoshop.

    >
    > That seems to be the crux of the matter doesn't it? Either break the flow
    > or spend money.


    sometimes spending money is worth it.

    he didn't say what camera he had, but if he absolutely must use the
    latest camera raw, he can get photoshop elements for roughly $50
    instead of cs4. i'm pretty sure he spent more than that on his camera,
    probably a lot more.
     
    nospam, Dec 26, 2009
    #17
  18. Netman

    Netman Guest

    Uzytkownik "nospam" <> napisal w wiadomosci
    news:261220091250378299%...
    > In article <>, ray <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> >> Guess I'm rather dense - you'll have to explain to me how that
    >> >> solution
    >> >> is any more incompatible than yours.
    >> >
    >> > camera raw is a photoshop plugin. ufraw is not. camera raw is invoked
    >> > automatically when opening an image in photoshop. it 'just works.'
    >> >
    >> > to use ufraw, it's a multi-step process that loses a substantial amount
    >> > of functionality.

    >>
    >> I see - but to use dng converter is not.

    >
    > you can batch convert the raws to dng and then use them as you would
    > any other raw file. there are no intermediate files.
    >
    > although it is is another step, it's easy to batch convert them and
    > from the dng, you can do anything you want as if it was still the
    > original raw. with camera raw, you can even go back and re-adjust the
    > raw conversion *after* retouching and cropping the image.
    >
    >> > camera raw is free. he only needs to download the appropriate version,
    >> > or use the (also free) dng converter if he wants to use a later version
    >> > of camera raw than what is supported by the version of photoshop he
    >> > wants to use. or, he can get a later version of photoshop.

    >>
    >> That seems to be the crux of the matter doesn't it? Either break the flow
    >> or spend money.

    >
    > sometimes spending money is worth it.
    >
    > he didn't say what camera he had, but if he absolutely must use the
    > latest camera raw, he can get photoshop elements for roughly $50
    > instead of cs4. i'm pretty sure he spent more than that on his camera,
    > probably a lot more.


    I have Canon 50D + 70-200 f/2.8 and 2 other lens.

    I have seen a video tutorial which makes me satisfy about Camera Raw.

    That`s why I want to buy PS CS4 and use Camera Raw plugin.

    netman
     
    Netman, Dec 26, 2009
    #18
  19. Netman

    nospam Guest

    In article <hh5un5$b9l$>, Netman <>
    wrote:

    > I have Canon 50D + 70-200 f/2.8 and 2 other lens.
    >
    > I have seen a video tutorial which makes me satisfy about Camera Raw.
    >
    > That`s why I want to buy PS CS4 and use Camera Raw plugin.


    the 50d is supported by camera raw 4.6 which will work in cs3. it's
    also supported with cs4 and any version of camera raw 5.x.

    <http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4033>
    <http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4034>
     
    nospam, Dec 26, 2009
    #19
  20. Netman

    ray Guest

    On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 12:50:37 -0800, nospam wrote:

    > In article <>, ray <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> >> Guess I'm rather dense - you'll have to explain to me how that
    >> >> solution is any more incompatible than yours.
    >> >
    >> > camera raw is a photoshop plugin. ufraw is not. camera raw is invoked
    >> > automatically when opening an image in photoshop. it 'just works.'
    >> >
    >> > to use ufraw, it's a multi-step process that loses a substantial
    >> > amount of functionality.

    >>
    >> I see - but to use dng converter is not.

    >
    > you can batch convert the raws to dng and then use them as you would any
    > other raw file. there are no intermediate files.
    >
    > although it is is another step, it's easy to batch convert them and from
    > the dng, you can do anything you want as if it was still the original
    > raw. with camera raw, you can even go back and re-adjust the raw
    > conversion *after* retouching and cropping the image.
    >
    >> > camera raw is free. he only needs to download the appropriate
    >> > version, or use the (also free) dng converter if he wants to use a
    >> > later version of camera raw than what is supported by the version of
    >> > photoshop he wants to use. or, he can get a later version of
    >> > photoshop.

    >>
    >> That seems to be the crux of the matter doesn't it? Either break the
    >> flow or spend money.

    >
    > sometimes spending money is worth it.
    >
    > he didn't say what camera he had, but if he absolutely must use the
    > latest camera raw, he can get photoshop elements for roughly $50 instead
    > of cs4. i'm pretty sure he spent more than that on his camera, probably
    > a lot more.


    Or simply avoid the whole mess by using ufraw and GIMP - at no expense.
    More than one way to skin a cat.
     
    ray, Dec 26, 2009
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Wayne J. Cosshall

    Photoshop CS3 Beta Indepth - Camera RAW

    Wayne J. Cosshall, Dec 18, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    325
    Wayne J. Cosshall
    Dec 18, 2006
  2. Wayne J. Cosshall

    Photoshop CS3 Beta review of Photoshop, parts 1, 2 and 3

    Wayne J. Cosshall, Dec 24, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    965
    KatWoman
    Dec 31, 2006
  3. Mike J.S.

    Photoshop CS3 or Dreamweaver CS3 on WinXP-64?

    Mike J.S., Sep 6, 2007, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    544
    Robin
    Oct 7, 2007
  4. just bob

    Re: photoshop cs3 raw aspect ratio

    just bob, Jun 9, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    304
    Paul Furman
    Jul 1, 2008
  5. cs3 vs cs3 extended ?

    , Jun 27, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    505
Loading...

Share This Page