Um, CS definitely seems/feels slower than PS7. But as soon as I put it to empirical test I couldn't put a finger on it.
I have CS on W2k with an Athlon 2400 and 1GB Ram I have scratch 1 on a NTFS IDE disc with 32GB free, scratch 2 on NTFS SCSI 15GB free... I have checked fragmentation on scratch 1, it does not need defragging. CS restart to register the new assignments I've given it 700+Mb of Ram Of course, so far I have just been checking out new features such as Camera Raw and the rather cool lens blur effects. Lens blur certainly gobbles some 96% of the CPU on even a 20MB image (using the depthmap from mask option), this eats cycles. However... when I do some resize operations and compare with PS7 the timings are verrrry similar. Interestingly the CS progress bar is much larger and wider than the PS7 one. I don't like this. It makes it feel as if things are taking longer! Some kind of temporal illusion? However I have found that its infinitely faster at rendering 16bit H/S adjustment layers than PS7 was :) No doubt this is a really fabulous upgrade. Now, wouldn't it be nice if they provided a way of using that chromatic aberration remover to work on scanned images. Ah well, there will be another UG next year no doubt. PRW Freeman http://www.architecturalimages.co.uk In message Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Paul Hewitt writes >I don't have a stopwatch available, all I can say is that CS is >unbelievably slow on my machine to the extent that I have reverted to >PS7 -- ____________________________________________________ Message scanned for viruses and dangerous content by <http://www.newnet.co.uk/av/> and believed to be clean =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
