# CS6, Lightroom or Aperture?



## Alter_Ego (Jul 11, 2012)

Ive been using photoshop cs for the past couple years so i am very familiar with it but i am open to learning lightroom since I've heard so much about it.
Does CS6 work well with RAW? is Photoshop CS6 able to work in RAW? or does it need an extension.

Ive used photoshop for mainly design but not photography so the photoshop aspects of photoshop are a bit of a mystery to me.
Should i move onto lightroom or aperture instead? 

Honestly i think staying with cs will be best for me since i am familiar with layers, adjustment layers and the tools.


----------



## Big Mike (Jul 11, 2012)

Photoshop (in of itself) is not compatible with RAW files...But, it includes a sub program called Adobe Camera RAW, which opens and converts Raw files.  The programing and technology behind ACR, is exactly the same in Lightroom.  

The difference between Photoshop (CS or Elements) and Lightroom, is more in the workflow.  With PS, you tend to open a file, work on it, then save it (or save a copy).  Lightroom creates a database when you 'import' images (it remembers the location of the image file, and renders a preview).  Any edits you do in LR, are saved in a separate (hidden) side-car file.  So anything you do in LR, doesn't affect the original file at all.  It's a very slick system of nondestructive editing.  

Pretty much anything you can do in LR, you can do in Photoshop as well.  But Lightroom was designed to streamline the workflow for photographers.  Because images are imported and not actually opened, you can very quickly go from one to the next, or copy settings from one to many others.  

There are, of course, many things than you may want to do that can only be done is image editing software like Photoshop...and the two programs work very well together.


----------



## Alter_Ego (Jul 12, 2012)

I see so i should probably invest in both at some point.

Great feedback. Thanks big mike.


----------



## Big Mike (Jul 12, 2012)

> I see so i should probably invest in both at some point.


That is usually what happens for those who use them as tools of the trade, or serious amateurs who can afford it.  

Given a choice between LR4 and CS6 (for photography), I'd probably go with LR4 at $150, rather than CS6 at $649.
And since you already have an older version of Photoshop CS, you can get most of the modern photo editing improvements with LR, but still use CS when you need it. (it works great in conjunction with LR).

There is also the new Adobe Creative Cloud (or whatever it's called).  For a monthly fee, you get to use any of their creative software.


----------



## KmH (Jul 12, 2012)

I recommend just the opposite, and consider function over cost. Get CS 6 (Photoshop 13) before you get Lightroom. Apparently you have never used Camera Raw even though it has been included with ever release of Photoshop since Photoshop 7 (released March 2002).

(For those that don't go back that far Photoshop 8 was the first to be named Photoshop CS (Creative Suite). CS2 was Photoshop 9, and so on such that CS 6 is Photoshop 13)

CS 6's Camera Raw and Lightroom 4's Develope module are essentially the same thing ACR 7, and Bridge can do most of what Lightroom's other modules can do.

CS 6 has many, many editing tools, features, and functions way beyond what Lightroom has to offer as far as editing goes.

With Adobe's creative cloud, once you stop paying the subscription, you no longer have access to any of the software.


----------



## ItsDaveTime (Jul 12, 2012)

Lightroom is great for organizing your pictures.  You can edit pics as well, but not as much as you can in Photoshop.  I personally use Lightroom for organization, and do my editing in CS6.  You can also use Bridge, but that's basically just lets you traverse your file directories.  I recommend Lightroom for the fact that you can tag pictures both with ratings and actual words, more than you can in Bridge.


----------



## KmH (Jul 12, 2012)

Bridge can tag images with ratings and actual words too. :Scratches Head

Go under the Bridge *Label* and *Tools* tabs.

A really nice part of having Bridge is that both Bridge and Photoshop can host ACR. Plus, you can have 2 different batch processes running at the same time, or you can run a batch process in Bridge while doing other edits in Photoshop.


----------



## ItsDaveTime (Jul 12, 2012)

KmH said:


> Bridge can tag images with ratings and actual words too. :Scratches Head



I guess I just like the interface of Lightroom better.  Although Lightroom tends to get a bit slow once you have thousands of images stored within its database.


----------



## Big Mike (Jul 12, 2012)

> I guess I just like the interface of Lightroom better. Although Lightroom tends to get a bit slow once you have thousands of images stored within its database.


You don't need to have all your photos in the same catalog.  I maintain separate catalogs for different types of things...personal, weddings, portraits etc.


----------



## CCericola (Jul 12, 2012)

Lightroom was deigned to work with Photoshop not instead of photoshop. If you are working with large quantities of images like retail or commercial photographers get Lightroom and Photoshop. If you are a fine art photographer and don't need the batch processing and cataloging aspects, get photoshop.


----------



## table1349 (Jul 12, 2012)

Photoshop or Lightroom.  Lightroom or Photoshop.    Hmmmm.  

It comes down to your needs.  If you are for the most part processing your photos then Lightroom will do you just fine for now.  If on the other hand you are doing true editing then you need Photoshop as Lightroom does not have true editing capabilities.  As mentioned above the two actually complement each other quite nicely once you learn to use them.  Most people can get along quite nicely with Lightroom for most of their needs.  Of course there will almost always come a time when you have true editing needs and Lightroom will not do everything you need of it.  Me I have and use both.


----------

