Hi,

I am interested in making use of photoshop brushes. My work is done in Cararra 6 Pro, so I am working with 3D models in sci-fi and fantasy genres. I desire to add smoke, plasma, and other fx elements to scenes for 2D still output. At present, I am leaning towards composite layering...

With all of that said, which version of Photoshop would best suit my needs...CS3 or CS3 Extended?

I have limited experience with Paint Shop Pro but find that I really need Photoshop for the ability to work with PSDs...which for some reason I am either unable to figure out how Paint Shop does or it doesn't support that feature.

Anyway...I am very interested in hearing what people have to say in regards to CS3 or CS3 Extended.

Thanks...

John

hi john, not sure if anyones already said this yet but welcome to the forum :)

i use CS3 extended @ the office but haven't really pushed the 3D aspect of it yet so i can't offer alot of pointers but i am very pleased adobe is seeing the need to integrate some of these types of feature sets into PS.

i only hope there doesn't become too many different flavours of PS :)
*(it's hard enough to keep up with the different ways photoshop can be used, and everyones unique needs!!!)

:) retrocity

Hi McKay001-
Given that you don't seem to want to do anything with video, and anything with the custom texturing of 3D models in Photoshop (though that may come later - it sounds like you just want to add to the images at this point), I would suggest regular CS3.

Given that you're working to add to 3D images, the thought of working on the textures of the models themselves might be tempting, but it's still a bit more difficult to really do in actual practice (I have CS3E and it's still a bit of a headache for me).

Doing everything you laid out in your original description can easily be done in regular CS3. And you'll save a few bucks as well, so not a bad deal, really.

Hope that helps - good luck-
-Lew ;-)

What thundering1 said.  And by the way, Paint Shop Pro will read and write PSD files.

Attached Link: http://www.wondertouch.com/

For the smoke, plasma etc. effects take a look at Particle Illusion. Easily the best way to add these kinds of effects in 2D post.

Thanks for all the responses and welcoming me to the forums, I am glad to be here!

SouthBeachPhoto, I wish I could figure out how to convince Paint Shop Pro (I am using version 8) to play along with PSD (I don't know why I can't figure out).

Spedler, Particle Illusion looks pretty cool. Would you say that it is more user friendly than trying to add effects than using Photoshop brushes?

BTW...sorry it took me so long to reply, relatives are visiting and so I have been running around.

Thanks!

John

I don't know about more user-friendly... there's a learning curve to it that is steeper than using brushes. But the effects you can get would be very difficult to achieve by painting by hand.

Particle Illusions has always fascinated me. While I realize there's a $99 version, I know I'd wanna spend the money on the $400 version but I can't justify the expense right now.

I know, "why doesn't the dope get the $99 version then..?" I klnow, I know... I just don't wanna buy it twice, even though I could start making money with it right NOW...

The debate in my head continues...

Thanks Spedler-
-Lew ;-)

Attached Link: Some of my smoke

Cool link on "Particle Illusion", I hadn't seen that one. I've been using Trapcode's Particular as a plug-in in After Effects for doing smoke on still images. While the images are static they are part of a sequence in a strip so it was good to be able to animate the smoke in time and place the particles in sequential images for optimum continuity. While painting each frame with that kind of consistancy might be time consuming, note that any particle system also has a certain overhead trying to wrangle the particles to just how you want them to behave. Here's an example of my use of Particular.

No problem, Lew.

Glad to be of help :-)

Deci6el,

That is an excellent piece of art! Exactly the type of ultra cool art that I want to do!!!

So...I can see the huge benefit that an fx program like Particle Illusion or Trapcode's Particular can provide.

Is the moral of the story...don't play with photoshop brushes when you can use fx programs?

Is there any benefit in even getting CS3???

Well beyond the fact that I can't seem to get Paint Shop Pro to deal with PSD layers. 8-(

John

Well, there's a trick to that question...

Yes, the plug-ins or FX programs will add elements you're looking for.
BUT - they can't do all the corrections and extensive compositing of multiple images/renders/passes that Photoshop can.

Yes, this is adding up to a LOT of money. The Trapcode plugin works with After Effects - which is $1,000. Adobe has dropped the $600 version from their lineup (there used to be 2 flavors - Standard and Professional. Many people got the Standard version so they could use plugins like that, as well as have the basic motion graphics and compositing capabilities.

I'd still get Photoshop as a base application - you can find FX plugins for Photoshop as well - and there IS a $99 version of Particle Illlusions for your smoke and flame FX.
Good luck-
-Lew ;-)

I used to think that After Effects was just for animating but have found it very useful doing my strip, which I guess is just a staccato animation. No doubt, AE is a big ticket item. I'm not sure that i agree with thundering1 that AE won't let you do the "extensive compositing of multiple images/renders/passes that Photoshop can". Most of the filters in AE are from Photoshop and then a "skad" more from other sources. (That's a full skad, btw). But then, I'm also only speaking from a Photoshop 7 POV, I've never stepped inside CS. If you're making still images, you could easily keep a lot of that cash and make some custom brushes in Photoshop. I've also been a big fan of Painter and it's Image Hose. All the Liquid Stealth pics were posted in Photoshop with occasional quick trips to AE and/or Painter.

Yeah, if you can render everything with alphas, you can composite them in AE, but when I'm referring to multiple images, I'm mostly talking about custom masking, cutting and pasting - stuff that would just be a nightmare in AE that PS handles with ease.

You can DO it in AE, but it'll take you forever in comparison.
Good luck-
-Lew ;-)

You might want to download the trial version of the current version of Paint Shop Pro as it supports psd files.

I used PSP and PhotoImpact extensively before getting CS2 and learned a great deal from them that has been useful in learning CS2.

Stephanie

I have a somewhat similar question and thought instead of starting a new thread, I'd place it here.
I have CS3 and wasn't interested in Extended at the time, but now I'd like to upgrade to  Extended.  Does anyone know if there's such a thing as a CS3 to CS3 Extended upgrade?

I searched the Adobe site but didn't see anything .and they (Adobe) don't seem to like Email contacts.

Oddly, I don't think there's a way to "sidegrade" to Extended...
I thought of just getting the regular version thinking I would do that but couldn't find a way to sidegrade - so I wen ahead and got Extended because I also do a lot of video work.

May as well...

If you have a way to texture your models (I think UV Unwrapper is free...?), and have general video software, do you need Extended?

With a bit of searching, I found that you can upgrade from Photoshop 7, CS, CS2, and CS3.  From CS3, the upgrade price shows as $349.00 (US).  Seems a little expensive for a sidegrade especially if you already have PS CS3 Standard.  This is the price for PS 7, CS, CS2 as well.

I only have the standard PS CS3 and upgraded from PS7 for $200.  I was going to get the extended, but didn't know how useful it would be since I use Photoshop mainly for video work (titles, stills), and postwork of stills.

Thanks!  Yes, that's a bit much for a sidegrade, since I have CS3.   At the time I upgraded to CS3, I wasn't aware that the was going to be a Lightwave plugin for PS Extended, so I passed.  Don't see how Adobe can expect to sell CS3 to Extended sidegrades a that price, especially when probably a small number of user's like myself would be interested.

Guess I'll wait for the next version.