don't want to preview in Photoshop El.

[kerriann85]

Before I installed PE3 (but used PE1) I could right click a photo from within a folder on my Windows XP desktop and choose "preview" to quickly look at a picture and even "slideshow" throught the other pictures. I guess it used the windows viewer thing. Now when I choose preview it opens PE3 to show the picture. It takes way too long and only opens that one picture. How can I go back to not having pix open in PE3 until I actually left click on it!?

[Foxhound]

There are two ways of changing your default image viewer.

1. Open PSE3 and change your program defaults at "Edit>File Associations" and just select what type of images you want it to open automatically. I think this is the best way because you will then know exactly what will, and will not, be opened by PSE from the start.

2. Right click on your image and then select "open with > choose program". You can then choose your default viewer for that particular image format.

If you set the defaults in PSE then you'll not have to keep right clicking on all the different file formats to set your default viewer.


[This message has been edited by Foxhound (edited 11-12-2004).]

[JRKROGH]

Thumbnail support as in PE2 and P7 was dropped in PE3 and PCS. I have no idea why.
I uninstalled PE3, the reinstalled PE2. I now have thumbnail support back. The only way you can see .psd thumbnails in PE3 and CS is to use the Adobe builtin browser. I use IrfanView to select pics for other than editing and with PE3 installed it can't be done. This has nothing to do with file associations, etc. Nothing to do with Win XP. It was as Adobe decision pure and simple. Some people who already had Photoshop 7 have found that moving a dll to PE3 will add the thumbnail support. But this is not supported and I would'nt recommend it. Better to yell at Adobe...I do. Although so far, all I hear back is echos from the Abyss <G>

John

[southpaw]

Adobe will probably fix it. It usually takes about six months to a year after a new release before a major full emcompassing program update is released on most programs. It just takes time, that's all. Adobe Photoshop Elements 2 is at the end of it's life, that's why it's so great. Adobe Photoshop Elements 3 just started. There bugs, glitches, and other things that all need to be ironed out. After intial testing, a program goes to preliminary testing through others, then it hits the market and goes through general user testing. Right now, PSE 3 is in general user testing, with the variations of programs installed with the newest updated systems, and outdated systems, and a whole lot of other things that a company can not test against in their initial or selective testing. This initial stage of the 'last' bugs getting ironed out is neccessary, though Adobe would have done better to release a 30 day version of PSE3 6 months before it came out... but hey, that was their decision.

Southpaw

PS ~~ think about it like this... how great is a microsoft operating system 3 years or more after it's been out? But man, you know, that first year is rough.


[This message has been edited by southpaw (edited 11-12-2004).]

[JRKROGH]

Hi...Comparing the complexity of MS XP with Elements 3...apples and oranges. But I do understand the point you are trying to make. When I was working (now retired) we NEVER jumped on to any new versions and/or releases. In a production environment that is a big no-no. But in this case, the thumbnail issue was a conscious decision by Adobe (read that deliberate); not a "bug". My contention is this change (from PE2 and P7) should have been documented.
And I don't think PE2 is at the end of its life...but I do think Adobe would like you to think so. One thing we're both in agreement on...I expect to see alot of patches of PE3.

[kerriann85]

Foxhound, thanks, choosing the file association from within PE3 worked. Trying to do it directly from the picture in the windows folder didn't work. It changed what opened the photo, but didn't keep PE3 from opening the preview. Problem solved.
JR, I hadn't saved a file as a .psd so hadn't noticed the lack of thumbnail support until I tried it. I'll probably circumvent that by saving as .tiff instead. Still lossless until i'm finished my touch ups. I don't really need to use .psd do I? (I do agree it was "rude" of Adobe to do that though)

[This message has been edited by kerriann85 (edited 11-15-2004).]

[JRKROGH]

Hi K85...You are correct in that you can save the graphic as a tiff (among other formats) and still maintain the layers, etc.
I don't know enough about .psd (or tiff) to know if you would lose anything (in the pic) as part of the process. If nothing was lost then saving all .psd's you have, to tiffs would be a great work around. I think tiff is a little larger in storage size.If it turns out the tiff holds the same info as a .psd then I have to wonder why Adobe didn't keep ".PSD" an internal format with tiff as external?

[southpaw]

Okay, now that TIFFs are mentioned, I have to say something.

TIFF is a free format, with certain specifications. "TIFF is an acronym for Tag(ged) Image File Format. It is one of the most popular and flexible of the current public domain raster file formats. etc." http://home.earthlink.net/~ritter/tiff/#whatis

The TIFF specifications do NOT support layers. HOWEVER, TIFF is amazing at it's exceptional ability to hold fine art digitally. And, TIFF is extensible. So, companies have made their own modifications on the TIFF format. Why is this important? Because, if your friend/co-worker doesn't use Photoshop, your layers won't come through. Macromedia Fireworks does TIFF with layers option too, but it is a different design working the same way. But if you try to bring TIFF with layers from Photoshop/Elements into Fireworks, or TIFF with layers from Fireworks into Photoshop/Elements, the layers will NOT transfer. Layers with TIFF is company only, so remember that those layers just won't transfer. I have not tested TIFF with layers transfer to GIMP 2 or Elements 3, I will try to remember to test it later.

Different Versions of TIFF ~~ GeoTIFF, Adobe Extensions for PageMaker, JPEG in TIF, ZIP in TIFF, TIFF Class F Specification, TIFF/IT Prepress Interchange Standard, TIFF enhancements for PageMaker 6.0, RichTIFF, WangTIFF Image-Annotation extensions, Kodak TIFF extensions

"TIFF is a trademark, formerly registered to Aldus, and which is now claimed (though not yet registered) by Adobe Systems, Inc."
http://home.earthlink.net/~ritter/tiff/#whatis

I don't know if that was helpful, but maybe one of you found it useful. PNG has similar layer transfer issues as well.

Southpaw

[This message has been edited by southpaw (edited 11-17-2004).]

[JRKROGH]

SouthPaw

Thanks for the information. I kind of thought saving a .psd into ??? might lose something and you've done a nice job of explaining it.

John

[kerriann85]

Wow, Southpaw, everything I need to know about tiff and then some! http://www.photoshopelementsuser.com/ubb/smile.gif I knew tiff was a "lossless" way to save pix but didn't know all that other stuff. Just now I'm starting to use layers so I didn't even think about the ability to "save layers" and I don't have to share them with "friends/coworkers" or use them in another program so not a problem there. I did wonder about file size so I did a test. My layered creation was exactly the same size in both a tiff and a psd--huge. Interesting though....both the tiff and the PSD showed up as a THUMBNAIL in my windows folder! (couldn't bring the psd into a larger "preview" pix though)
Thanks for the interesting conversation you guys. Learning more every day! (maybe you can next convince me I should always be shooting my photos in "raw"?)

[southpaw]

kerrian,

You'll find that if you fiddle with the different compression modes of TIFF, you'll come out with smaller files than your PSD counterparts. But to be entirely truthful, layers in any file type and trying to transfer them from one company's program to another is often a pain, if even possible in some cases. Only the PDF file format seems so exceptional at transfering exactly how you intended platform to platform. A good thing to generally know, when you are considering sending something that that doesn't need to be edited, you can try saving in PDF.

As far as RAW, LOL. Well, I have a C4000, which when I bought it, it was new. It takes pictures in various sizes of TIFF and JPEG formats. And it was one of the better on the market. Now, more than a year later, it's considered outdated and passe. The same camera line now of course does RAW, and TIFFs, and JPEGs, and who knows what else. The thing is... that camera cost me more than 400 dollars. It still takes beautiful pictures. And I don't happen to have an extra 450 to 1500 dollars lying around for another digital camera that is of comparable quality. So.... lol.... nope, I am definitely not going to be telling you to go RAW anytime soon.

Southpaw

[This message has been edited by southpaw (edited 11-17-2004).]

[Foxhound]

So far the only time I've had to convert anything to tiff is when I submit images to a buyer through a stock agency. If any image comes into Photoshop it gets saved as a psd because of it's lossless format and ability to maintain the open layers. Works very well for me.

I shoot virtually all my images in the RAW format. If for no other reason it allows me to not be preoccupied with the temperture of the changing light. I leave my white balance on auto and fix it later if needed. Not to mention I have all the digital image information in tact and can change them at will. If you have the card space available then it's worth shooting in RAW (NEF). Curently I shoot with 8 512meg Lexar's so that's just over 400 raw images.