Log in

View Full Version : Photoshop Elements Support: A Sad, Sorry State of Affairs


Jason Dunn
08-24-2006, 05:30 PM
Every couple of months I fire up the organizer side of Photoshop Elements 4.0, and I usually end up getting frustrated with how sluggish it is and I quit after a few minutes (I enjoy using the editor side though). A few weeks ago I thought I'd try the online photo ordering process, to see how well it works for Canadians and if it's something I can recommend to my somewhat computer-challenged relatives. Picasa is a great program, but the only option for online photo ordering it offers is BonusPrint (http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9590), and you know how I feel about that company (they never did respond to me, the cowards). At any rate, I dragged a few photos over to the online printing drop box. Then I found a big photo collage I had created with LumaPix FotoFusion (http://www.lumapix.com/) and tried to add it to my online order. Here's the error I received:

http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/photoshop-elements-error.png

If you look closely at that image, you can see that the JPG I'm trying to add to my order is 12.2 MB in size. It's ultra high-resolution (70 megapixels) because I print the collages at 16 x 20" in size. The Adobe Photoshop Elements error claims files have to be smaller than 54 MB, which my 12.2 MB file clearly is. So we have a nice, fat, juicy bug here. I wanted to report it to Adobe, and looked through their support pages (http://www.adobe.com/support/products/photoshopel.html). I was stunned to see there's absolutely no way to send an email directly to Adobe tech support to report this issue, and no phone number to call. I could register for a premiere support package, but I'd have to pay for that.<!>

Wondering if perhaps they did support in the forums, I looked at that page (http://www.adobe.com/support/forums/). No mention of Photoshop Elements anywhere. Why would a Photoshop Elements user go into the Photoshop and ImageReady section, since both are high-end applications clearly not geared toward them? Yet that's exactly where the Photoshop Elements forums are. Once I found the forums, I was disappointed - the "forums" are these plain text ASII-looking things from 1994. I could see no involvement from official Adobe techs either, though maybe they are there and not announcing themselves as such. Either way, as a Photoshop Elements user with a legitimate bug, I'm unsure of where to go with this information.

As a side note, Photoshop Elements 4.0 has been out for nearly a year now (Sept. 27th, 2005), yet to my knowledge there hasn't been a single software update for it with bug fixes or new features. It's not like there isn't room for massive improvement (especially in the speed department), so this is yet another disappointment. Is Photoshop CS any better with updates? I haven't used Photoshop since version 6.0. Any other Photoshop Elements users out there, and what do you think of the support, or lack thereof?

aroma
08-24-2006, 06:29 PM
While I've had need to use Photoshop support, Photoshop CS has been much better than that with updates. I received a number of updates while using CS, and now CS2.

On a related note, your issue is something I've always taken issue with on a number of different application. It is VERY frustrating to have a legitimate, and obvious but in an application and not have any method, other than _paying_ for tech support, to report it.

I share your frustration.

jeffd
08-24-2006, 07:07 PM
it prolly is refering to 54 megs uncompressed?

Jason Dunn
08-24-2006, 07:09 PM
it prolly is refering to 54 megs uncompressed?

Possibly...but how many Photoshop Elements users will understand the compressed/non-compressed JPEG issue? File size should be file size. It's a stupid error message no matter how you slice it. ;-)

James Fee
08-24-2006, 07:48 PM
Don't get me started on PSE. I have wasted probably the total cost of Photoshop CS on the last couple versions.

I'm getting into Nikon Capture NX / Picture Project and just biding my time until Lightroom is out of beta.

Timothy Huber
08-24-2006, 07:58 PM
I've been using Photoshop Elements since it was Photoshop Album. I bought it for the organizer and not for the editing capabilities. I will agree with you that the organizer is slow.

I don't remember the exact circumstances, but with one of the earlier releases there was a bug that was causing me some serious problems. Like you, I went searching for the support section and the user forums and was amazed at the low quality. I'd expect this from a small company but not from a behemoth like Adobe.

Timothy

Jason Eaton
08-24-2006, 08:30 PM
Elements has always seemed like a 'side' project for Adobe. Just enough effort put into the program to bundle up with some scanner or camera software package.

While I would love to recommend Photoshop (full) it is usually overkill in both function and price that a more casual user would desire.

Gimp is a nice xerox of a xerox of Photoshop (very close in functionality and layout but slightly off) and is also free open source. Worth a try for the high end manipulation.

The only thing I have found that does a lot of what Elements does, and in my opinion slightly better, is ACDSee 8 Photo Manager. There currently is a free trial if you want to give it a go. Not bad for photo tagging, sorting finding, and basic editing. Not terribly expensive either...

Link - http://www.acdsee.com/products/acdsee/index.aspx

Jason Dunn
08-24-2006, 08:59 PM
The only thing I have found that does a lot of what Elements does, and in my opinion slightly better, is ACDSee 8 Photo Manager.

Yeah, ACDSEE products are my day to day workhorse products. I really like PRO with it's shadow highlight tool, it's freaking AMAZING.

cameron
08-25-2006, 03:19 AM
Jason,

This is completely unrelated to the real question in your post - but I think that you may be a little on the extreme side on your file size. Files for a 16x20 print shouldn't be any larger than 15-20 megapixels, as anything larger is really overkill. In my experience, and according to quite a few printers, 200-240 pixels per inch is the ideal resolution. Extrapolating this out takes you to 18 megapixels.

Jason Dunn
08-25-2006, 04:37 AM
...but I think that you may be a little on the extreme side on your file size. Files for a 16x20 print shouldn't be any larger than 15-20 megapixels, as anything larger is really overkill.

So, here's what's interesting: my resolution gives a print 468.98 DPI, which is indeed quite high. I did 16 x 20" test print with Smugmug and had to reduce it to their limit...which was closer to 300 dpi and 15 megapixels (I can't seem to find the hard data on their limits right now). The resulting image I got back was clearly inferior to the normal 70 megapixel images I got printed via Ofoto (now Kodak). Drop shadows weren't "fuzzy" enough, and the photo borders were visibly jagged. Either their printer sucked, or the image wasn't high enough resolution...so I got it re-printed from Kodak with my huge image, and it looks GORGEOUS.

So in general I'd agree with you, except when it comes to these big 16x20" collage prints. ;-)