Lightroom vs Photoshop

[Dmitri]

If I have photoshop cs5 (latest), is there any reason to get lightroom (or elements or other adobe stuff)?

[TPF Sponsor]

[Schwettylens]

For sure you dont need elements. I think elements is just a dumb down photoshop? Correct me if im wrong please.

[pbelarge]

Elements is not as sophisticated as photoshop, it has been designed for those who want to work with photos, spend less money and have an easier learning curve.
Photoshop does it all and then some, not just for photographers, it is also for those deeply into graphics.


LR has been designed for photographers, it is a photo organizer that also performs some photography manipulation. As each new version of LR is announced, it becomes a little more sophisticated in the ability to manipulate photographs.

There are plug-ins that can assist all three programs as well.

There are some who use both LR & PS, some who also use LR & PSE.

[KmH]

The image editing parts of both CS5 and Lightroom 3 use the same parametric rendering engine: Adobe Camera Raw 6.1.

The difference is that with CS5 you also get the standalone image browser: Bridge.

Lightrooms main function is as a catalog database manager, the image editing capability is a secondary feature.

There are both advantages and disavantages to using a database manager as opposed to a image browser, if you have enough images to manage.

[icassell]

I use LR (I've been using LR2, but ordered LR3 today) for database management and initial image editing and then transfer my image into CS5 for final editing.

CS5 is not an image-management program, so LR will add to your functionality.

[cfusionpm]

I actually rarely even use PS anymore. I can do most of my edits entirely in LR, and if I need some PS edits, I just edit the original or copy and stack it in LR.

[Dmitri]

Ok so if I understand it right - Lightroom is pretty much the same as Bridge + Raw?

[D-B-J]

lightroom 2 is GREAT for raw editing, and if you do ALOT of it, i find it much easier to use than the photoshops acr software.

[icassell]

Ok so if I understand it right - Lightroom is pretty much the same as Bridge + Raw?

No, not really. Lightroom maintains a catalog of all of your images in thumbnail form. You can pick out the image you want and work on it. It is a great workflow tool. All of my images are on an external hard drive from my editing laptop, but I don't need the drive connected to see the thumbnails. I think you can download a free trial -- try it out.

[Scatterbrained]

Lightroom is great for your standard editing (cropping, white balance, color adjustments, sharpening, noise reduction. . .etc. . ). It does all of the editing to the raw image so you can move through a lot of images quickly. Lightroom was designed with pro photographers who handle large amounts of images in mind. You can do minor skin touch ups, dodge, burn, iris enhance etc, but if you're trying to say. . . removed a light pole from the front of a building or add a hot model to a picture of your corolla you'd need Photoshop. The two software packages complement each other pretty well. You can likely handle most of you're images in LR and when you have a shot that needs a lot of work you can send it to PS.

[magkelly]

I have LR and Photoshop. In all honesty while I have found LR usable I still end up using Bridge, Camera Raw and Photoshop far more. As a browser and for quick edits it's pretty good, but if you're going to end up doing more than a quick crop, or red eye removal, or some sharpening, I find the CR/PS combo far more useful. I do like LR, for what it is, but I don't think I'd bother to update to LR3 to be honest whereas updating Photoshop at some point is something I always make a real priority.

It's rather like Illustrator vs Indesign. If you only do a couple of quick 3 page brochures every once in a while Illustrator will do you just fine, but if you're constantly doing bigger desktop publishing projects then you'd really need Indesign. For out in the field doing quick checks, crops, ul to Flickr and whatnot I think LR is ideal. But when you really have to get in there and WORK on a photo to bring the very best out of it, I'd say CR/PS is definitely the way to go.

[Heck]

Try the demo for LR and I think you will like it.

[ghache]

i use both, i do all the basic editing (exposure, white balance and all that fun stuff) in lightroom since i am using it as a library and i use ps for retouching and more advanced pp.

[KmH]

Ok so if I understand it right - Lightroom is pretty much the same as Bridge + Raw?

Bridge is a standalone browser and it is used by all the software products that make up the CS suite.

Lightroom is a database manager that has an imbedded image editing capability.

In Lightroom, if you have a lot of images and have done a good job of keywording, they can be very easy to retrieve.

In Bridge even with good keywording retrieving images can be a pain the the butt.

I strongly suggest you get The DAM Book: Digital Asset Management for Photographers by Peter Krogh

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/DAM-Book-Digital-Management-Photographers/dp/0596523572/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276114625&sr=1-1]Amazon.com: The DAM Book: Digital Asset Management for Photographers (9780596523572): Peter…[/ame]

[Dmitri]

oh okay, I'll try the trial version. I just always get nervous with stuff like that, if I don't like it and try to uninstall it how bad will it mess up my CS lol. I've had enough bad experiences with programs in the past that it gives me shivers

Thanks all for the information