Project 52!

ORIGINAL: Composed

When is it expected to be out? What new modules will it have? Has this all been announced? Thnx.

The official press release is here:

http://www.cakewalk.com/Press/01-20-05-Project5V2.asp

i think cakewalk should just call P5 version 2 just, P5. stop the upgrade trend of numbering the latest release. Putting the number 5 in the name was radical and now with the upgrade coming i think the 2 should be lost in the fine print.

have a good one
3Eo

stop the upgrade trend of numbering the latest release.

Remember that not everyone upgrades as soon as a new version comes out.

Both viable contrasting points of view. My take: There will be a period of time where those who don't upgrade will have some questions here, and we'll need a way to differentiate between the two versions. After all, some posts popped up recently from users of 1.01 who never downloaded the 1.5 update, and that was free. I really don't care what Cakewalk calls the next version; we need a nomenclature for our own uses here. And I don't recall any official sanction for the use of the "P5" contraction, but we all accept that as a given. So it's up to us.

We tossed this around awhile back, and there was a consensus among a very small sampling of the forum to use "P5II". I've been using that reluctantly (the lesser of the evils), but I never felt too comfortable with it. I've also been guilty of using "P2" in my love of shortcuts, but I can see where that's bound to cause some confusion. Still, it's a bit of a logical progression, since, when referring to versions [1.01 vs. 1.5], that would be next in line, or at least 2.01 or 2.02 after the inevitable maintenance release. That continues to be a bit "wordy".

So, what's it gonna be, folks? I'm at a bit of a loss here [believe it or not!]; "P52" is way too confusing, "P5II" implies P5 "Junior", and that's obviously not the case, given the huge feature set increase. P5 "Squared" might be more descriptive, but how do we easily indicate "powers" in a way that's simple enough for everyone? How about "P5, The Sequel", "P5 Revisited", "P5 Redux", "Another P5", "Next P5", "The Second Project5", "P5S", "P5/5", "P5.2", or "P5v.2"? Can you tell that I'm running out of serious ideas? The best new one that I can come up with is "2P5": short, to the point, descriptive, and it separates itself from "P5".

Let's get this BS settled now. While it seems trivial, we'll soon have a lot more important work to do deal with when that actual update comes out, so sign in with your opinion here. I suppose that I shouldn't hijack this thread for this purpose, but it seemed to be leaning towards that direction. We can start a new thread if you like, but let's get this one behind us. I don't care what it ends up, but we all need to be on the same page.

ORIGINAL: b rock

P5 "Squared" might be more descriptive, but how do we easily indicate "powers" in a way that's simple enough for everyone?

<programming nerd> P5^2 is how it's done in some computer and typesetting languages.</programming nerd>

Of course, that will lead to the inevitable 'oops no shift key' typo 'P562'.

Project 52 sounds too similar to Native Instruments Pro-52, which was upgraded to Pro-53 a few years back.

To avoid making the product sound obsolete, perhaps Project5 Infinity + 1 would work?.

I like P5v2 myself. Of course I am biased :)

Oh, you're right! That is what I was thinking of. The native instrument one. So it is called Project 5 version 2? That isn't as catchy though I have to say. Project 6? I don't know. Why was it called Project 5 in the first place?

I used the Eyedropper tool to sample the forum's background color and did away with dealing with transparency altogether.

I smoothed the edges by doing the following:

1. Select the background with the Magic Wand (with a reasonable tolerance setting).
2. Select Inverse to get just the shirt.
3. Duplicate the shirt in a new layer.
4. Select the background of the shirt layer with the Magic Wand.
5. Select | Modify | Expand | 2 pixels.
6. Select | Feather | 1 pixel.
7. Delete!

The blue colorization was just a solid fill on a new layer that was set to Multiply. I selected the P5 logo and non-T-shirt areas in the original layer, then deleted the selection in the blue layer to keep those areas from being colorized.

Since the edges of the shirt in the original image were unsual, to say the least, I opted to apply a subtle drop shadow to give the edges more definition. I think this can be improved still, but it does make the logo stand out.

Finally, I adjusted the Levels to move the black, white and gray points of the color spectrum to make the wrinkles in the shirt stand out a little more (kind of like killing a song's dynamics with a limiter).

I actually used to tutor intermediate Photoshop (pre version 5) in college (along with physics, math, CS and English), but the new version has a lot more to it. I'll still say that antialiasing and transparencies don't mix, but if anyone knows any secrets, I'd be interested in hearing them.

And the Wacom trick sounds pretty good; I actually just bought an Intuos3, which I am very happy with. The fact that it has iPod-like touch controllers that are programmable make me happy enough... can I get these on a MIDI controller? Anyway, the touch controls are perfect for quickly zooming in and out and would be great to have for that and many other purposes on a MIDI keyboard.

nice T-shirt

but it's only PhotoShop magic
i mean haven't we all been fooled by photo shop magic enough already?
don't tease us like this

unless you're prepared to take that design to a T-shirt shack near you and do an unauthorized limited run. with any unresponsive governing body, local action is often the only resolution.


I'm with Nick on the name P5 v2 -- but that may just be the way software people think
we see a 'v' and know what it means, but it really doesn't roll off the tongue all that well

v2 were also those nasty rockets that landed on Britain during the blitz, so since I'm the one that wants special markerting for all those synth workstation users in the UK, maybe not such a good idea how about P5 v deux captures the international and Canadian appeal

Too long for the t-shirt, ja'think??

Nope. Since the t-shirts exist only in dimensions known to superstring theorists, I'd say that we can fit anything on them by practical application of quantum mechanics. Of course, this must be performed at the sub-molecular level, which explains why we haven't seen any t-shirts.

Another tactic would be to emulate the two-dimensionality of the new interface. I would assume that world would have X & Y co-ordinates that extend infinitely in each direction. Therefore, once again, no problem fitting any length of title onto a t-shirt. The problem is that I've never gotten a two-dimensional t-shirt to fit me correctly, and no one will know how cool you look unless they're in another dimension themselves. So, we're back to square one: no t-shirts, or if they exist, no one can see them.

how about P5 v deux captures the international and Canadian appeal

hmmm....it might work! P5deux ....nah... I can just hear it as the butt of some bad jokes, "I use P5 duh! Dont you mean P5 deux? Duh! D'oh!