Dreamweaver CS4 Beta

I've been using this Beta from Adobe to maintain my main phoography website, and so far I'm pleased with it. I like the minimilist interface, the side by side editing most of all. It also feels like the FTP is working better than CS3 ever did for me.
I think the CSS features have evolved, but since I mostly code by hand, I don't realy know. So far, it has been solid on Windows XP SP3 on a big bad Dell XPS 420. Admittedly, I don't use many of the exotic features so I'm not stressing it at all, but I like what I see.
This feels like Adobe continuing the process of moving Dreamweaver away from its heritage and into the Creative Suite family look and feel. It's definitely a great tool for serious website developers.

So Disappointed with Adobe

I used to feel that Photoshop was the Ultimate Software...my personal Holy Grail. My goal was to learn it inside out and upside down. I quickly realized the PS is a bottomless pit of possibilities that could never be fully understood. The best I could do would be to learn the best ways to retouch portraits, using a small subset of the tools.

Then CS3 happened.

First we all discovered that Print was broken. The settings were not sticky. Workflows were broken. Many returned to CS2 just to get work done. It took 6 months to get this fixed so it would work the way it used to. Forward, into the past.

Then Bridge started crashing. Then it started crashing more. Then productivity ended. I discovered on the Adobe Forums that this was happening to lots of people. Adobe was silent. I wasted many many hours researching and trying different solutions until I finally figured out how to get back to work. Without going into detail, I had to turn off some of the features that made the Bridge a great tool.

I think the Adobe I used to respect is gone...it has lost it's way. Whoever is in charge seems to be more interested in adding new features than creating reliable software with minimal bugs. I am talking about software that serious professionals like me rely on to make a living. When it doesn't work, I don't work. I feel abandonded and deceived.

I have given up on Adobe, and I'm looking for other software by smaller companies that I can rely on. I feel sad like I'm ending a relationship, and I'm excited about the future. I was blind to her shortcomings for so long, but now I see her for who she is: a fake pretending to be someone she isn't. Yes we can still be friends, but I will never trust you again.

The Truth about Digital

To put it simply: digital photography is very time consuming, if you want to get the most out of your images. The file from your camera is only the starting point on the way to creating the finished product. For one thing, it needs to be properly sharpened since digital camera files are all a little soft.
Since I am a portrait photographer, my workflow is geared to making skin look its best. Just working with huge 12meg Raw files and very huge 150megs or more 16bit Photoshop psd files takes a lot of time and disk space.
Time is money and I spend way too much time working with my digital images, so digital is very expensive in terms of time. Of course the equipment is expensive and has to be replaced more often than film cameras to keep up with the state of the art.
Of course, I would never go back, and will continue to pursue the Holy Grail of the perfect Workflow.

Photoshop CS3

I have been using the beta version of Photoshop CS3 that is freely available on the Adobe site. My initial impression is that it runs faster and has a few interesting new features. My favorite improvement is in Adobe Camera Raw. The new controls make it a lot easier to extract a better file from a Raw file than before. The new controls are similar to what is already available in Bibble Pro. The beta ACR is pretty buggy, especially when working with multiple files, so I am careful with it.
I still prefer retouching my images in CS2, because it is more stable. I'm sure that when the production version is released, those problems will be worked out and it will be a pleasure to use. For example, the CS3 Liquify filter is MUCH faster than before. And the new selection tool is pretty amazing from what I have seen, even though I don't use that feature very often in my normal retouching work.
Bottom Line: I can't wait to get a hold of the production release. It is a major advance for Photoshop users.

Black and White photography

What's old is new again. Isn't it interesting how black and white photgraphy is so popular again? Even with the proliferation of digital cameras that only take color pix, there is a tremendous interest in the old school. Before color came about, photographers developed their own film and made their contact sheets and prints. It was all done inhouse. Then with color film, they had to send it out to a lab for processing and printing. In many ways, this was much cooler because it freed up a lot of time, although it increased the overhead due to lab processing charges. Basically the photographer became a runner for the lab...a middleman as it were.
Now the situation has come full circle. The digital photographer "develops" his own "film" in his darkroom (Photoshop), shows the proofs online, and prints on his Epson 2400. He only uses the lab for very large prints or for proofing.
And now, eveyone wants black and white prints. Creating a great b&w print is not that easy. There are at least ten ways to convert a color image to b&w in Photoshop, and only a couple of them are really great. And they rely on some decisions by the photographer to pick the best contrast settings. Then there's the challenge of printing on a printer that was designed for great color. It takes a lot of reading and testing to achieve acceptable or great results, but it is possible.
Look at the work of this Austin portrait photographer to see what is possible.