Why use Lightroom if you already have Photoshop??

"John Navas" wrote:
That's a non-trivial suggestion -- my own take is that the learning
curve is pretty high and steep.
Well i was pressuming the OP is already an experienced CS3/ACR and Bridge
user, so i guess it should be possible to get a quick feeling if the
workflow and possibilites that LR offers match his own working style.

I´d like to add one thing: Lightroom´s full abilities can only be unleashed
when working with RAW files, if you shoot JPEG only you don´t need it.

Regards,
Markus

tony cooper wrote:

the Adobe site) So far, the one benefit I see is the ability to
increase/decrease exposure. This has worked out well with some
photographs shot using a circular polarizer. Increasing the exposure
by two stops in LR gives better results than anything I can do in PS7.

Are you still shooting JPG?

Exposure adjustments would be even more effective and useful if you shot
raw.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

tconway wrote:
"trouble" wrote in message

I have Photoshop CS. Would you recommend getting LR as opposed to upgrading
to CS4 or CS5 in time?

Depends on what it is you like to do with images. If almost strictly a
photog, LR may be the way to go.
What are your druthers- do you shoot mostly RAW now?

--
john mcwilliams

Jack wrote:

Just wondering. I constantly see posts here and in other NG's WRT to Adobe
Lightroom. I've gone to Adobe's web page to read about it, but I STILL
don't get it. If one already owns Adobe Photoshop (in my case, CS3) what is
the purpose to buying and using Lightroom? Doesn't PS do everything LR
does? Can somebody with a clue help me out here as I seem to be completely
clueless on this issue. TIA.

For handling a lot of images easily in little time and keeping them
organized. Lightroom is like Bridge, Camera Raw and a powerful photo
database in one application.

Here's a typical Lightroom workflow:

Use Lightroom to simultaneously: 1) import files from your memory
card, 2) rename them according to your own (or your company's) file
naming protocols, 3) assign keywords and 4) convert them to compressed
DNG.

Preview all shots and sort, rate (no stars through four stars) and
cull (delete the rejects) them.

Set all the raw conversion parameters (individually or in bulk - or a
combination of the two) to get the images looking the way you want.
For example, if there's a dust spot on your sensor you can remove it
from all photos in a batch in one go. This is done nondestructively,
so your original images are kept unaltered) and in most cases I find
I'm able to get the look I want without needing Photoshop later.

Export JPEG, TIFF or PDS files in any colorspace, bit-depth and size
you like, individually or in batches.

Later you can find images by their location on your hard drive, by a
database collection to which you have assigned them or by keywords.

There's a lot more in there, too.


--
Mark Roberts Photography & Multimedia
www.robertstech.com

In , on 12/16/2008
at 11:41 AM, "trouble" said:



If you don't know why you need it then you don't need it.
Lightroom is a specialized version of Bridge/ACR.
You can apply tweaks to large numbers of images simultaneously in Bridge
but the interface in Lightroom is more suited to that task as well as
organizing large numbers of similar images.
In truth Adobe should have dumped the bugfest that is still Bridge and
substituted Lightroom but that would kill a revenue stream. In order to
entice people to buy Lightroom as well as Photoshop there are some
modifications of the tools in Photoshop that are only found in
Lightroom, but they are no big deal.
Adobe has gotten into the really bad habit of creating tools that appear
to do the same operation mathematically but calling them different
things and giving them a different graphic interface if the tool appears
in Lightroom, the ACR or the Photoshop desktop. Adobe purposefully does
not document the tools well (read the Photoshop online "help" for an
example of what "obfuscation" means) so that if you look into different
books and articles by "experts" you usually find wildly different
interpretations of how the tools work and how to apply them.
It is sad that a great product like Photoshop has so much marketing
chicanery that negatively impacts its use.

Yup. Its why I use Nikon Capure NX2. The price is way lower too.

On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:55:05 +0100, "Markus Fuenfrocken"
wrote:


"John Navas" wrote:
That's a non-trivial suggestion -- my own take is that the learning
curve is pretty high and steep.
Well i was pressuming the OP is already an experienced CS3/ACR and Bridge
user, so i guess it should be possible to get a quick feeling if the
workflow and possibilites that LR offers match his own working style.

I´d like to add one thing: Lightroom´s full abilities can only be unleashed
when working with RAW files, if you shoot JPEG only you don´t need it.

And how are you supposed to figure that out by using the trial version
for a couple of hours?

On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 23:29:39 GMT, Mark Roberts
wrote:

Jack wrote:

Just wondering. I constantly see posts here and in other NG's WRT to Adobe
Lightroom. I've gone to Adobe's web page to read about it, but I STILL
don't get it. If one already owns Adobe Photoshop (in my case, CS3) what is
the purpose to buying and using Lightroom? Doesn't PS do everything LR
does? Can somebody with a clue help me out here as I seem to be completely
clueless on this issue. TIA.

For handling a lot of images easily in little time and keeping them
organized. Lightroom is like Bridge, Camera Raw and a powerful photo
database in one application.

Here's a typical Lightroom workflow:

Use Lightroom to simultaneously: 1) import files from your memory
card, 2) rename them according to your own (or your company's) file
naming protocols, 3) assign keywords and 4) convert them to compressed
DNG.

Preview all shots and sort, rate (no stars through four stars) and
cull (delete the rejects) them.

Set all the raw conversion parameters (individually or in bulk - or a
combination of the two) to get the images looking the way you want.
For example, if there's a dust spot on your sensor you can remove it
from all photos in a batch in one go. This is done nondestructively,
so your original images are kept unaltered) and in most cases I find
I'm able to get the look I want without needing Photoshop later.

Export JPEG, TIFF or PDS files in any colorspace, bit-depth and size
you like, individually or in batches.

Later you can find images by their location on your hard drive, by a
database collection to which you have assigned them or by keywords.

There's a lot more in there, too.

Can it do retouching? Like removing a tin can from the grass?

Bubba wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:55:05 +0100, "Markus Fuenfrocken"
wrote:

"John Navas" wrote:
That's a non-trivial suggestion -- my own take is that the learning
curve is pretty high and steep.
Well i was pressuming the OP is already an experienced CS3/ACR and Bridge
user, so i guess it should be possible to get a quick feeling if the
workflow and possibilites that LR offers match his own working style.

I´d like to add one thing: Lightroom´s full abilities can only be unleashed
when working with RAW files, if you shoot JPEG only you don´t need it.

And how are you supposed to figure that out by using the trial version
for a couple of hours?

Actually Bubba, LR 2 is really good at handling JPEGs. OK so a few of
the more intricate features are still designed around RAW files but the
application itself (which started life as "Rawshooter") has matured a
little in version 2 and now works quite well with JPEG files as well as
RAW files.

On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:27:10 -0500, "tconway"
wrote:


"trouble" wrote in message
.. .
If you don't know why you need it then you don't need it.
Lightroom is a specialized version of Bridge/ACR.
You can apply tweaks to large numbers of images simultaneously in Bridge
but the interface in Lightroom is more suited to that task as well as
organizing large numbers of similar images.
In truth Adobe should have dumped the bugfest that is still Bridge and
substituted Lightroom but that would kill a revenue stream.
In order to entice people to buy Lightroom as well as Photoshop there are
some modifications of the tools in Photoshop that are only found in
Lightroom, but they are no big deal.
Adobe has gotten into the really bad habit of creating tools that appear
to do the same operation mathematically but calling them different things
and giving them a different graphic interface if the tool appears in
Lightroom, the ACR or the Photoshop desktop. Adobe purposefully does not
document the tools well (read the Photoshop online "help" for an example
of what "obfuscation" means) so that if you look into different books and
articles by "experts" you usually find wildly different interpretations of
how the tools work and how to apply them.
It is sad that a great product like Photoshop has so much marketing
chicanery that negatively impacts its use.
I have Photoshop CS. Would you recommend getting LR as opposed to upgrading
to CS4 or CS5 in time?
tim


Absolutely. I love lightroom, but I also have CS2 as well as
Elements 6. I find that LR and Elements does 99.9% of what I ever
need, and most of that is done in LR.

Someone said it is a version of Bridge. Not really true, it is a
totally different program. It's designed from the ground up for
photographers, especially those who shoot RAW. Once you start using
it I think you'll find that you don't really need Photoshop for most
of what you do. The image adjustments in LR are very capable, and the
latest version has the equivalent of the healing brush and cloning
tools along with local adjustments of color, tone, etc.

The only time I use Photoshop (or Elements) is when I absolutely must
use layers for something, or if I'm doing some slight of hand image
manipulation; or if I want to use a Photoshop plugin of some kind.

Otherwise my workflow is amazingly simple and gives great results:
import, sort, rename, adjust and export to whatever format I want. You
can create presets to develop a group of RAW files as a batch, or
tweak individual images to your heart's content.

Check out these tutorial videos:
http://www.whibalhost.com/_Tutorials.../01/index.html

They are specific to version 1.0, but the program is up to over
version 2 now. The basic interface is the same.

Mark Roberts wrote:
Jack wrote:

Just wondering. I constantly see posts here and in other NG's WRT to Adobe
Lightroom. I've gone to Adobe's web page to read about it, but I STILL
don't get it. If one already owns Adobe Photoshop (in my case, CS3) what is
the purpose to buying and using Lightroom? Doesn't PS do everything LR
does? Can somebody with a clue help me out here as I seem to be completely
clueless on this issue. TIA.

For handling a lot of images easily in little time and keeping them
organized. Lightroom is like Bridge, Camera Raw and a powerful photo
database in one application.

Here's a typical Lightroom workflow:

Use Lightroom to simultaneously: 1) import files from your memory
card, 2) rename them according to your own (or your company's) file
naming protocols, 3) assign keywords and 4) convert them to compressed
DNG.

Preview all shots and sort, rate (no stars through four stars) and
cull (delete the rejects) them.

Set all the raw conversion parameters (individually or in bulk - or a
combination of the two) to get the images looking the way you want.
For example, if there's a dust spot on your sensor you can remove it
from all photos in a batch in one go. This is done nondestructively,
so your original images are kept unaltered) and in most cases I find
I'm able to get the look I want without needing Photoshop later.

Export JPEG, TIFF or PDS files in any colorspace, bit-depth and size
you like, individually or in batches.

Later you can find images by their location on your hard drive, by a
database collection to which you have assigned them or by keywords.

There's a lot more in there, too.

Thanks for the description, it just begs more questions though sorry

Can I zoom in & pan to a specific area, then flip to the next photo
which is nearly identical, to decide which to cull? It has to hold the
zoom and position, not default back to the center or upper-left.

How accessible is the database? What if I want to synch that with a web
site built with mySQL & php? What if I decide I don't want to use LR,
can I get my data out in a usable form? Can I import data from a web
site? Say flickr... or my own, or another program?

I would use it to import my web pages, clean that up & standardize, then
export back to my web page and continue to keep those synched.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam