Gear Talk > Software & Accessories
Lightroom VS Photoshop
Kernuak:
--- Quote from: pdirestajr on March 16, 2012, 04:39:06 PM ---
--- Quote from: unfocused on March 16, 2012, 02:27:08 PM ---Mine is definitely a minority opinion, but as a non-professional who only has to manage his personal photo files, I say stick to Photoshop.
I bought Lightroom, tried it a few times, just couldn't get excited about it. (Okay, maybe I need to give it another shot, but I didn't find it all that useful for me).
My point: I can do everything in Adobe Camera Raw that I can do in Lightroom. They are the exact same tools, just different interface. I'm used to the ACR interface after several years of using it, so I'm comfortable with it. I do a lot of work with smart objects. Going back and forth between Photoshop and Camera Raw. (As an aside, I believe smart objects are absolutely the best way to dodge, burn and adjust image areas.)
One of the huge flaws of Lightroom, is that it is a one-way street. If you take a smart object into Photoshop to make adjustments, then duplicate it to return for additional processing in Raw, you can't easily get back to Lightroom. Instead, you end up back in ACR. So, since at least half the work is going to be done in Camera Raw anyway, what's the point of processing some in Lightroom and some in Camera Raw? None that I have found.
For file organization, I've used Bridge for so long that I'm pretty comfortable with it. Not as sophisticated as Lightroom, but it works fine for me.
--- End quote ---
My workflow is exactly the same. ACR + PS CS5. I see so many people talking about Lightroom that I wonder if I am missing out on something. Is there any editing benefits to using LR over ACR? I have used ACR for years and have my own file management system that I don't know what benefits LR offer.
--- End quote ---
LR has quite a few extra options than ACR in CS4. CS4 narrowed the gap though compared to CS3, so CS5 may have narrowed it further. The one thing that swayed me towards LR2 (which I since upgraded to LR3) was the CA correction, it was the only system that worked most of the time to remove the worst of it out of everything I tested.
Dnd:
We use both.. Lightroom for minor stuff along with cataloging. Photoshop for real editing.. definately use both all the time... could probalby get by with just lightroom and elements 10... Had been using apeture and since lightroom have not looked back.
Mt Spokane Photography:
I have lightroom and Photoshop CS5. Lightroom fills 99 percent of my needs. Only if you get into heavy duty editing does photoshop becomew necessary.
Note, you do need some training, just like any other piece of complex software, just trying to learn lightroom by trial and error will giver you the wrong impression. Fortunately, there some on-line tutorials on the adobe site to help you out. A good Lightroom book is also worth many times its cost.
briansquibb:
I still use DPP for my lightroom type pp and Elements 10 for the extras (plus a bunch of filters)
CowGummy:
--- Quote from: thepancakeman on March 16, 2012, 06:01:30 PM ---For me one of the biggest differences is the ability to do things in bulk. I can have a whole set of photos that need some basic editing such as changing the color balance and bumping up the blacks. I can do them all at once in LR. There may be a way to do it in bulk in PS, but not that I've found (granted I'm a PS novice). I also find the crop functionality of LR to be quicker and easier. I own them both and do about 95-98% of my work in Lightroom.
--- End quote ---
Batch actions in PS would handle all of that quite nicely.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version