PDA

View Full Version : PSE vs CS4


jrivera
September 11th, 2009, 02:58 PM
Since I have read that Adobe probably won't be coming out with PSE7 for MAC, I have considered going to CS4. I know CS4 is more expensive but they have a price break right now until the 15th for $299 when upgrading from PSE. How hard is it to learn CS4 and is it worth it to shell out the money or should I just be patient until PSE8 comes out?

frank abramonte
September 11th, 2009, 03:10 PM
Joyce, it's a personal choice depending on the use you have for the advanced capabilities of CS4. If you ever intend to use CMYK then you must have CS4 since it's not available on PSE.
The learning curve for the basics I would say is about the same between them.
Also, how advanced are you with PSE?
Read what Tommy_Boy_1984 wrote about PSE and CS4, it may help you decide.

http://www.elementsvillage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50446

jrivera
September 11th, 2009, 03:22 PM
Frank,
Thanks for the response. I would consider myself an advanced PSE user but then since I don't know what CMYK is maybe I'm not - :confused:. It indeed was a steep learning curve for PSE and it does pretty much do everything I want it to but the price of $299 kept hanging over my head and I didn't know if it was too good to pass up. Thanks again for your insight - this is exactly what I need.

baycruisers
September 11th, 2009, 05:04 PM
I have both and find PSE 7 to be much more useful on scrapbooking type tasks. (I'm not a scrapbooker, but I've been scanning a lot of old family photos and like PSE's ability to auto-divide gang-scanned photos). I prefer CS4's sharpening tools and filters, but otherwise, either program will do much of what I need.

jrivera
September 11th, 2009, 05:09 PM
Thanks so much for your perspective on this, I really appreciate it. What is better about the sharpening tool in CS than PSE?

jjvera00
September 11th, 2009, 07:21 PM
I recently purchased CS4 because of the price offer of $299 (normally $699). So far it has been ok and I think that my background experience of PSE for the past few years have made the transition easier.

What you may want to do is download a 30-day trial version of CS4 to see if you like it or not. I know you have until the 15th to play with it so it may not be enough time to make an accurate decision.

baycruisers
September 11th, 2009, 07:24 PM
Thanks so much for your perspective on this, I really appreciate it. What is better about the sharpening tool in CS than PSE?

Frankly, not that much. However, Scott Kelby created an action that uses a luminosity blending mode and Fade Unsharp Mask option that gives you some nice results. I don't think there's a comparable option in PSE. Is that one feature worth the extra money? Probably not, but I'm still learning.

alibony
September 11th, 2009, 08:11 PM
I've gone in the other direction. I used to use Photoshop CS2 and switched to Photoshop Elements. Cost was the deciding factor. I just couldn't justify spending the big bucks for PS when I could do 95% of what I wanted in PSE at a fraction of the cost.

At first, I found Elements annoying - especially when features that I found essential in CS2 (such as the ability to add a layer mask to any layer and to create my own actions) were missing from PSE. Now, I've learned to love PSE, found workarounds for many of the missing parts, and rarely use CS2 - except for stuff I just can't do in PSE, like save custom shapes and create actions.

The two programs are enough alike that you would have no problems adapting to CS4, if you decide to purchase it.

Karen

jrivera
September 14th, 2009, 11:09 AM
Well, I think I have made my decision based on the last two comments. I'm going to stay with PSE. Thanks for the feedback, it was was exactly what I was hoping for - someone else to make the decision for me - LOL :D

Barbara Brundage
September 14th, 2009, 03:54 PM
Besides, don't forget that just because there isn't PSE 7 for Mac, that doesn't meant there will never be another Mac update. Lately Adobe seems to be skipping the odd numbered releases for the Mac version, so we got 4 and 6 but not 5 and 7.

jrivera
September 15th, 2009, 12:04 PM
That is very true! Thanks for your response.
Joyce