CPU and paintbrush /blur brush @ 300 pixels wide

Hey guys I've been a Photoshop user for close to 15 years. I have ver. CS2 and a AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual core CPU 4200+ 2.21GHz CPU /1GB RAM (6 years old along with the version CS2 running WinXP SP3) I plan on upgrading this year my hardware, OS (to WIn 7 64-bit) and the Adobe Production Premium suite to CS6 (After upgrading to CS5.5 since I am ineligible for the upgrade from CS2. )
One of the things that has always bothered me in Photoshop CS2 was when I set a paintbrush or a blur brush to 300 pixels wide and I'm working even on a small 4x6" 300dpi canvas If I make a brushstroke it takes seconds to make a rendered stroke. I plan on doing digital paintings with a Wacom tablet 8x10, 11x14, 16x20" in size with Photoshop CS6.
I read that as of 2008 CS 3 Photoshop will use the GPU for rendering/processing some effects. Is this true for PaintBrush and blur tools?
Granted we are talking about a 6 year old mid-level CPU and now new technology but I would like to know along with using 8 GB RAM
Will this 300 pixel-wide brush lag totally change with a Ivy Bridge Intel Core i5-3570K Ivy Bridge 3.4GHz Quad-Core?
Is there a significant difference when using Photoshop with a Ivy Bridge Intel Core i7-3770K Ivy Bridge 3.5GHz Quad-Core since both chips are multicore which Photoshop does use?
I'm trying to choose my new build and figure out what CPU to get since they are $110. difference. Is is night and day with most of the CPU intensive stuff on Photoshop?

Here is a link to what was added in CS6. http://forums.adobe.com/thread/979969
I have read in past posts that PS is more a memory intensive program than a CPU intensive program, so it appears more RAM is better than a faster processor. It is not uncommon to have 24 g of RAM now.
The lag with big brushes, liquify, blur, etc. is highly dependant on the video card and specifically the driver.
So it seems that 8 gigs of RAM and 1 gig of VRAM is necessary for average performance with some tools.
PS does use multicore processing but still uses just one video card.

Similar Messages

IPhone shrinking 300 pixel pages (webmasters)

Hi, I can't figure out what's going on my mobi pages:
Safari on my 4s iPhone displays these two .mobi-formatted pages properly
(this is the only phone I tested, but someone previously pointed out the problem, too):
kumeyaay.info/mobi/
kumeyaay.mobi/ (kumeyaay.mobi is an addon domain hosted on the kumeyaay.info site)
But it shrinks these pages:
kumeyaay.info/mobi/reservations/
kumeyaay.info/mobi/casinos/
kumeyaay.info/mobi/history/
kumeyaay.info/mobi/kumeyaay/
kumeyaay.info/mobi/mobi/
kumeyaay.info/mobi/music/
I double checked the pages in GoLive CS2 (where I created them) and they all appear to all be formatted exactly: one 300-pixel wide table, and centered.
Any clue/tip would be appreciated...

still, another spin:
<html>
<head>
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, minimum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, target-densitydpi=device-dpi">

Photoshop CS5 can only decode fax encoded images up to 32767 pixels wide and tall

Dear Sir/Madam,
Can you please help me? I am scanning large drawings using an Xerox 6204 Large printer/scanner. The resolution is set at 600 and saved as .tif. Photoshop CS3 can open files with no problems, but CS5 gives me the following message:
"Photoshop can only decode fax encoded images up to 32767 pixels wide and tall"
I can also view with infarview and open with applications such as corel draw. Am I missing a plug-in or patch update? The same file can be opened in both Photoshop versions if I scan at resolution 300.
Your help is greatly appreciated.
All the best
Paulo

Hi Mylenium,
Many thanks for the prompt reply.
I agree with you... it's a little odd to save on fax tiff format... to be honest, it's not like we have an option on the matter... the XEROX 6204 Large Format Printer/Scanner either give us .Tif or .PDF options... Anyway's no problem with CS3 or other software like mentioned above... so even knowing it's a bit strange to use such format, still does not explain why on CS5 I get this error message. Furthermore if I open on CS3 and save as (same file name and same format .tif) I can then open on CS5!!!!
To my surprise, I did not know it was saving as a fax tif... all I get is tif. Even so if all other software including an older version of Photoshop can open it why CS5 can not? What is missing? As mentioned if scanned at 300 dpi it opens... Confused. Very confused!!
All the best
Paulo

Blur video frame with NI PCI-1411 and JAI CV M-300 camera (urgent problem)

Hello,
I am new with Vision and I need some advice with a problem, which I encountered.
I have a computer with integrated NI PCI-1411 board, which is connected to a JAI CV M-300 camera. I am measuring a steel part which is positioned in a dark chamber. The part is put on a glass board and is illuminated from underneath with light.
The part is moving. I have to measure this part when it reaches the camera region. I have made a test with not-moving part and everything is perfect. Now, when I move the part I get blur frames from video (with these no part measurement is possible). I need specify, that the camera has no trigger, so it makes video all the time (this video is later inspecting with Vision Builder).
I have tried to change parameters in MAX, but no involvement. I have found no proper icd/file for the camera.
I also could use a SONY DXC-950P camera, if this is better.
How can I eliminate the blur from video frames? Or what am I doing wrong? Is the camera not good enough? Camera + trigger would get better images.
I have attached the video frame with moving object (static) and the blur video frame with moving object (dynamic).
Please give me a answer or ideas as soon as possible.
Thanks.
Attachments:
static.jpg ‏391 KB
dinamic.jpg ‏421 KB

You are using an interlaced camera. It takes half the picture (every other line), waits a split second, then takes the other half of the picture (the other lines). When it puts the two images together, you can see the two positions it was in when the images were taken.
The best solution is to use a non-interlaced or progressive scan camera, which takes the entire image at one time. The Sony might be this type of camera, since it has a P in its name. I didn't look up the specs.
If you can't get the right kind of camera, your only other option is to use fields instead of frames. One field is the half image taken at one time. The image will be half the height of the original image, though, which can mess things up.
Another possibility is the reduce the resolution of the image. If you take every other pixel in both directions, you will have a very clear image that is half the size of the original. You can do this with Extract in LabVIEW, not sure if it is available in VBAI.
Bruce
Bruce Ammons
Ammons Engineering

I have photoshop elements 12 and I can't get the pictures to set at 200 x 300 pixels. I get 200 x 301 or 200 x 274. I did uncheck the resampling blox but it makes no difference. What can I do to fix this?

I have photo shop elements 12 and I am having problems obtaining 200 x 300 pixel size. I get 200 x 301 or 200 x 274 instead. What can I do to fix this? I have windows 8.1.

Use the crop tool.
On the tool's option bar, type 300 px & 200 px, and the desired resolution.

Pb G4 1.67Ghz running OS 10.4, right side of the screen 2, pixel wide vertical lines, a few days later colors posterized on pics and vid. Vertical lines don't show screen capture, but pics still posterized. Hardware test from disk shows ok.

Right side of screen started showing 2, pixel wide vertical lines. A few day later colors in pics and vid posterized. Vertical lines don't show in screen capture but pics still bad. Ran hardware test from disk, ok, adjusted color in sys prefs, new profiles a bit better but still bad, mpeg worse, jpeg bad. No better in new user account. Now a month later, right side has 8 vert lines and occasionally a slightly darker area in bottom corners for a few seconds. Reset pram, battery plugged into adaptor 99%. I can notice, for a slit second, when the screen saver is on, when I move cursor to get back to desktop, true color of image can be seen for a flash of a second.

sorry, was in a rush, any suggestions to fix or ideas of what has gone wrong

How can I convert my logo 300dpi (274 pixels wide) from EPS to Gif format?

I have a logo that needs to be fixed for web purposes. It looks great in print but very poor quality on screen. I need one for my website and HTML email newsletters, along with a high quality GIF 300 DPI (274 pixels wide) for a HTML coded signature. I tried it in Photoshop to save this file as GIF format. But it seems my files is 274 pixel but it is 96 dpi rather than 300dpi. How can I convert it from EPS to 300 DPI (274 pixels wide) GIF file format??
I have an EPS file for it. Can anyone please help me ? Here is the LINK

If your logo is 274 pixel wide at 300DPI it will print .9" wide. DPI is meaningless for the web For displays and displaye drivers do not use the image file dpi setting. Displays are run at one resolution normally their manufactured pixel resolution. Display these days are manufactured with resolution ranging from 96PPI to over 300PPI so your logo will display 2.8" wide on a low 96ppi resolution display and .9" wide on a high 300ppi resolution display. The the difference between Jpeg and Gif is color Jpeg supports 8Bit color so 16M colors but does not support transparency. GIF only supports 256 mapped colors reduced to 255 colors it you want transparent empty pixels. You can also use PGN format which supports transparency and 8 or 16 bit color.

Brush tip icons in CS4 and painting w brush tip icons

Why in CS4 Photoshop do none of the brush tip icons paint to the edges of the icon dashed line. They all paint 4 to 5 (etc.) pixels behind the brush tip line. CS2 & 3 painted dead on the brush dotted line if one desired. Am I missing how to do this??? in CS4? I am not painting with the soft brush, but the HARD brush. I expect the brush tip icon to show me exactly what area I will paint. Am I wrong???

Chris, I have looked everywhere in CS4 preferences to adjust the
"bounds" setting for a brush, but cannot find it. I see the sliders for
MASTER DIAMETERS of a brush and the HARDNESS of a brush.
I can't remember ever having to set bounds in previous editions of
PS, or I could be wrong.
To be clear on what is happening, if I create a brush that is 110 pixels
wide w hardness of 100, shouldn't CS4 paint a solid 110 pixel circle,
exactly within the LIVE brush icon from dotted edge to dotted edge
of the brush icon? My brushes paint behind the dotted lines.
This makes me guess where the brush paint lands on the canvas
within the dotted brush icon.
Sorry if I am wordy. Just a wierd experience w the brushes in CS4.

PS CS6 Extremely slow and sluggish. Brush tool delay.

Hello everyone.
I own a copy of Photoshop CS6.
Switching from Photoshop CS to CS6, I have found this version to be extremely slow and I can not find a reason why it is like this. It is impossible for me to work on it.
Problem: Slow performance, when using the brush tool there is a long delay - lag. The brush takes more than 8 seconds to catch up with my strokes.
Software:
Adobe Photoshop CS6 x64
OS:
Windows 7 x64 SP1
CPU:
AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE
GPU:
Radeon 6790 OC @ 920Mhz
RAM:
A-Data DDR3 1333Mhz CAS9 4GB (x2)
SSD:
A-Data 510 128GB SATA3
HDD:
Samsung SATA 1TB
Tried:
- Memory usage allowed upgraded to 6GB, nothing changed.
- Default selected "Scratch Disk" is the main SSD which has over 58GB of free space, I've tried selecting the secondary HDD as well but nothing changes.
- Disabled the "Use Graphic Processor" square. nothing changed.
- Disabled the "Use open CL" square in advanced Graphic Processor Settings. Nothing changed.
- Changed power management settings in windows to "High Performance". nothing changed.
- Disabling tablet pc service doesn't help.
Notes:
- Graphic drivers are the latest release on AMD website
- Windows is completely updated
- SSD Firmware is the latest available.
- The issue happens both with mouse and tablet.
- 1px brush and 5000px brush lag just alike in zoomed and not zoomed canvas.
- This happens on both x64 and x86 versions of the software.
Any help is aprecihated.
Thank you in advance.

ForeKeith wrote:
AMD replied to my email just today and said that my graphic card should be compatible and should perform great with the current drivers.
Wow, they went out on a limb and said that? AMD clearly is denying any problems just as any corporate entity appears to do nowadays. Didn't someone once say "shoot all the laywers"?
It's pretty clear the Catalyst 12.4 release is a bust with Photoshop. Lots of people have seen that. And I just checked - AMD hasn't released Catalyst 12.5 yet.
http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/windows/Pages/radeonaiw_vista64.aspx
But I agree that your card is MORE than powerful enough. Mine is slower than yours and my Photoshop experience is quick and interactive. There is a SPECIFIC PROBLEM that's manifesting here.
But just to be absolutely, completely, undeniably sure we're not talking about a performance issue with very large files, please do the following:
1. Create a new, blank document as follows:
2. Choose the Brush Tool then reset it by right-clicking in the little brush icon at the upper-left and choosing Reset Tool:
3. Make the brush 1000 pixels in size, fully soft.
4. Set the foreground color to something other than white and brush quickly from the upper-left corner of the image to the lower-right. Roughly how many seconds does it take for the actual on-canvas stroke to get all the way to the bottom (i.e., how far behind does it get)?
Is it:
Nearly instantaneous?
One second behind?
Many seconds behind?
On my system with this big brush and huge image, it gets about 1 second behind.
-Noel

Pixel-wide distorted lines jumping around

I admit that topic sounds confusing - but then, so is my problem:
A few weeks ago I noticed some distorted lines on my MBP screen (first generation 15"). The appearance is as if two adjacent rows of pixels "bleed", they seem to be identical, smearing whatever is on the screen in that position out across this pixel-wide band (there are several such bands or lines, both vertical and horisontal).
The really weird thing is, they come and go - they're mostly there and mostly in the same places (two vertical ones and three horizontal) but occasionally they disappear, then reappear, and, stranger yet, they shift about when I move the cursor to the lower right corner of the screen (at which point the entire screen seems to shift or jump slightly - one pixel? - up and to the left).
The lower right corner is inactive, the only thing that happens when the cursor is there is that the dock pops up - but the lines don't react to the dock appearing when I put the cursor anywhere else along the bottom of the screen, only the right lower corner.
I didn't do anything (that I'm aware of) when it first occured - no installs or re-installs, no updates, nothing like that. I haven't dropped it, stepped on it or had it run any hotter than usual, in short, no particular event or behavior caused this problem to start...
Anyone?
Jj
MacBook Pro 2.0Ghz/2.0 Gb RAM Mac OS X (10.4.9)

I'm having the same issue. It just started this afternoon. Do you have Parallels? I was using Parallels with Windows Vista Business when it first started. I don't know if that has anything to do with it or not, but Windows was doing some weird things with screen resolution, jumping between a couple different settings by itself, just before this weirdness started. At first I thought it was Windows but then when I switched back to the Mac I noticed it was doing it there too.
I've rebooted, and changed the screen resolution, but nothing has helped. The text looks kind of blurry unless I mouse over it and then it either gets sharper or way too sharp as if it's been through a heavy sharpening filter. Anywhere I move the mouse there's sort of a pixel-shift where the pixels look as though they're being smeared around by one pixel. Also, If I move the mouse quickly left and right the whole screen goes back and forth about a pixel.
There are two other interesting things about this situation:
1. I'm using a dual screen setup with my 15" MacBook Pro and a 23" Cinema Screen. It does it on both of them, and continues if I unplug the CS and only use the MBP screen.
2. If I log in as another user, *it doesn't do it anymore* - only under my main user account does it happen, which also leads me to believe that it might have to do with Parallels. At least it would appear to be software related instead of hardware related.
Was there anything you can think of that you did to make it stop? This is really annoying!

Ruler and Info panel give different pixel dimensions

The pixel dimensions in Illustrator CS5's Info panel are wrong. Can anyone suggest why?
I have a web layout in Illustrator that I'm transposing into Adobe Muse, using Save for Web and Devices.
I want to use the X and Y coordinates and the dimensions of the objects in Illustrator to place them correctly in Muse, so that all the elements scale to the right size.
The Illustrator artboard is 960 pixels wide and the layout fits the artboard. Similarly, the site width in Muse is 960px wide.
The measuring units are in pixels in Illustrator, but something very strange is going on.
in the Info panel, a grouped object - a logo - is described as 16383 pixels wide and 211px high.
It's simply not possible, not least because the logo is taller than it is wide. But when I measure it with the ruler tool, it tells me that the logo is 136px high and 122px wide.
The problem only applies to this grouped object and it's not because it's grouped with some other thing that is 16383 pixels wide - the bounding box fits precisely round the logo when it is selected.
Can anyone suggest a solution?

Badger,
What happens if you Copy and Paste that Group into a new Document (you may the rest follow if it helps)?

300 pixels vs 72 pixels

We built a home page in Photoshop at 300 pixels per inch. Now
we are ready to load into Dreamweaver and it seems as though many
pages are built at 72-80 PPI. Do we have to start over? Does it
matter? Please tell me I dont have to start all over again? This
has taken me hours to get to this point...
THanks
VED

>>we are ready to load into Dreamweaver
Ignoring the resolution (non)issue, when you say "load into
Dreamweaver" do
you mean just the images from PS or did you generate HTML in
PS also?
Because if you are planning to use PS generated HTML you are
in for a big
disappointment and endless frustration. Never use HTML from
an image app, it
is convoluted and will create a rigid but fragile structure
that will break
easily and often. Create your HTML only in DW, you'll be glad
you did.
Walt
"vederenzo" <[email protected]> wrote in
message
news:g9t4kj$4d9$[email protected]..
> We built a home page in Photoshop at 300 pixels per
inch. Now we are
> ready to
> load into Dreamweaver and it seems as though many pages
are built at 72-80
> pixels. Do we have to start over? Does it matter? Please
tell me I dont
> have
> to start all over again? This has taken me hours to get
to this point...
>
> THanks
> VED
>

Is 720P 960 or 1280 pixels wide?

In FCP, the Preset choices for Sequence Settings include DVCPro 720P, which turns out to be 960 pixels wide. Panasonic brags that their D2 camera (which I just shot my first footage with) is 1280 pixels wide. Then there is the Canvas "view as square pixels" choice.
This gets real confusing real fast. (I remember something called "The Industrial Revolution", which involve STANDARDIZED interchangeable parts, which fueled American success and democracy), but that concept seems to have gone by the wayside in the Digital Era. Oh, well...)
Can anyone explain the actual resolution of 720P and the correct "square" setting to poor me?

I was wrong. Panasonic's HVX200 P2 camera records 720P at 960x720 pixels. The Preset in FCP for 720 P is also 960x720. I had been looking at Wikipedia's explanation of 720P, which states that it is 1280x720.
I'm still confused about "Square Pixels," however. If I set the Viewer or Canvas to show square pixels, the image looks OK; if I set the Viewer or Canvas to not show square pixels, the image looks distorted. I would think that the pixels would have to be not-square to expand 960 to 1280, but the opposite seems to be the case.
Can anyone explain this to me?

Scroll bar only scrolls the top ~300 pixels

The latest update of Nightly is unusable. The scroll bar only changes the top 300 pixels or so of the page. Then the links do not work in the bottom portion, and you can't see the entire page.
Troubleshooting info:
"application": {
"name": "Firefox",
"version": "36.0a1",
"userAgent": "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/36.0",
"supportURL": "https://support.mozilla.org/1/firefox/36.0a1/WINNT/en-US/",
"numTotalWindows": 2,
"numRemoteWindows": 0
"crashes": {
"submitted": [],
"pending": 0
"modifiedPreferences": {
"browser.cache.disk.capacity": 358400,
"browser.cache.disk.smart_size.first_run": false,
"browser.cache.frecency_experiment": 1,
"browser.places.smartBookmarksVersion": 7,
"browser.sessionstore.upgradeBackup.latestBuildID": "20141022030202",
"browser.startup.homepage_override.mstone": "36.0a1",
"browser.startup.homepage_override.buildID": "20141022030202",
"dom.mozApps.used": true,
"extensions.lastAppVersion": "36.0a1",
"media.gmp-gmpopenh264.lastUpdate": 1414067969,
"media.gmp-gmpopenh264.version": "1.1",
"media.gmp-manager.lastCheck": 1414067968,
"network.cookie.prefsMigrated": true,
"places.history.expiration.transient_current_max_pages": 104858,
"plugin.disable_full_page_plugin_for_types": "application/pdf",
"privacy.sanitize.migrateFx3Prefs": true
"lockedPreferences": {},
"graphics": {
"numTotalWindows": 2,
"numAcceleratedWindows": 0,
"windowLayerManagerType": "Basic",
"windowLayerManagerRemote": true,
"numAcceleratedWindowsMessage": [
"blockedGfxCard"
"adapterDescription": "RDPDD Chained DD",
"adapterVendorID": "0x0000",
"adapterDeviceID": "0x0000",
"adapterSubsysID": "00000000",
"adapterRAM": "Unknown",
"adapterDrivers": "RDPDD",
"driverVersion": "",
"driverDate": "",
"adapterDescription2": "",
"adapterVendorID2": "",
"adapterDeviceID2": "",
"adapterSubsysID2": "",
"adapterRAM2": "",
"adapterDrivers2": "",
"driverVersion2": "",
"driverDate2": "",
"isGPU2Active": false,
"direct2DEnabled": false,
"directWriteEnabled": false,
"directWriteVersion": "6.1.7601.17563",
"direct2DEnabledMessage": [
"blockedGfxCard"
"webglRendererMessage": [
"blockedGfxCard"
"info": {
"AzureCanvasBackend": "skia",
"AzureSkiaAccelerated": 0,
"AzureFallbackCanvasBackend": "cairo",
"AzureContentBackend": "cairo"
"javaScript": {
"incrementalGCEnabled": true
"accessibility": {
"isActive": false,
"forceDisabled": 0
"libraryVersions": {
"NSPR": {
"minVersion": "4.10.7",
"version": "4.10.7"
"NSS": {
"minVersion": "3.17.2 Basic ECC",
"version": "3.17.2 Basic ECC"
"NSSUTIL": {
"minVersion": "3.17.2",
"version": "3.17.2"
"NSSSSL": {
"minVersion": "3.17.2 Basic ECC",
"version": "3.17.2 Basic ECC"
"NSSSMIME": {
"minVersion": "3.17.2 Basic ECC",
"version": "3.17.2 Basic ECC"
"userJS": {
"exists": false
"extensions": [
"name": "McAfee Security Scan Plus",
"version": "1.0",
"isActive": false,
"id": "{e4f94d1e-2f53-401e-8885-681602c0ddd8}"
"experiments": []
}

Start Firefox in <u>[[Safe Mode|Safe Mode]]</u> to check if one of the extensions (Firefox/Tools > Add-ons > Extensions) or if hardware acceleration is causing the problem.
*Switch to the DEFAULT theme: Firefox/Tools > Add-ons > Appearance
*Do NOT click the Reset button on the Safe Mode start window
*https://support.mozilla.org/kb/Safe+Mode
*https://support.mozilla.org/kb/Troubleshooting+extensions+and+themes

Gaussian blur brush?

Is it possible to select the brush tool and have it work as a gaussian blur brush?
I'd like to be able to brush in the blur if possible to small areas rather than use the lasso tool method.
THANKS

CMD J - to float a copy of your layer
Gaussian blur this layer
Add a mask fill to the blurred layer fill the maskwith black
Brush with white in the mask to reveal blur
this will act just like a blur brush, even better cause you can paint with black on the mask to undo blur.

CPU and paintbrush /blur brush @ 300 pixels wide

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for