Confounded by 6.0 Differences?

[hohriver]

Day Two of 'trying' to use 6.0.
I'm ready to put the Photoshop manual through the company paper shredder. It would have a higher value as landfill material.

The 'online' help is not much better.
Say you want a simple question answered. Good luck. Say you don't understand why when you create a shape and fill it with color you can't use the eraser on it. You try all the 'hints' ( nothing is explicit in the guides, trust me ), using the Path Component Selection Tool and clicking on the thumbnail of the shpe in the Layers palette, clicking inside the shape to choose it, and then you grab the eraser to apply and are told the "layer is not directly editable".

What the heck? What do you have to do to make the "layer" directly editable? Why doesn't an eraser or a pen or a pencil function somewhat like in previous versions...you know, nothing too complex, just paint or draw on the layer you would like to add to or alter? Doesn't seem like much to ask. But if they can't supply any backwards compatability or intuitive user interface, is it too much to expect some instructions which would effectively explain how these actions are made different in this version, and how to use the tools to accomplish your basic goals?

Now before you rush forward to tell me good old Adobe has done a fine job of providing manuals and guides and online help, I'm here to remind everyone that if that were truly the case there would be no market for third-party 'How To' books, whatsoever. But that's not the case, is it? They abound at Barnes & Noble and Borders, et al. Which speaks volumes (pun intended) about software manufacturer's inability to produce a comprehensive and clear instructional manual to accompany their products.

I'll never understand that one.
And possibly, never understand 6.0 either....

 

[gollyg]

I'm not sure about the online help, but I agree with you regarding the shapes layers. They are a very clumsy implementation of vector layers. Essentially they are a complex method of using clipping paths, and since they exist as vectors they can't be edited with bitmap tools. You first have to render the layer (which of course makes it uneditable as a vector!). I think the problem is that the error messages seem generic - in Fireworks you would actually be given the option of converting the vector to a bitmap, which lets you know exactly what the problem is and how to fix it.

 

[GeorgeMack]

It sounds to me as if you can't use an eraser on a vector shape (which makes sense -- eraser is for bitmap objects, vector is ... vector.) So you'd have to edit the vector shape instead, or rasterize it to use eraser. Good for different things. Since this is basically the first release with both "flavors" of image in the program, the documentation is still finding its way. (And it was a big, complex, many bells-and-whistles program to begin with!)

 

[gollyg]

I realise the limitations inherent in vector graphics, and what you can and can't do with them, but my main complaint remains that this is a clumsy implementation. Photoshop does many things well, but vectors ain't one of them....

yet

 

[KenKasmar]

...which is why I use Illustrator for vector graphics design and Photoshop for raster graphics work.

 

[gollyg]

I guess my perspective is from that of web design, not print. I too use illustrator for vector work, but sometimes, particularly in prototyping, you need the flexibility of both bitmap and vector. Adobe are acknowledging this by including a type of vector support in PS, but it falls short of the mark set by Fireworks. And yes I acknowledge the shortfalls of Fireworks in bitmap editing.