If you have photoshop, why even use light room?

D-B-J · Jul 22, 2014

Trever1t said:
I use both. I find the import and catalog features of LR much easier to use than Bridge. I also prefer the raw conversion in LR over CS, just easier and more logically laid out to me. Ido my basic edit in LR, edit in CS and bring it back to final touch in LR. Crazy? I don't know, pretty much self taught so I could be doing it all wrong!

I use the same process. Lightroom is excellent for organization and raw editing, and I use photoshop for more specific edits, cloning, etc.

Jake

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

mmaria · Jul 22, 2014

KmH said:
The bottom line is, if you want a complete photograph editing capability you will want BOTH - LR and Photoshop - and would then use tools, features and functions from both in your workflow.

now, you said something interesting. Why do I need LR if I have Bridge and ACR? What can LR do and ACR can't?

sscarmack · Jul 22, 2014

mmaria said:
KmH said:

The bottom line is, if you want a complete photograph editing capability you will want BOTH - LR and Photoshop - and would then use tools, features and functions from both in your workflow.

Click to expand...

now, you said something interesting. Why do I need LR if I have Bridge and ACR? What can LR do and ACR can't?

You don't. If you stick with bridge.

LR replaces both. Makes it easier to manage, organize, edit, and present your photos.

LR has all the features ACR has, while LR has way more features than ACR.

Think of LR as your one stop shop.

The only time you'll need PS, is when you want to do heavy photo editing, (clone tool, layers, etc)

JustJazzie · Jul 22, 2014

Is Lightroom destructive like Photoshop?

(Sorry If this was mentioned and I missed it.)

Braineack · Jul 22, 2014

JustJazzie said:
Is Lightroom destructive like Photoshop?

(Sorry If this was mentioned and I missed it.)

no. the actual file is not manipulated in any way. It just display the image data in a different manner based on your slider settings. It stores those settings in a separate file it refers back to when you open that image up.

you must save a new file out when you want to do something with it.

JustJazzie · Jul 22, 2014

Braineack said:
no. the actual file is not manipulated in any way. It just display the image data in a different manner based on your settings.

Thanks. That's what I thought, but I wasn't 100% sure since I don't have Lightroom. (Yet)

Imo, this is a HUGE bonus over using only Photoshop.

mmaria · Jul 22, 2014

sscarmack said:
You don't. If you stick with bridge.

LR replaces both. Makes it easier to manage, organize, edit, and present your photos.

LR has all the features ACR has, while LR has way more features than ACR.

Think of LR as your one stop shop.

The only time you'll need PS, is when you want to do heavy photo editing, (clone tool, layers, etc)

awww... so teaching has started

I can't recall if I ever had a photo edited without layers nor I think I could edit just in LR/ACR without PS

Braineack · Jul 22, 2014

mmaria said:
I can't recall if I ever had a photo edited without layers nor I think I could edit just in LR/ACR without PS

youre not editing your photos in LR so much as processing them. LR manipulates data, PS manipulates pixels.

mmaria · Jul 22, 2014

^ yeah I know the fact

I could have been more careful with my choice of words

sscarmack · Jul 22, 2014

Thats one thing I wish LR could do, was manage layers. Like when I did that detective photo, all I wanted to do was adjust the red of my shirt but it kept adjust my skin tone too, so in that situation I had to jump into photoshop and use a mask.

So you will need both, to handle certain jobs.

But most of the time, I only use LR.

mmaria · Jul 22, 2014

sscarmack said:
... when I did that detective photo, all I wanted to do was adjust the red of my shirt but it kept adjust my skin tone too, so in that situation I had to jump into photoshop and use a mask.

so LR doesn't have the adjustment brush like ACR does?

sscarmack · Jul 22, 2014

mmaria said:
sscarmack said:

Thats one thing I wish LR could do, was manage layers. Like when I did that detective photo, all I wanted to do was adjust the red of my shirt but it kept adjust my skin tone too, so in that situation I had to jump into photoshop and use a mask.

Click to expand...

so LR doesn't have the adjustment brush like ACR does?

It does.

mmaria · Jul 22, 2014

sscarmack said:
mmaria said:

so LR doesn't have the adjustment brush like ACR does?

Click to expand...

It does.

oh...ok... why didn't you use it on your shirt? ... nevermind

the point is... I'm used to ACR, the rest of you is used to LR and that's it.

They are both great and it's a matter of a preference or, as I seem to hear all the time that LR is a bit more practical. So be it. We should just enjoy in what we like and make sure we use it to its max.

I liked GIMP also

JustJazzie · Jul 22, 2014

mmaria said:
oh...ok... why didn't you use it on your shirt? ... nevermind

the point is... I'm used to ACR, the rest of you is used to LR and that's it.

They are both great and it's a matter of a preference or, as I seem to hear all the time that LR is a bit more practical. So be it. We should just enjoy in what we like and make sure we use it to its max.

I liked GIMP also

I'm interested to hear your workflow with acr and Photoshop. Aperture has been giving me tons of trouble lately. I was going to just put up with it until I can get Lightroom, but if ACR could solve my issues perhaps it would be worth a shot!

I can pm you if you'd rather not derail the thread.

Braineack · Jul 22, 2014

sscarmack said:
Thats one thing I wish LR could do, was manage layers. Like when I did that detective photo, all I wanted to do was adjust the red of my shirt but it kept adjust my skin tone too, so in that situation I had to jump into photoshop and use a mask.

yes, it's very annoying you can't do localized color/curves edits in LR.

If they could open up all the editing capabilities to their "filters" that would be great.