Images out of focus?

Question

I've been using ACDSee as a photo viewer/organzer and linking to photoshop for editing.  I recently upgraded to cs5 photoshp and finally decided to try Bridge since I figured the integration would be better and figured bridge would be using the same monitor calibration profile as photoshop.
So it's a nice program, BUT - all my images (preview/slideshow) are out of focus (or low resolution/quality). I searched for settings everywhere in the preferences, even turning on/off software rendering, with no apparent affect.   They're sharp in photoshop and every other photo viewer I've ever tried, so  I figured I was missing something really obvious.  I called adobe support and installed their "desktop sharing" software.  The rep then had me reset bridge to all defaults, open an image, then open the same image in photoshop AND acdsee.  He verified that the image in Bridge was not as sharp as both photoshop and acdsee.  He explained that bridge didn't use the same imaging technology as photoshop (really) and that bridge was intended as a front end to photoshop to aid in selecting images for later editing. 
I explained that as a photographer I couldn't use bridge to select images for editing if I couldn't tell WHICH ONES WERE IN FOCUS (emphasis mine).  I'd have to load them all into photoshop to determine that, so what use was bridge?   He said he was going to check on that and left the call for a while, then came back and reiterated that he was correct...that bridge wasn't meant for the quality of viewing I was looking for.  He said he would suggest that as a future enhancement.  I said that didn't make much sense since I must be living on another planet if no one else has ever complained about this since the initial release of bridge way back when.  He politely laughed.
So I'm completely mystified...is that actually correct?...That the images viewed in bridge are presented in a lower image quality than photoshop???  (or even ACDSee??).  I like the program and its interface, but I can't use it if I can't even determine which images are in focus.  PLEASE tell me the support rep was inadequately trained...
I'm running windows 7 64 bit...in case it matters my graphics adapter is composed of dual nvidia GeForce 8800gtx cards with basically default settings, using the latest nvidia drivers (which were just updated last month to specifically support the video hardware utilization of CS5).
Thanks in advance for any help/suggestions/explanations!

Answer 1

Ahh, I see another idiot has been suckered in by the business model of Adobe Inc.  When I first purchased CS4 I had many, many problems with Photoshop, Bridge and InDesign. It is these three programs I utilize the most with a little of Dreamweaver and even less of Illustrator.  After nearly a week spent both online and on the telephone we came to the conclusion that some hidden software code that entegrated the suite, and which each software package shared to some unknown degree, did not like my NVidia GeForce 9800GT video card.
After a two step process of testing updated drivers from NVidia and totally reformatting my entire computer the various graphics card problems were not resolved.  Did you notice that I had to reformat my entire hard drive?  That entailed a week of installing each and every program (over 40 of 'em) and locating and updating all the various drivers for some fairly mundane attached cards and equipment.  The problems with Adobe were not resolved. Not one!
The problem I had with Bridge CS4 was similar to yours and still on occasion occurs. The displaying of thumbnails as extremely low resolution blobs of pixels.  The solution is not related to the preferences but more to the handling of pixels between Adobe's graphics display code and how it interfaces with my NVidia display adapter.  I have seen similar problems with other iterations of the NVidia display adapter.  As you have seen Adobe's motto seems to be: We are God and everyone must bow to us.  In the industry the proper manner is for the display adapter manufactuer to create the various operating system drivers and for the software developers to properly hook to those drivers. Adobe does not follow this standardized method of hardware to software integration.
The one way I have found that seems to work on my WinXP Pro SP3 Core 2 Duo with 4 gigabytes of memory is as follows. Under the Tools menu should be a Cache submenu which contains a purge "your folder."  Purge the folder and let the computer rebuild it.  Do not do anything while it is rebuilding the cache.  And I mean nothing!  At least on my system it seems that my switching to some other program in the middle of the cache building (which contains the thumbnails) upsets Bridge which does not like not having full unfettered access to the graphics card or its drivers during the cache building.
Perhaps this works with CS5 or not.  I do not plan on upgrading to CS5 for Adobe to laugh at my needs! Why pay them my hard earned money for them to tell me to go pound sand and that I am on my own resources.  I have never been able to fully utilize Photoshop CS4 and still constantly use PS7 and PS CS2.  And the corrupting of files by InDesign CS4 with no method of repairing the files makes the usage of this program laudable to a book creator.  Creative Suite 2 appears to be the last fully stable software package released by Adobe.  At least none of the files created by InDesign CS2 end up being recreated.
Do yourself a favor and do not attempt to create a web gallery via Bridge.  There are free and shareware programs out there that handle the task much more adroitly than it does. JAlbum is a good one.  Bridge's Web Gallery could have been a God send to those needing such functions.  However, if you look at the coding within the templates they were each generated by a third or fourth party enterprise and the ability to manipulate them is entirely out of the reach of even the most accomplished HTML coder.  And Dreamweaver laughs at the template files—not understanding the concepts used to build or enact them. And I have to yet to find any tutorials on how to create a set of files to be used as my own web gallery template.
One of the most frustrating aspects is that the majority of hard core Web Gallery programs now utilize XML files significantly.  Bridge does not allow you to generate such a file containing the full spectrum of available tags that an image file can contain.  Adobe's adherence to metadata standards is a very good one but the usage of the intereactivity between the various packages and external software packages is non-existent.  Bridge's scripts, which would be used to create a XML file, are, in this writer's opinion, as useless as crayons are to a digital artist. And with no third party individual willing to tackle them from the perspective of true usability, this will continue to be an issue.
The one saving grace of Bridge in CS2 and CS4 is the ability to embed generated metadata into the image file itself.  I strongly stress the embedding of metadata into the file as the tools that can be used in Bridge to ease the task are well thought out and simple to integrate into a digital workflow.  For a photographer, or a digital archivist, simply create a temporary metadata file from information entered into one file, and copy the same information to an entire directory of files.  I have used this on directories containing up to 2,000 files and it worked without a flaw.  External pony files are too easy to get lost and thus there goes your carefully crafted metadata compilation.
Once you do get Bridge working correctly you will soon find it replacing your Windows file manager or a third party graphical broswer.  I cannot comment on the Mac but what I have seen demonstrated on the Mac is almost as useful as Bridge.  When working in either InDesign or Photoshop (ver. 7, CS2 or CS4) I have Bridge up and running.  I do not allow Bridge to automatically load with the operating system, preferring instead to load it when needed, as I have seen instances where it causes problems.
And yes, I both love and hate Adobe.  They got me addicted to Photoshop and InDesign and keep me stringing along with promises of a greater higher.  I leave my Illustrator tasks to CorelDraw which is far, far friendlier and easier to use for vector images. A vector program with no real-world scaling?