Photoshop VS. Lightroom

[o hey tyler]

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).

Well no, as you stated, Photoshop doesn't do EVERYTHING Lightroom does. It doesn't organize anything. For organization and image management (and general ease of use, but that could be argued) Lightroom is superior. But if you need layers and masks, then PS is also necessary. I usually touch up my files in Lightroom, and then set them to export and then open in PS CS3 to do more intensive editing if needed.

 

[KmH]

The only people that need the organizing and image management features Lightroom has (Digital Asset Management - DAM), produce a lot of images on a week in, week out basis.

Many people that buy Lightroom, buy it for the wrong reasons, and never even upload their photos properly (key wording) to take advantage of Lightroom's image database DAM capabilities.

The image organizing and management features of PsE 9 and Bridge are more than sufficient for most people's DAM needs.

Lightroom is a compliment to Photoshop Elements or CS, not a replacement.

Get a version of Photoshop first, then Lightroom.

 

[sanderso]

OP: you can download both LR and PS from Adobe and try them for 30 days before you buy.

 

[AtuspidsGoddess]

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.

Not sure that I would agree with lightroom being more useful to photographers over Photoshop...or that Photoshop is more useful to graphic artists...etc...I only use photoshop for post processing and in however many years I've still to learn it's full capabilities...I think as far as post processing goes...Photoshop is the best of the best...if you could only have one or the other...it would have to be photoshop...luckily we can have both! Just sayin'. I have never had the need to venture into lightroom or what it's used for since I have photoshop so...can't say for LR. *shrugs*

 

[KmH]

For high volume shooters that need DAM, Lightroom is a god send for streamlining their workflow. Lightroom can do things workflow wise that Bridge can't.

There are even better DAM applications out there than Lightroom (like Expression Media), but Lightroom integrates so nicely with Photoshop CS.

 

[tirediron]

Not sure that I would agree with lightroom being more useful to photographers over Photoshop...or that Photoshop is more useful to graphic artists...etc...I only use photoshop for post processing and in however many years I've still to learn it's full capabilities...I think as far as post processing goes...Photoshop is the best of the best...if you could only have one or the other...it would have to be photoshop...luckily we can have both! Just sayin'. I have never had the need to venture into lightroom or what it's used for since I have photoshop so...can't say for LR. *shrugs*

I'll caveat my statement: For photographers who primarily or always shoot in RAW format, Lightroom is, IMO, the more useful program....