# Lightroom vs Camera raw (Adobe)



## MiFleur (Feb 12, 2013)

I see that so many people use lightroom  to process their images. 
I use Photoshop CS5 and Camera raw
What does lightroom offers that photoshop and and camera raw does not?


----------



## Big Mike (Feb 12, 2013)

Lightroom uses the very same raw processing 'engine' that Adobe Camera Raw does.  So in terms of image quality or potential, they are pretty much the same.  The big difference is in the interface of the program and the workflow that you would use. 

Do you also use Bridge?  It's usually part and parcel with an ACR/PSCS work flow.

Here is a link with 100 short videos on the topic of 'Ways Lightroom Kicks Bridge's Ass'.  But more that just a comparison, it's a great overview of Lightroom and the awesome things it does.
Learning Center ? 100 Ways Adobe Lightroom Kicks Adobe Bridge?s A$$ For Photographers


----------



## Light Guru (Feb 12, 2013)

MiFleur said:


> What does lightroom offers that photoshop and and camera raw does not?



Organizing and cataloging of your photos.


----------



## MiFleur (Feb 12, 2013)

Big Mike said:


> Lightroom uses the very same raw processing 'engine' that Adobe Camera Raw does.  So in terms of image quality or potential, they are pretty much the same.  The big difference is in the interface of the program and the workflow that you would use.
> 
> Do you also use Bridge?  It's usually part and parcel with an ACR/PSCS work flow.
> 
> ...



Yes I do use Bridge but I checked the list from the link you gave me, and I did not suspect there was so many things, that it could do.
Thanks so much for the info


----------



## KmH (Feb 12, 2013)

Lightroom's primary purpose is image database management, and is designed specifically for photographers.  

Bridge is a browser (not database management software) and is designed to be used with most of Adobe's software. Bridge includes many of Lightroom's image management/organizing features.


----------



## Big Mike (Feb 12, 2013)

> Lightroom's primary purpose is image database management, and is designed specifically for photographers.


I would disagree with the first part of that.  I think that Lightroom's primary purpose is to be an 'almost everything you need' solution for photographers.  Image database management is certainly a part of that, but it's image editing functions are just as or more important to photographers.  

Of course, Photoshop CS can do many, many things that Lightroom can't, but they have tried to give LR most of the tools that most photographers use most often.


----------



## KmH (Feb 13, 2013)

Lightroom is based on 2 engines: an image catalog database management engine (the Library module), and a parametric image editing engine (the Develop module which is ACR).

The other 5 Lightroom modules tap into those 2 engines. Note that the Library module is the first module, and that most of the other modules are tied to the Library module rather than to the Develop module.


----------



## CCericola (Feb 13, 2013)

Adobe Lightroom was designed for photographers to help organization and workflow and work in addition to Photoshop. It was not meant to be a replacement for Photoshop. The developers have put more into lightroom than was originally planned so I can see why non-professionals see it as a replacement.


----------



## KmH (Feb 13, 2013)

Yep! Lightroom has always been specifically for photographers, and intended as a front-end supplement to Photoshop.


----------



## Big Mike (Feb 13, 2013)

In the first version of Lightroom, the library module was much the same as it is now in version 4.  But what they have added over the years, is more and more functionality in terms of image editing and various output options.  The develop module is much the same as ACR, but it's a much better interface and it ties to the other modules more smoothly than Bridge, ACR and PS CS tie together.  

In a good workflow, it make sense to do as much as you can, before the image is converted from RAW to an actual image.  So that means a photographer probably spends a fair amount of time/work in ACR (or Lightroom).  And I'd rather work in LR than ACR any day.

Lightroom is not a replacement for Photoshop CS, but I think that with many photographers who use both, the most efficient workflow is to do as much as possible in LR and only use CS when absolutely necessary.


----------



## MiFleur (Feb 13, 2013)

So if I understand well, Lightroom would replace ACR completely, I would not need to use bridge either to access my images, and would need to open photoshop only when I need to work on more than one layer or for advanced work. 
I can adjust white balance, default lens corrections, levels or curves, saturation and such in lightroom. I can also resize and save in different format in lightroom without having to open photoshop.

It sounds very interesting. 

thanks for all your answers, 
Mike your were very helpful with your clear explanation.


----------



## KmH (Feb 13, 2013)

CS 6 Camera Raw and Lightroom 4's Develop module are both ACR 7.

There are features Camera Raw has that Lighroom's Develpop module doesn't have.
There are features Lighroom's Develop module has that Camera Raw doesn't have.


----------



## MiFleur (Feb 13, 2013)

KmH said:


> CS 6 Camera Raw and Lightroom 4's Develop module are both ACR 7.
> 
> There are features Camera Raw has that Lighroom's Develpop module doesn't have.
> There are features Lighroom's Develop module has that Camera Raw doesn't have.



I guess it is hard to get the best of both worlds

I am seeing a friend next week that has lightroom 4, I will study a bit. and see if I find it is worth buying lightroom or just keep working with ACR
anyways the company is getting CS6 soon. At least my nikon d600 will be supported.


----------



## KmH (Feb 13, 2013)

Adobe lowered the price of Lightroom by about 1/2 when they released LR 4.

ACR 7 (CS 6 Camera Raw/Lightroom 4 Develop module) was major upgrade to Process Version 2012. Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 * Process versions
ACR 6 (CS 5 Camera Raw/Lightroom 3 Develop module) was Process Version 2010.

Images edited in LR 4 using PV2012 cannot be accurately rendered in CS 4, 5 which is PV2010.


----------



## Buckster (Feb 13, 2013)

KmH said:


> There are features Camera Raw has that Lighroom's Develpop module doesn't have.


Out of curiosity, they are?


----------



## groovieknave (Feb 13, 2013)

Lightroom is definitely worth buying. It has powerful convenient tools... But doesn't replace photoshop for a pro. Lightroom is cheap and all that most people need.


----------



## Buckster (Feb 14, 2013)

Buckster said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > There are features Camera Raw has that Lighroom's Develpop module doesn't have.
> ...


Perhaps this got missed because of the page turn...

Keith?


----------



## KmH (Feb 15, 2013)

The other day I wanted to mention the Bridge/ACR Workflow - Chapter 10 in the book The DAM Book: Digital Asset Management for Photographers 

Apparently, a lot of people don't know Camera Raw can batch process images, and that Camera Raw can be hosted by either Bridge or Photoshop, including both doing the hosting at the same time (see below). http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...-gallery/312977-batch-process-camera-raw.html

Like being able to change the working color space or bit depth Buckster -


----------



## Buckster (Feb 15, 2013)

KmH said:


> Like being able to change the working color space or bit depth Buckster


In practical terms, why is that important?


----------



## Buckster (Feb 22, 2013)

Buckster said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > Like being able to change the working color space or bit depth Buckster
> ...


I'm sorry...  Did you say something Keith?  No?

This is interesting: Learning Center ? 100 Ways Adobe Lightroom Kicks Adobe Bridge?s A$$ For Photographers


----------

