Page 1 of 1

PSP X2 does not allow plugins to process 16bit images

Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:56 pm
by HaraldHeim
Although support for 16bit images has been added in PSP X a few years ago, PSP X, XI and X2 do not allow you to process 16bit images with Photoshop plugins. You can only process 8bit images in PSP with them.

PhotoImpact, also owned by Corel, seems to have the same problem. Not sure about Photo-Paint...

This makes PSP look even more amateurish than it ought to be and could drive away even more photographers. What do you think is the reason for this? Incompetence? Sales Strategy? Please let me know your opinions.

Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 6:28 pm
by Jaci
Although I enjoy trashing Corel :P, I'm not sure if this is just incompetence in this case considering that in Photoshop CS2 some of its own filters won't be applied to 16 bit images either. Or am I missing something?

Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:00 pm
by HaraldHeim
Sure not all filters included with PSP and Photoshop support 16bit images. But I did not mean these native filters. I meant third party .8bf plugins that already support 16bit images, but PSP does not allow them to be applied to 16bit images. It only allows them to be applied to 8bit images.

Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:27 pm
by Jaci
In that case sign me up for incompetence!

Corel has serious issues with professional output, so its no wonder that 3 versions later (and keep in mind that it was actually JASC that introduced 16bit back in version 9) they still haven't provided the appropriate support for it.

Now if this were still a JASC product one could maybe try to understand why it takes so long for extra support to be added, but we are talking about Corel, a company that constantly tries to take part of Adobe's market share!
Ok, so the company isn't as innovative (or innovative at all) as Adobe, but if the technology exists and you want to be a strong competitor, then make proper use of it.

If it was a sales strategy, I would consider it an incompetent one as well :wink:

Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:00 pm
by HaraldHeim
Correction: 16bit image support was introduced in PSP X by Corel!

Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:28 pm
by Jaci
HaraldHeim wrote:Correction: 16bit image support was introduced in PSP X by Corel!

I guess that not even their own version comparison chart receives enough attention then :-?

Here's where I got the reference from: ... 568-07.pdf

Yet another reason to stay on the early versions of PSP

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 6:15 am
by OzLaw
I go along with incompetence- wot no 16bit!.
PSP has been going down hill in many ways with subsequent versions. Don't laugh but I am mostly using version 6.02 for my work because I am using image files up around 500MB (one recently cracked the gig). Even version 7 has problems with files this big.
With these big images if I do a fill with version 6 it takes ~10 seconds, Version 7 ~10 minutes - if it doesn't crash.
I have every version up to ~X but I stopped buying them because for big files they were getting worse and worse.
But then I have been using PSP since about V1 ~16 years and I even consider layers a new fangled waste of time. :-)

Yay! PSP, OzLaw

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:31 pm
by HaraldHeim
Yes, processing very big images in PSP is a waste of time. I did not know that it was working better in Version 6. I agree that PSP went downhill from Version 7 or 8 on. They did not do enough for it to stay eye to eye with Photoshop.

Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 5:00 pm
by victoriak68
I'm not a genious when it comes to these things and I'm not pretending to be, but may I hazard a guess as to why Corel is ignoring this issue?
They are so busy trying to buy up products that other companies have created that they aren't paying attention to the products they already have. I would go on, but I am only willing to go so far to found like a fool. This is just a theory anyway...

plugins in PSPX3 ?

Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 1:25 am
by arthurghewett
I am running Vista home edition
Plugins do fine in Photoimpact X2 but how can I get them to work in PSPX3 ?


Arthur H

Chosing PSP 6.02 over Photoshop

Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 5:56 am
by OzLaw
[quote="HaraldHeim"]Yes, processing very big images in PSP is a waste of time. I did not know that it was working better in Version 6. I agree that PSP went downhill from Version 7 or 8 on. They did not do enough for it to stay eye to eye with Photoshop.[/quote]

OK, I know with that subject I am equipping this reply with a 'fuze' javascript:emoticon(':oops:')
javascript:emoticon(':oops:')but before anyone replies with vehement attacks on PSP or PS etc etc. Let me just say everybody has different needs and requirements and PSP does not equal PS. Occasionally even I need them both (but rarely do I leave PSP).

OK having said that I will say for several reasons unique to my work PSP 6.02 is superior to PS.
PSP respects the pixel, you put in a big image with N pixels you can get out a big image with exactly N pixels. PS like most other "Mud" javascript:emoticon(':wink:')
javascript:emoticon(':wink:')products, tends to be totally obsessed with WYSIWYG to the extent of pixel level damage. Dimensions are often rounded to 2 decimal places (regardless of units!) and for my work I need at least 4 decimals and I need pixels to stay exactly where I put them.
Also PSP 6.02 has some unique operations that just don't exist in PS so some of my image work cannot be done in PS at all.

I am glad PSP 6.02 is so robust and well written that it still runs on the later versions of windows, even "blister" if you are 'saddled' with that.

Yay PSP OzLaw

Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 9:20 am
by D_Spider
Corel hires people with MBAs in marketing (easiest curriculum in business), who got BBAs in college (pretty worthless "degree"), and took as few academic subjects as they could in high school. I bet they don't pay them much, so that any of these people who can read, write, and think minimally leave for other employers. What's left?