Polarr v Lightroom

gayle23

TPF Noob!
Joined
Nov 2, 2016
Messages
106
Reaction score
12
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Hi, I'm newish to photography but really love it and desperatly want to improve. I am eager to learn how to improve my photos using post processing techniques. I keep hearing about Lightroom and photoshop but my partner suggested Polarr as it's free. Is it as good as Lightroom? I'm not super techy so don't want to learn to use something that in the end I will end up changing from and moving to Lightroom and relearning my way around that. I can find lots of tutorials for lightroom also but not so many for Polarr, I am particularly interested in portraits and want to create beautiful black and white photography also. I know you can get plug ins for black and white photography but I don't know if there are any that will be compatible with Polarr? I am really new to post processing.
Any advice I would be very grateful. Thank you
 
Is it as good as Lightroom? Somehow I doubt it... Lightroom has many years and many millions of dollars in R&D behind it. It's the industry standard in raw conversion/cataloguing software. There a couple of applications which are close, but they're all similarly priced. IMO, the $10.00 'Photographer's Bundle' from Adobe for Lightroom & Photoshop is WELL worth the cost, and while there will doubtless be far more than you need at the moment, you can grow in to it. Almost every plug-in out there is made for LR/PS; many are made for other software suites as well, but there are virtually none that don't work with LR/PS.
 
I use polarr online to quickly edit photos. but I limit the usage to editing others photos here during quick C&Cs. (since I'm at work and have no access to my normal tool).

It could never replace LR.
 
Adobe's $9.99 a month Photography package includes both Photoshop CC 2017 and Lightroom CC 2015 (and Lightroom update when it's available).
Lightroom, though a professional grade application, by itself is an incomplete editing application. Which is why Adobe also includes the professional grade Photoshop CC.
In fact, Lightroom was designed to be a compliment, or front end application, to Photoshop, not a replacement for Photoshop.

Polarr is even more incomplete than Lightroom is and by only using Polarr you won't be able to do anywhere near all the kinds of edits that can/need to be done to photographs.
 
I started with LR back with the expensive version 3 after using some other programs like ACDSee. LR is my photo management platform as well as for basic processing. I can then do more with PS, On1, Nik (installed for the B&W processing) and other programs and plug-ins. A program like Polarr is free for the basic, but for things like the radial or gradient mask you have to pay.
 
Thank you for your replies. My partner seems to think that Adobe are just money grabbing! Guess I will stick to Polarr until I get my photography to a decent enough level to warrant paying for LR/PS. Can I also ask if you guys would ever consider using pre-set filters. I'm guessing no! Some of the filters seem to make my pictures look better than I can but then I haven't had much chance/time to properly learn how to use Polarr. Just wandering if it is scorned upon by professionals! Thanks again.
 
Thank you for your replies. My partner seems to think that Adobe are just money grabbing! Guess I will stick to Polarr until I get my photography to a decent enough level to warrant paying for LR/PS. Can I also ask if you guys would ever consider using pre-set filters. I'm guessing no! Some of the filters seem to make my pictures look better than I can but then I haven't had much chance/time to properly learn how to use Polarr. Just wandering if it is scorned upon by professionals! Thanks again.

Yep, I'd go along with the "scorned upon" in reference to Polarr. There are other options besides Adobe that are not "scorned upon," but Adobe is the defacto standard. What kind of camera (make and model) are you using?

Joe
 
I am using darktable to process my raw images. Free, and powerful enough for me at the moment.
 
Hi Joe, I have a Nikon D3300 and have just bought a F1.8g lens.
 
Hi Joe, I have a Nikon D3300 and have just bought a F1.8g lens.

Good. Now go through the camera menu and set it to save NEF (RAW) files. Those are what you want to process for best results. You'll find Polarr can't open them and so it's useless. You can have the camera save JEPGs as well.

There's a right and wrong way to do this -- arguably a little extreme. Let me rephrase that: There's a best way to do this and then a sliding scale running from "good enough" to "dear lord that's awful" ways to do this. Polarr is at the low end of that spectrum. You have more to learn about the options and the ways in which they matter. You may not want to learn and adopt methods to achieve best results and that's fine. You may be happy as an enthusiast to adopt "good enough" practices that give you results that satisfy your needs and expectations. From what you've said so far, I assume that you don't yet know and understand the range of options and why they matter which means you don't have enough info yet to make a decision. Here's something to read that will help: http://photojoes.net/class_notes/chapter01.html

Joe
 
I am using darktable to process my raw images. Free, and powerful enough for me at the moment.
Thank you will take a look at that.
 
Hi Joe, I have a Nikon D3300 and have just bought a F1.8g lens.

Good. Now go through the camera menu and set it to save NEF (RAW) files. Those are what you want to process for best results. You'll find Polarr can't open them and so it's useless. You can have the camera save JEPGs as well.

There's a right and wrong way to do this -- arguably a little extreme. Let me rephrase that: There's a best way to do this and then a sliding scale running from "good enough" to "dear lord that's awful" ways to do this. Polarr is at the low end of that spectrum. You have more to learn about the options and the ways in which they matter. You may not want to learn and adopt methods to achieve best results and that's fine. You may be happy as an enthusiast to adopt "good enough" practices that give you results that satisfy your needs and expectations. From what you've said so far, I assume that you don't yet know and understand the range of options and why they matter which means you don't have enough info yet to make a decision. Here's something to read that will help: http://photojoes.net/class_notes/chapter01.html

Joe
Thanks Joe, I will definitely check that link out tonight. Your right that I don't have a clue about the options available to me. Feels like I just don't know where to start! So are filters in general a big no no? (I know you say they are in reference to Polarr.) Are they just being lazy or do professionals use them and tweak them a little if they need to. I find myself going through the filters on Instagram with a feeling of this is probably really wrong! but some of them kind of look really good to me!
 
I am still using the Stand Alone LR version 5.7 so I am not paying a monthly fee. If you don't want a monthly fee then might look at On1. They have a new version that is due around December that will include a file management program. The current version includes layers and a portrait specific tool.

In general if you are using the LR and PS modules on a weekly basis then the subscription offering is worthwhile. If you are just starting out and may skip a few months in using the camera then it might not be the best option.
 
I am still using the Stand Alone LR version 5.7 so I am not paying a monthly fee. If you don't want a monthly fee then might look at On1. They have a new version that is due around December that will include a file management program. The current version includes layers and a portrait specific tool.

In general if you are using the LR and PS modules on a weekly basis then the subscription offering is worthwhile. If you are just starting out and may skip a few months in using the camera then it might not be the best option.
Yes I think I will give myself a little more time to improve and then look into getting LR. Thanks that's helpful.
 
I used basic software when I first got back into digital photography. Looking back I worked on knowing the camera and understanding how to properly manage my Aperture, Shutter and ISO controls. After that I tried to get more out of my photos and went RAW then went LightRoom. I tried a few other freebies but LR just stuck and I've been using it ever since. I have the standalone version LR v6.7 now but used v4.4 for years before upgrading. I don't like paying a perpetual lease for something if I don't have to.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top