Photoshop VS. Lightroom

[rateeg]

What's the difference and what should be best for Post Processing?

 

[tirediron]

Neither... both... Really, it's apples and oranges. They're two different programs with two different purposes. Lightroom is meant specifically as a RAW editor with cataloguing functions. Photoshop has limited RAW processing capability (Through ACR) but very in-depth image editing and manipulation capabiltiy. My opinion is that Lightroom is much more useful for most photographers, while Photoshop proper is of greater benefit to graphic artists and those who do more artistic post-processing.

 

[rateeg]

you mean lightroom is a photoshop shortcut?

 

[reznap]

I can't stand the layout for Lightroom and the neutered editing capabilities. But my organization is non-existent.. and LR helps with that.

 

[Big Mike]

Did you try a search? This has been asked (and answered) many times before.

In a nutshell...you shouldn't compare them head to head like this. They are different software for different purposes.

Photoshop is a very large program that can do just about anything you could want for image processing/manipulation. It can do many, many things that Lightroom can't do...so I guess most would say that it's the 'best' for post processing.

Lightroom was designed as a workflow program. It's meant to make it faster and easier for a photographer's workflow. Since it first appeared, they have added a bunch of image editing tools, so yes, many people use it for things that they used to use Photoshop for...but it's still not a direct replacement for Photoshop as an image editor.

They are actually made to work very well together. You can go from LR to PS and back again pretty smoothly.

 

[McNugget801]

Lightroom vs. Photoshop

 

[KmH]

The Raw converter, parametric image editing part of Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3 is Adobe Camera Raw 6 (ACR). Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3's main function is image database management. Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3 is an incomplete image editing solution because it lacks precise selection tools and lacks the capability to do layers.

Adobe Photoshop Creative Suite (CS) 5 includes the same ACR 6 Lightroom has, Bridge (an image browser), and all the raster graphics editing tools Photoshop has become.

Adobe designed Lightroom as a compliment to Photoshop CS for professional photographers having a large image catalog to manage and that they routinely added a several thousand images to per month.

 

[subscuck]

If you're mostly interested in the editing capabilities, not the organizational capabilities, Adobe's other offering, Photoshop Elements, might be in line with your needs. It's also the cheapest of the three. I generally see it between 79 and 99 USD. It's often referred to as PS-lite or a stripped down version of PS as it doesn't have all of PS's capabilites. It's still very competent with a good book to teach you how to use it. Like PS, it's non destructive editing thru layers and comes with ACR. From what I've read, the user interface is supposed to be very easy for the non professional. It can't edit in 16 bit like PS, and doesn't have all the tools PS has. Even still, it provides everything most people need. Graphic artists and photography professionals would find it lacking, but their demands are much greater than the non pro. If you outgrow it, you can move up to PS CS.

 

[D-B-J]

All good advice. I use photoshop and lightroom together to edit.

Regards,
Jake

 

[Ryan L]

Photoshop has limited RAW processing capability (Through ACR) but very in-depth image editing and manipulation capabiltiy.

CS5 and ACR 6.3 to me seems like it has as much, if not more RAW editing ability?? I thought LR3 used the same RAW converter, ACR?

 

[subscuck]

CS5 and ACR 6.3 to me seems like it has as much, if not more RAW editing ability?? I thought LR3 used the same RAW converter as ACR?

ACR 6.3 is the RAW converter, and you're correct, CS5 and LR3 both have ACR 6.3.

 

[gennatay]

I use Lightroom and Photoshop Elements. For me PSE does just what I need without the heavy price tag.

 

[Oogle]

Ok I've been using photoshop for about..... 6 years now.... and might I just say this.... PHOTOSHOP... enless your doing touchup only lightroom doesnt really do eveything you want.. photoshop allows you to do anyhting and everything that pops up in your head. and dont get elements..... you just get cheated out of a quality program.

 

[DerekSalem]

Neither... both... Really, it's apples and oranges. They're two different programs with two different purposes. Lightroom is meant specifically as a RAW editor with cataloguing functions. Photoshop has limited RAW processing capability (Through ACR) but very in-depth image editing and manipulation capabiltiy. My opinion is that Lightroom is much more useful for most photographers, while Photoshop proper is of greater benefit to graphic artists and those who do more artistic post-processing.

What are you talking about? Lightroom3 and Photoshop CS5 use the *EXACT* same RAW-processing capability (the RAW-processing is all done using an external Adobe plug-in which is used by *all* Adobe products).

There are 2 upsides to using Lightroom over PS: Certain things are quicker (easier to access) and the cataloging process is much easier. That's *it* btw.

Photoshop does *EVERYTHING* Lightroom does and *MUCH* more. It can be easier to make more exact changes (Lightroom can make vague changes, Photoshop gives you more direct control).

 

[Kevin Sanders]

Lightroom is very quick and reasonably intuitive. I try to keep my editing to a minimum and can do most things in LR, but PSE 9 is good for when you want to do stuff that requires selection or layers (and a few other things).
So my answer is 'Both'. PSE is too long-winded to use as an organizer/quick editor. LR is much faster.