Epson Raw plug in and new versions of Photoshop CS / Elements

[Charles D. Orze]

Hi all,

I just upgraded to Elements 3.0 and my Epson Raw plug-in won't work with it. Epson seems not to have updated the plug-in to keep pace with Adobe. Has anyone a work around (other than using the old version of Elements or Photoshop 7)?

Charlie Orzech

 

[jlw]

Are you sure it doesn't work, or does it just get overridden by Adobe's own plug-in?

I recently upgraded to Photoshop CS2, transferring my old plug-ins including the Epson, and the first time I tried to open a raw file Photoshop threw a dialog box warning that the Epson plug-in conflicts with the Adobe Camera Raw plug-in. But after that, although Photoshop defaults to ACR for opening raw files, the Epson plug-in is still available by choosing it in the 'Format' pop-up menu in the Open File dialog box, and it still works fine.

Maybe Elements is different, but it seems that there's nothing wrong with the plug-in itself.

 

[Charles D. Orze]

Yes, unfortunately a box pops up saying that Epson Photo Raw Plug-in is compatible with Adobe Photoshop 7 and Elements 2. Weird.

Charlie

 

[Dan Lazin]

You need version 1.02 of the RAW plugin -- which, for some reason, only seems to be on Epson Europe's site, not Epson USA's or Epson UK's. To quote from the description: "EPSON RAW Plug-in software version 1.01 does not work with Adobe Photoshop Elements 3.0. EPSON will soon release RAW Plug-in software version 1.02, wich is compatible with Adobe Photoshop 7.0/CS and Photoshop Elements 2.0/3.0."

Here's the link for the Windows version.

And here's the link for Mac OS X.

 

[Charles D. Orze]

Thanks for the tip Dan!

Charlie

 

[peterbilitch]

As Dan writes, version 1.02 is compatible.

I still find that I am only using Elements 3.0 for fixing 'problem' images. Almost all of my images are only processed using the Epson RAW software and then require no further adjustment.

For the sake of interest, are others working in a similar way, or do most people find that they wish to process their images further than is possible with the Epson software?

Peter

 

[rogermota]

I dont have my R-D1 yet, but have played around with original size photos from the cam and will probably be duotoning all my images to get the closest look i had with printing film on Afga Multicontrast Fiber (slight warm tone). I've seen a lot of people really push duotone (or hue&saturation filter) to almost sepia which makes me cringe (unless obviously they intended it to be sepia, but in most cases its sorta neirther one or the other and to me screams photoshop).

I don't know if Elements can do duotone but I'd recommend giving it a shot a playing with the preset settings, you can achieve something that at least on the monitor looks very much like it was printed on Afga (warm) or Ilford (cold) Fiber. Personally I've always been a traditional wet darkroom printer and find amazing the amount of control photoshop affords you in mimicking print.

The only thing I'm wondering is, what's the closes thing to fiber paper printing one can get with digital? (16x20 sheets)

 

[jlw]

...what's the closest thing to fiber paper printing one can get with digital? (16x20 sheets)

If you use one of the Epson pigment printers, you can print on various kinds of fine-art paper; some of these come pretty close in appearance to my old favorite, Portriga-Rapid.

The "consumer" models (the ones priced under a thousand bucks or so) top out at 13x19-inch sheets, though. Epson has printers that will go a lot bigger, but they're also a lot more expensive (think in terms of buying either a printer or a pretty nice car...)

 

[rogermota]

eek! to be honest I havent really researched much into inkjets and papers yet. I'm going to be sending out for 3rd party printing. Anyone have experience w/ sites like photobox.com? their only options are gloss or matte but I fear it'll pretty much look like prints on cheap RC paper (worse, cheap kodak b&w RC paper)

 

[rogermota]

The "consumer" models (the ones priced under a thousand bucks or so) top out at 13x19-inch sheets, though. Epson has printers that will go a lot bigger, but they're also a lot more expensive (think in terms of buying either a printer or a pretty nice car...)

Don't wanna go too off topic from original post here, but I did some searching around.. the new Epson Stylus Pro 4800 in the UK sells for £1500 (£500 cheaper than an R-D1) and besides the usual colour cartridges has 3 black ones AND does A2 (16.5 x 23.4 in)

Its an absolute monster of a printer but seems like a plausible alternative to the new-sports-car-price-range pritners.

Dunno what other people have found regarding fiber paper for inkjets, Moab Paper seems to fit the bill (from the descriptions)