I have yet to experience any kind of annoying slowdown running PSCS. All operations seem virtually instantaneous. Scratch disk allocation is a big part of the equation. I have a 200 gig firewire drive that is almost empty as my first scratch disk. I have 1.5 gig of ram with 70% of it allocated to PS. However, I'm working on a Mac, which may change the routine in some way. Paul
> Hi Don, > > I'm not sure you'll see much, if any, difference in the end result, but I'm > just now starting to explore the possibilities and pitfalls of converting > RAW files, so it's very possible I'm talking through my hat ... > > If I were you, I'd not pay for the upgrade to PS CS until you're sure > you'll need it (unless you can get it very inexpensively). If you've a > fast enough connection, download the trial edition from Adobe and see how > it works for you. Apart from the various new features and frills that CS > offers, it's also quite memory intensive, and if your machine isn't up to > it, you may find the program slow and cumbersome to use. I'm using a very > current WinXP machine with 2gigs of fast memory, a fast CPU, two very fast > and large hard drives + an external drive, and have plenty of room for > scratch disks, and still I get frustrated when running certain routines. > > The trial software is complete in every way as far as I can tell, so it > should give you a good sense of whether it'll do the job you want done. > > Shel > > > > From: Don Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > I am using the Pentax software and PS 7.01 plug-in to convert the > > RAW files, perhaps that is a big part of my problem. > > I'll pick up the CS upgrade today and see how it goes. > > I've seen some excellent examples of images from the D taken by > > you folks and was really wondering why mine were so inferior. > > Is it simply the algorithms used in the CS convertor that > > result in a superior end result? > >
