Photoshop CS2 Free, update

Support Other Software
1

Hi,

Last year most of us probably heard that Adobe had stopped their license server for their CS2 suite of programs, Photoshop, Illustrator etc.

Photoshop CS2.jpg960×528 162 KB

After this announcement lots of blogs all over the internet stated with applause that Adobe were giving Photoshop CS2 away for free etc.

Then as the days went by, the balloons came down, the party plates we stuck in the trash. It became more apparent that, no, this was not the case, CS2 wasn’t free at all.

CS2 free download and serial was for previous owners. As these previous registered owners couldn’t re-register when they entered their old serial as Adobe had had a fault with their license server.

The new serial basically allowing you to install without any communication between you and Adobe – some people don’t have firewalls apparently :wink:

There were loads of people reading the ULA and saying you could, then others saying it was a grey area and then others saying that you still could, but they seemed like they were chancing their arm.

So the other day I was looking on eBay for a copy of an older version of Photoshop, it’s easy to use a trial of CS6 and install a common amtlib.dll, (don’t worry, it’s mentioned a lot online) but I just don’t want to pirate it – I want to run a legitimate business, as I’m sure many others do. Photoshop CS6 is way too expensive, even if you are starting a business in my opinion, the renting of it is a lot too, especially when your just starting a business, forget it if your a hobbyist, unless your loaded.

So after a bit of research I found out that you can’t just buy a copy of Photoshop, you have to go through a lengthy license transfer:

see:

Otherwise, you may have a copy of the software, in a genuine box, with a genuine disc or 2 and a slightly ruffled manual. But the license is still registered with the last owner if they registered.

I don’t have much money, in fact my pocket has had a rather large hole in it for a very long time. So the best bet was to find a copy of Photoshop CS2 I thought.

Photoshop CS2 yes it’s old, but it’s very powerful, Most other software is still on catchup too. It Works on Win 7 and 8 (with running as admin and XP compatibility SP3 with the installer), It can even run in Linux with Wine and Winetricks. No more Gimps lack certain features, such as 16bit, CMYK, plus you can import modern .psd files, as long as they don’t have too many Adjustment layers that aren’t compatible, most are though.

So yep, after an initial introduction to how competitive eBay is when bidding and loosing the first time by being pipped at the post by over excited bidders. I ended up managing to obtain a copy for £55 inc shipping and import duty etc.)

While the auction was on, I inquired with the seller if they would be willing to do the Adobe license transfer as per the link above. They agreed and contacted Adobe.

A rep at Adobe told them that they couldn’t transfer the license as their server last year had suffered a fault and no longer and they supported CS2 or it’s updates so that it didn’t matter about the transfer at all. They also said it’s so old now and doesn’t work with new hardware (the later probably referring to new Macs).

Even the seller suggested to me (who was nice) that maybe I should just download it anyway as it appears free anyway to save me money.

But to be safe I went ahead and bought the copy. But the question is should I have bothered?

I don’t mind actually having a copy for so little, it’s still very cheap even compared to Photoshop Elements 13 and CS2 has so many more pro features that Elements doesn’t come near. Plus it’ll be nice to have on my desk :wink:

So from what I gather from what the rep at Adobe said. They don’t have any details of who bought what for CS2, so that’s why they can’t transfer licenses. They don’t think it works on modern hardware, so not interested with what you do with it.

This looks to me like CS2 is free (Adobe just can’t say that), well at least nobody will ever know you didn’t purchase it, not Adobe anyway. They just don’t seem to care about it.

Crazy, but looks like it could actually be true.

What do you guys think?

2

It is very, very simple: no matter the UNOFFICIAL stance that a number of Adobe’s employees might take on the legality of downloading and using CS2 without owning a license, the OFFICIAL stance is that CS2 can only be downloaded and used by license holders of either CS1 or CS2.

Simply stated: unless you own a CS1 or CS2 license of Photoshop, you may not use it.

If you acquired an original box with the original discs, and the original license number printed (on a card, or on the box), then you are allowed to use that generic serial number, since the original license servers are no longer available. Someone else, who sold the packaging and original discs, might still have that version installed, but he/she lost the license the moment he/she sold the box and original discs.

Thus, if you have an original box with the original discs and serial number, than feel free to use it.

The question is, however, whether it is really worth your trouble. Photoshop CS2 has a lot of limitations that may work against using it for 3d work:

  • 32bits per channel is barely supported. Layers do not work, most filters are deactivated. You cannot work with multi-layered 32bit EXR files from Blender in it.

  • even in 16bit per channel mode many filters and effects remain unavailable. I would almost say CS2 is barely workable in 16bit per channel mode compared to other current image editors.

  • there is no 64bit version of Photoshop, limiting the memory it can use to at most ~4GB.

  • the GUI looks and feels quite outdated. Windows Aero is unsupported. No dark GUI option. Palettes cannot be docked.

  • newer Photoshop plugins (including the generic ones such as Google Nik, Topaz, etc) no longer function in CS2 or with limitations.

  • you cannot load up RAW files from modern camera models without first converting those with Adobe converter tools.

  • it is no longer supported or updated. It is a dead program.

Honestly, get yourself Photoline if you cannot or will not work with the current version of Photoshop. It supports full 16/32bit per channel editing, Lab and CMYK, a HSV workflow, has no limitations in terms of filters at higher bit depths, and offers modern image editing features that were unavailable at the time of CS2. And it loads up 32bit per channel EXR files out of the box (even the latest version of Photoshop requires a paid-for plugin to open layered EXR files).

For digital painting download Krita for free, which works well together with Photoline, and blows Photoshop CS2 out of the water for texture and paint work. And also supports full 16 and 32 bit per channel with no limitations in your workflow.

CS2 is a tad too limited. Perhaps not so much in comparison to GIMP, but certainly compared to a combination of Photoline and Krita.

http://www.pl32.com/
https://krita.org/

3

Normally these days I don’t reply to comments such as these. But as some things were stated as fact that were a little inaccurate I thought I’d address them so that other users would have more than one opinion – sometimes those that shout the loudest, aren’t always right.

Yes, as I said, I don’t like piracy and want to have legit software. I’ve bought a copy of CS2 as I said too which currently does all I need and does it well.

What I was discussing was the way in which a lot of users thought CS2 was free, then changed stance.

But after learning from an official Adobe rep that you can’t transfer licenses like you have to with all other versions of Adobe products. Because of the faulty server that Adobe had, this means they have no knowledge or record of who owns what when it comes to CS2 it appears. They also appear not to care about CS2 – it’s out-dated software to them, there’s no revenue in it, they don’t support it anymore.

They messed up, and fixed it, albeit with what appears to be slightly messy and confusing method, but it’s old news to them I expect. Anyway, it’s a grey area, but I thought an interesting topic.

Now onto specifics, facts…

CS2 is capable and can work well with Blender or any other 3D software.

…”32bits per channel is barely supported”…

Generally in rendering stills in blender, most of us render to 8, or 16bit, this works fine in CS2 and is supported.

For 32bit EXR files I use other more specific software as many others do. That’s a hardly a deal breaker, how many create our own HDR images for Blender?

…”Layers do not work, most filters are deactivated”…

Layers do work fine with no problems.

Most people that use Photoshop professionally rarely use filters, most filters are pretty gimmicky anyway.

…“even in 16bit per channel mode many filters and effects remain unavailable”…

Most work in 16Bit, these are the ones that do:
Blurs (All apart from Smart Blur 9 out of 10)
Distort (Lens Correction)
Noises (All x5)
Render (Fibres and Lens Flare)
Sharpen (All x5)
Stylize (Emboss, Find Edges, Solarize)
Video (All x2)
Others (All x5 including High Pass)

These Don’t work in !6bit mode:
Artistic, Brushstrokes, Pixelate, Sketch, Texture.

…”I would almost say CS2 is barely workable in 16bit per channel mode compared to other current image editors.”…

Really, why?

The limit of 4GB for Photoshop CS2, Of course if you’re rendering for print to A4 or above then maybe it’s an issue. 4GB should be fine for the best of us that don’t.

…”the GUI looks and feels quite outdated.”…

Well that’s a matter of opinion of course. But compared to Gimp, PaintShop Pro X7, Photoshop Elements 13 etc. I don’t see any problems with it’s clear layout.

…”Windows Aero is unsupported. No dark GUI option. Palettes cannot be docked.”…

Well I don’t know what that transparent area I’m looking at is on the taskbar, but I thought it was Aero – maybe I Photoshoped it in.

Photoshop CS2 works fine with Aero, although Illustrator CS2 has issues. The palettes do dock to themselves, just not to the edge of the screen – is that really worth quibbling about, gees!

Both also work fine in Windows 8/8.1 I’ve tested. You just have to run the installs with “Run as Administrator” and possible temporary disable UAC. For the first run “Run as Admin” again, that’s it.

I’d love it to have a dark theme, but very few do that are more than a few years old. Unless you can afford £650+ for Photoshop CS6 or are prepared for a subscription for the year, etc. It’s not anywhere near as bad as Gimps bad theme, or lack of.

…”- newer Photoshop plugins (including the generic ones such as Google Nik, Topaz, etc) no longer function in CS2 or with limitations.”…

The lack of commercial filter support as I said isn’t a deal breaker for most people, unless you need them. Most “Effects” can be obtained using Channels, Curves, Exposure, Selective Colour etc. Most filter packs are for those that either don’t know how, or are on a deadline and don’t have time to put effects together themselves. CS2 also has Actions.

I never use Camera Raw in Photoshop to edit my Canon Raw files, I use other software. So for me it’s not a problem. Lets face it, would anyone have expected to edit them in CS2 so many years on with all the new cameras that have been released?

…”- it is no longer supported or updated. It is a dead program.”…

Even though it’s not supported, it works fine, it’s only dead if it doesn’t do it’s job and doesn’t work. That’s such a dumb statement to make.

In my tests for the last few months I’ve looked at all the recent image editors available, many have pros, and many also have glaringly bad cons. There’s very little to choose from without concessions unless you can afford the mammoth of all pricing structures that is CC or CS6.

Photoline
(59 euro Shareware) is promising, but it has issues like most other software. It’s been in development for a very long time, since 1995, has anyone heard of it? The default UI and layout is so old and out-of-date it looks older than CS2.

On my tests it didn’t handle all my Adjustment Layers from Photoshop PSD files. The UI also flickered constantly. Selections are poorly conceived - certainly no shrunken selections. I also couldn’t get some of the Adjustment Layers to work. The Website site is poor and looks circa 1995, plus the splash looks the same – it doesn’t inspire confidence.

But putting some of these odd issues aside, it’s definitely worth considering if they fix some things in my opinion and get an artist to change and update the whole look.

Yes it has some better features that CS2, Modern features with old interface.

Krita
(Open Source)
is an amazing paint program, it’s got a lot of promise for the future, CMYK and 16bit support and a great brush engine, but it’s still early days for Windows users with it.

I’ve had several discussions with it’s devs recently with one issue or another, start up times incredibly slow, slow response on adjustments, slow opening documents, brush pointer displays wrong colour on the canvas. All these are bugs which eventually they say they’ll iron out, but for now it’s great on Linux.
Great for painting, but also consider Painter and Manga Studio.

I’ve no idea why anyone would say that CS2 is limited though, even compared to CS6, it’s packed full of features that all of the other software developers try to copy, but generally fail miserably at, or try to re-think where it’s not necessary – I’ve used Photoshop for 20 years and CS2 is still fab. It’s certainly not dead yet.

Although always be wary of those that start a sentence with “Honestly…” were they not being honest before?

Either way, I don’t think anyone should listen to some random people in a forum, research it all yourself to find out what you think is right, don’t listen to us :wink:

4

It is not really a grey area - you either own a license of CS2, or not - according to the licensing agreement from Adobe, if you use CS2 without a proper license, you are breaking that license agreement, and therefore you liable for prosecution.

Of course, whether Adobe would ever actually do this - well, almost certainly not. In this sense it is up to the user to decide whether installing and using Photoshop CS2 is morally and ethically acceptable, or not. That I cannot answer. It is up to each individual’s sense of right/wrong, etc. :slight_smile:

Of course it is very capable. I never stated it is not. But it does come with a couple of caveats, in my opinion, that should not be overlooked.

Actually, I do. All the time, because it makes it easier for me to do compositing later.

You are quoting me out of context here. Layers do indeed work in 8 and 16 bit per channel modes, but are not supported in 32 bit per channel mode - which was the context I mentioned. To me that is a deal breaker, since I do work with multi-layered 32bit per channel files.

How would you know that most professionals rarely use filters? That is an odd assertion to make indeed.

I have worked with Photoshop professionally since version V3.5, and I know many colleagues who do use the built-in filters (myself included). For example, for texture work the clouds filter is quite handy to have. As are the polar coordinates, lighting effects, and so on. None of those work in 16bit per channel mode in Photoshop CS2 - of course a work-around is to create those effects in 8bit mode, and then copy the layers to a file in 16bit per channel mode.

Still a bit inconvenient, though, and the entire point is to be able to work with a full 16bpc workflow.

And what about other professional and commercial filters and plugins? The newer ones will not work in Photoshop CS2 at all. Most require CS4 or later, and require a 64bit host (which CS2 is not). For example, Google Nik and Topaz are in wide in use by professional photographers. I use Topaz Remask every week in my work - and it works very well in Photoline, and other 64bit compatible Photoshop plugin hosts.

Using Photoshop CS2 is just not an option when professional/commercial filters are required in a workflow - and not only for “professionals”.

I am going to nitpick here :slight_smile:

“Most” actually do not work in 16bpc: out of a total of 105 filters (I counted) 72 are deactivated in 16bpc mode in Photoshop CS2. Again, one could work around this limitation by copying to an 8 bpc file, and applying the filter, then pasting back in the 16bpc version, although this is still a bit of a pain, and inconvenient.

Ah, I may have overreacted a bit. I loaded up Photoshop CS2 for fun after reading your post, and it just felt so… limiting.

Look, I am not saying Photoshop CS2 is unusable for 16bpc work - merely that Photoshop CS2 is much more limited in that regard compared to versions after CS2. With CS2 Adobe was finally making some headway with a 16pbc workflow, but it still does have a number ofcaveats.

However, it is a very capable 16bpc image editor - still much of an improvement over the Gimp.

All a matter of opinion, of course. As for commercial filter support, “most” people is ill-defined, and yes, a lot can be accomplished with the standard image tools.

And of course, there are other alternatives on the market - not only Gimp. Aside from Photoline, Corel PhotoPaint also works in 16bpc and 32bpc mode, and is a modern alternative. The beta of Affinity Photo is out, and looks like a great inexpensive alternative for Mac users. And all of these are supported and upgraded - unlike CS2.

I am arguing that other, inexpensive, alternatives exist that ARE still being supported and updated. You find a bug? Send it in, and it should be squashed in the newer version or beta. Have a question for technical support? With an up to date application there is a fair chance you will receive actual support.

And (inexpensive) alternatives do load up newer cameras’ RAW files without the need for other tools. Like it or not, for many users not having this option is just not a very attractive proposition. They want simplicity, and would rather avoid the complexity of additional tools they would have to deal with.

All this aside from the legal fact that, unless the user owns a proper CS or CS2 license, the “free” version of CS2 is not supposed to be downloaded and installed.

I completely agree with you that RAW developers such as RawTherapee are great, and oftentimes are a definite improvement over the built-in tools of other image editors.

Well, $10 a month is not such a big deal for many Photoshop users. The cost of a couple of StarBucks cups of coffee.

Don’t misunderstand me, though: I absolutely dislike the CC digital serfdom. I will never rent my software. Which is why I switched to other tools than Adobe a couple of years ago.

Photoline IS quite different in terms of handling compared to Photoshop. Both have their cons and pros, but I have to say that personally I work faster in Photoline than I ever did in Photoshop (most of the time). Merely testing a new software package for a couple of days cannot tell you much how its workflow compares to the software you are thoroughly familiar with.

There are many things I think are way better solved than in Photoshop - especially how the layer stack works: as many layer masks as you like per layer (which can also be grouped), layer opacity from -200 up to +200, virtual layers which allow you to virtually clone any type of layer (including layer masks!), virtual cloned layer that update in real time (unlike Smart Objects), external file layers, each layer can have its own image mode and bit depth, adjustment layers that can be grouped into one “super” adjustment layer, adjustments and layer effects can be applied to layer masks, and so on, and so forth.

There are also things I miss in Photoline: the Refine Edge command, being able to move pixels around destructively with a selection only.

Compared to CS2 I miss nothing at all. Well, perhaps the multi-channel option and channel calculations. :slight_smile:
But in overall Photoshop CS2 feels extremely limiting compared to the current version of Photoline.

Of course, that is my personal opinion.

5

On my system Krita runs very, very well. I also understand other Windows users have had issues. I use Photoline’s app connection option to send layers over to Krita for painting, and then send them back to Photoline. It a nice round-trip workflow - something quite unique to Photoline. Even vector layers work with Inkscape roundtripping. Anyway.

I LOVE Manga Studio. Of all the drawing applications I have worked with, none come close to that program’s feel when drawing. I use it for ink and line drawings. It’s great. And affordable.

Painter is great too, but unfortunately does not support 16bitpc. Only 8bit.

Never said it is crap. I have been a loyal Photoshop user since version 3.5 (going on v4 at the time). And I adored the ground it walked on - times change though. I will never become an Adobe digital serf, as I have mentioned earlier.

CS2, in my opinion, does not compare very well to the current version of Photoline (or CS6), though. In many regards. Of course, this is my personal opinion. I can fly in CS6, and CS2 is quite good, but so limited in higher bith depths, and certain commercial filters - which I require for my work. So that is perhaps why I feel CS2 is adequate, but not that great were it to be integrated in my current workflow.

CS2 is still one of the best image editors around (Hey, it’s Photoshop!). But it depends somewhat on the specific workflow whether it can still keep up with updated modern workflows, or not.

Fact is, for 32bpc work Photoshop CS2 is unworkable. And I require that support. Whether that matters to the average user, I doubt it. The average user probably will never even use more than half of what is available in CS2.

Agreed, I should not use that word. It also sounds quite emotional, does it not? :slight_smile:

However, back at you - likewise be careful of those who state that “most” [fill in your type of people] do this or don’t to that. Unless you can backup those assertions with hard evidence, it means very little. :wink: And even IF most people would assert to certain behaviours, it still does not necessarily mean the point you are trying to make is true because of it (classic bandwagon fallacy).

[/QUOTE]

Yup, agreed. Do your own research, and make up your own mind.

Back to work. I am procrastinating big time. :stuck_out_tongue: