# If you have photoshop, why even use light room?



## molested_cow (Jul 21, 2014)

I use photoshop for both work(design) and photo editing, therefore I don't bother with light room and don't have any experience with it.
I was watching this video where he uses photos of different exposures and combine the desired parts, which I do too with photoshop. What I am a bit confused is, if he has photoshop, why even start in light room? Photoshop has Adobe RAW plug-in that works just like how it is in light room(as shown in the video), meaning that everything he did in light room can be done in photoshop. So why the trouble of using both programs?

I am not doubting the capabilities of light room, just confused over his choice of work flow. Is there something that I've missed?


----------



## e.rose (Jul 21, 2014)

I didn't watch the video, because I don't want to sit through 22 minutes (although, I AM curious as to how he's dealing with multiple exposures in LR... I didn't even know you could do that.  ), BUT...

I use both LR and photoshop.

I dunno what that dude's deal is, but I can tell you how *I'm* using it.

First off... Lightroom is a FABULOUS way of keeping your photos organized. (But what about Bridge?!) I had Bridge open for about 10 minutes one time and decided I hated it. I don't even remember why. I just remember it being less user friendly than LR as far as organization is concerned. Maybe it's better now, but who knows.

My personal workflow... I have a different catalog for EACH. SHOOT. Every single shoot I do gets it's own catalog. It helps things stay uncluttered, since I know that no matter how I have things sorted, filtered, or grouped, I'm ONLY ever going to see that session.

On top of that you have ACR in PS, yes, but LR makes batch editing easier.

So I can take a photo from the first scene, adjust it to my desired settings... and then sync those settings across all the other photos in that scene with the same lighting. Then I flip through them real quick to make sure no tweaking is needed and TA-DA! I've done about one RAW file worth of work to like 10 images all at once.

Now *personally*... I don't like to do any heavy editing in LR. I know people who use pretty much ONLY LR. And then I know people who are like me who start lightly in LR and then pull into Photoshop.

So I adjust WB, contrast, exposure, and do some sharpening, etc. in LR, but that's about it. Any retouching or stylistic edits I do in PS. 

But what's cool is that I can export the basic edits from LR directly into photoshop, and once I save the .psd file, it creates a copy of it in LR for me so I don't have to reimport the new .psd file.

When I'm ready to export everything to JPEG, I can batch export my .psd files from LR. I can batch resize, batch sharpen, whatever I want to do.

So really, LR has editing capabilities, yes, but with an emphasis on organization and cataloging.

Batch key-wording... Keyword filtering... Batch Metadata editing... I honestly don't even use it to the extent that I *could* but I'm starting to more and more.


----------



## Trever1t (Jul 22, 2014)

I use both. I find the import and catalog features of LR much easier to use than Bridge. I also prefer the raw conversion in LR over CS, just easier and more logically laid out to me. Ido my basic edit in LR, edit in CS and bring it back to final touch in LR. Crazy? I don't know, pretty much self taught so I could be doing it all wrong!


----------



## SpikeyJohnson (Jul 22, 2014)

I use both. But lately I have broken out the photoshop the most.  I like the speed of lightroom though.  The power of photoshop is just entoxicating and convinces me to use it more often.  I also find that photoshop is a more valuable skill to have so I try to perfect my photoshop skills.

P.S. I also watch Sergei Ramelli and love the tutorials he does.  I especially like his hotel room retouch where he does the professional hotel room shot.


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

OP, thanks for asking this, I was also so curious about that same thing.

I use CS6 and of course, I start in Bridge, ACR and then PS.

but... I've never used Lightroom, I've just seen it in tutorials.


----------



## Vince.1551 (Jul 22, 2014)

LR is great if your workflow involved tons of photos to PP. That is something CS is lacking. As for me I don't have that many photos to PP and I don't like the cataloging system of LR (imaging changing your PC or moving images from external drive or exporting and you have tons of 'catalogues' it is going to be a nightmare) so I stick to just CS.


----------



## jmurphy (Jul 22, 2014)

My workflow is similar to that of e.rose. I just like the way Lightroom does certain things and the way Photoshop does other things. I have tried only using one program to do all my photo editing but I always end up going back to using both.


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 22, 2014)

Vince.1551 said:


> LR is great if your workflow involved tons of photos to PP. That is something CS is lacking. As for me I don't have that many photos to PP and I don't like the cataloging system of LR (imaging changing your PC or moving images from external drive or exporting and you have tons of 'catalogues' it is going to be a nightmare) so I stick to just CS.



actually I keep my photos on an external drive.
But If I take my laptop with me I store photos locally.  To move photos to and from a local to/from external is easy . just use the "move" feature or drag and drop (not an individual file, but an entire days worth of shots).  

I've also had a computer crash, and my new computer and fresh install of LR just connected right up to the catalog (I had a backup of the catalog files) and I kept going without a hiccup.

The photos are loaded in a catalog based on date.  Then you create your own catalogs above it.  I create groupings of catalogs such as River/Nature, PhotoShoots, Astro, Misc, Water, Buildings, People  etc  and have sub catalogs in those based on date_name.
Nicely organized.  I'm sure there's better ways but so far it's pretty easy.

Exporting is a breeze too ... one or many of your own selection.


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 22, 2014)

At first I thought LR was totally non-intuitive. Then I tried other software and they were all based on workflow and all kinda looked the same.  Even Nikon's software looks the same.  So I stuck with LR and learned how to use it ... slowly but surely.  Now it's a breeze.


----------



## Overread (Jul 22, 2014)

As others have said Lightroom has its strength in cataloging and easy batch processing of your RAW photos. You can quickly import - select - organise - batch process the RAW and get most of your work done in the easy to use Lightroom interface. From there you can jump into photoshop if you want to use plugins or specific more complex editing methods; but lightroom covers most of the general basic ground.

Yes you can use Photoshop to do most of this as well; but the Lightroom interface is more steamlined and easier to use for most.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jul 22, 2014)

Cataloging and culling example.

If I have 500 pictures from a day of shooting, I import into a folder by date with appropriate tags.
In Library grid mode select all, then give them 2 stars.
Then I set filter to view only those greater than or equal to 2
I go through them individually hitting 1 for each picture I want to delete and it disappears from view.
For potentially good pictures, I hit 3 or 4
After finishing the pass through, I set filter to allow only =1 and review them to make certain I didn't mark anything for deletion that I really want to keep.
Then select all the 1's in library grid mode and delete


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

I'm sure its been said, but its too early and I don't feel like reading haha.


I edit all my photos in Lightroom and only use photoshop if I need to modify or manipulate an image, whether thats masking, blending, changing specific colors etc.


But Lightroom is 90% of my workflow.


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

I guess I would understand only if I try Lightroom, because everything said here I do in Bridge and ACR...


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

mmaria said:


> I guess I would understand only if I try Lightroom, because everything said here I do in Bridge and ACR...



Can you edit in Bridge, or is it just an organizer?


----------



## Braineack (Jul 22, 2014)

I like to ask: If you have LR, why even use PS?


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 22, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> Cataloging and culling example.
> 
> If I have 500 pictures from a day of shooting, I import into a folder by date with appropriate tags.
> In Library grid mode select all, then give them 2 stars.
> ...



another method ... in Develop mode

I use "X" which is mark for Deletion
Then under the Photo menu option, I think the last menu selection, is Delete Rejected Photos (or something like that).

Overall, when I go through the photos (using my keyboard arrows while I do some initial tweaks to see if I like them) I mark them "X" for deletion, "P" for flagged or nothing if I'm unsure.
Then I use the Delete Rejected Photos to remove them entirely from disk.
Then as I continue my post processing I may use the stars if I really like something to identify it above the others and modify any "P" flagged or "U" unflag it
Then I set the filter to Flagged for the photos I like,  Select them all and export to JPG.

multiple ways of skinning the perverbial cat ...


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> mmaria said:
> 
> 
> > I guess I would understand only if I try Lightroom, because everything said here I do in Bridge and ACR...
> ...




it's an organizer but you can do lots of thing there... It's not that much user friendly but with a few tutorials you can make it friendly and get to know everything there is...

I apply info template while I'm importing the pictures, tagging, rejecting, staring, pdf contact sheets and much more 

editing starts in ACR


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

^^^Astro

I do the same exact thing, except I don't flag, I mark it with a  1 star rating and then sort it down, and then my favorites usually get 3 star and then my final image gets a 5 star.

This way I can distinguish between, good images, my favorites and final full blown edits in one click.

When you flag, you can't do this.


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

mmaria said:


> sscarmack said:
> 
> 
> > mmaria said:
> ...




IMO, thats to much work and adds a whole nother step to my process. Lightroom, as soon as you import you can edit right away. No extra steps needed. Its a great organizer, you can tag, sort, rate, etc. Too each their own though


----------



## Braineack (Jul 22, 2014)

yeah I only flag the images i export.


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> ^^^Astro
> 
> I do the same exact thing, except I don't flag, I mark it with a  1 star rating and then sort it down, and then my favorites usually get 3 star and then my final image gets a 5 star.
> 
> ...



ahh .. I make a Virtual Copy and may Unflag the first version as I do more with the second version (or 3rd or 4th).  
I'm basically using the Flags for if I'm going to Export the file as I set the Filter to Flagged, select all, then export.

So I may have multiple versions of one shot too such as a full view, then a fully cropped view.

I also use the stars but mostly just for editing .. not for selection or anything.


----------



## SnappingShark (Jul 22, 2014)

Photoshop for manipulating my images heavily.
LR for adjusting exposure, tones, balances, and anything, well, light related - plus simple fixes such as spot reduction etc


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> IMO, thats to much work and adds a whole nother step to my process. Lightroom, as soon as you import you can edit right away. No extra steps needed. Its a great organizer, you can tag, sort, rate, etc. Too each their own though


hm... I guess I don't see it that way because I've never used Lightroom, I've always used Bridge and ACR and get used to it


----------



## EIngerson (Jul 22, 2014)

I use both.


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

mmaria said:


> sscarmack said:
> 
> 
> > IMO, thats to much work and adds a whole nother step to my process. Lightroom, as soon as you import you can edit right away. No extra steps needed. Its a great organizer, you can tag, sort, rate, etc. Too each their own though
> ...



I use to be the same way honestly. I never used lightroom and kept hearing how 'awesome' it was, gave it one chance and absolutely hated it! 

I then continued with my old workflow and then about two years past and I started getting real busy with my photography, booking jobs etc. And I found my workflow was killing me and I talked to a friend of mine who also does photography and he told me I needed to get lightroom. I explained to him that I tried it and hated it, etc. But he said, get it and I'll show you how to use it. 

Since then, I love it and couldn't image my photography life without it.


Thats my story and I'm sticking to it


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> I use to be the same way honestly. I never used lightroom and kept hearing how 'awesome' it was, gave it one chance and absolutely hated it!
> 
> I then continued with my old workflow and then about two years past and I started getting real busy with my photography, booking jobs etc. And I found my workflow was killing me and I talked to a friend of mine who also does photography and he told me I needed to get lightroom. I explained to him that I tried it and hated it, etc. But he said, get it and I'll show you how to use it.
> 
> ...


 hm.... when you said like that... it makes me want to try LR


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

mmaria said:


> sscarmack said:
> 
> 
> > I use to be the same way honestly. I never used lightroom and kept hearing how 'awesome' it was, gave it one chance and absolutely hated it!
> ...



If you want, I can show you how to use it


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> If you want, I can show you how to use it


 ... tempting


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 22, 2014)

I hated LR too when I first tried it.  Matter of fact I didn't use it for close to a year after I bought it.
I tried to find other software to do things.  BUt they all had various workflows, etc.  Or could only manupulate one image at a time.  So since I owned it and keep hearing great things about it I sat down to figure out how to use it properly.

I recall things that drove me nuts were .. 
- selecting photos to export.  Sometimes I would just export one.  Othertimes I would export all the photos.
- the layout of LR in general.
- the actual photo menu options are on the right ... and it just took time to learn what stuff does .. and I'm still learning.
- exporting - didn't know actually what outcome I needed ..

but like anything it took time and once I figured one thing out I was fine.  Then I kept trying to learn something new.

it's like the camera .. learn each feature to see what can be done .. whether you use it or not .. like multiple exposure


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

mmaria said:


> sscarmack said:
> 
> 
> > If you want, I can show you how to use it
> ...



Going once....twice...... 



astroNikon said:


> I hated LR too when I first tried it.  Matter of fact I didn't use it for close to a year after I bought it.
> I tried to find other software to do things.  BUt they all had various workflows, etc.  Or could only manupulate one image at a time.  So since I owned it and keep hearing great things about it I sat down to figure out how to use it properly..........


Exactly here. It took me a solid 2-3 months before I got the hang of everything and knew what I wanted to do. Now its second nature. I just wish I could do more with it, like have layers like photoshop, etc.


----------



## Tailgunner (Jul 22, 2014)

jmurphy said:


> My workflow is similar to that of e.rose. I just like the way Lightroom does certain things and the way Photoshop does other things. I have tried only using one program to do all my photo editing but I always end up going back to using both.



This^

I started out with LR (well Nikon NX Capture 2) and was gifted CS6 by my wonderful wife. Anyhow, I really enjoy CS6 but there some just somethings that I do better at in LR. So I switch back and forth a lot. Unless it's something simple and basic, then I tend to edit solely in LR...unless I'm already in CS6. I'm still coming around to Bridge. Right now all i really use Bridge for is reviewing images and seeing which ones are worth editing.


----------



## MRnats (Jul 22, 2014)

I tried LR and didn't like it, but it was because I was in a rush and couldn't really take the time to learn it. ACR I could just dive into without knowing how to do anything and started editing. LR seems like it has a steeper learning curve. Everyone seems to love it though so I guess it's just a matter of learning it. I started watching a YT video to help me get accustomed to it but then my daughters started crying and I just never went back to trying to learn it. One of these days I will though...


----------



## Big Mike (Jul 22, 2014)

Watch these....
100 Ways | KelbyOne


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

Can I just get a list or overview? Thats a lot of videos hahah


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> Can I just get a list or overview? Thats a lot of videos hahah


I need a 1 page cheatsheet
unfortunately, that wouldn't help if you don't know how to use it already.


----------



## Big Mike (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> Can I just get a list or overview? Thats a lot of videos hahah



Most of them are a minute or less.  

But overall, they give a bunch of reasons why it's easier/better (as a photographer) to have a workflow in Lightroom, rather than Bridge & Adobe Camera Raw.  

The point is that when you have a Photoshop CC based workflow, you end up using multiple programs....Bridge, ACR, PS etc.  But with a LR workflow, you can do 'most' of what you need to do, right in Lightroom.


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

astroNikon said:


> sscarmack said:
> 
> 
> > Can I just get a list or overview? Thats a lot of videos hahah
> ...



Here you go, best thing I've ever found.

ShortcutMapper - Keyboard Shortcuts for Popular Apps


----------



## KmH (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> mmaria said:
> 
> 
> > I guess I would understand only if I try Lightroom, because everything said here I do in Bridge and ACR...
> ...


Bridge can host Camera Raw.
Photoshop can too.
So, with Bridge/CC you can have 2 ACR windows open at the same time.


----------



## KmH (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> mmaria said:
> 
> 
> > sscarmack said:
> ...


Bridge works the same way.

Bridge lets us tag, sort, rate, etc, too. The major difference between Bridge and LR is that Bridge is a browser, while LR is a database manager.


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

KmH said:


> sscarmack said:
> 
> 
> > mmaria said:
> ...



I'm not hating, too each their own. I just prefer to limit my workflow and don't like hopping from one program to another just to edit a photo. Thats all


----------



## Braineack (Jul 22, 2014)

I can import directly from my memory card (LR automatically loads when I pop it in), tag, sort, rate, process, sync, use plugins (like Portraiture or Silver effx) all within in LR.

If I really need to then manipulate pixels, I can import it out to PS and import .psds directly back to LR when I'm done.

Being able to do 95% of my work in one program (and having all my raw edits saved in a tiny catalog file the gets backed up) makes more sense to me.

Never been a fan of the Bridge/ACR workflow.  I've been using PS since version 3.0, back in 95-96 IIRC.


----------



## KmH (Jul 22, 2014)

Vince.1551 said:


> LR is great if your workflow involved tons of photos to PP. That is something CS is lacking.


Photoshop CS/CC have a couple of different batch processing functions.
Camera Raw can batch process too, but many don't know that it can.

In Bridge click on Tools and in the drop down box you'll see Batch, and Image Processor among several other functions. The Batch process makes use of Actions.
To batch process using Photoshop CC/CS Camera Raw - lynda.com Article Center | Batch Processing in Adobe Camera Raw

http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/processing-batch-files.html


----------



## e.rose (Jul 22, 2014)

Braineack said:


> I like to ask: If you have LR, why even use PS?



Because I can't retouch in LR, I can't layer in LR, and I can't do any of the more intricate editing I do, in LR.

Each has their purpose. Not everyone has *needs* for those, but people like me do.

Like I said before, I know people who ONLY use LR, and I know people who use both LR and PS... but I don't think I know anyone who ONLY uses PS.


----------



## KmH (Jul 22, 2014)

Braineack said:


> I can import directly from my memory card (LR automatically loads when I pop it in), tag, sort, rate, . . . ..


You can import directly to Bridge too (Bridge automatically loads when my computer detects my memory card). You can then tag, sort, rate, filter, select for batch processing in Camera Raw, open in your plug-ins (like Portraiture/Silver Efex) that are in Photoshop.

The bottom line is, if you want a complete photograph editing capability you will want BOTH - LR and Photoshop - and would then use tools, features and functions from both in your workflow.

Which is why Adobe's subscription plan for photographers _includes both_.


----------



## Braineack (Jul 22, 2014)

e.rose said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > I like to ask: If you have LR, why even use PS?
> ...



i feel like my hyperbole is always missed by you...


----------



## D-B-J (Jul 22, 2014)

Trever1t said:


> I use both. I find the import and catalog features of LR much easier to use than Bridge. I also prefer the raw conversion in LR over CS, just easier and more logically laid out to me. Ido my basic edit in LR, edit in CS and bring it back to final touch in LR. Crazy? I don't know, pretty much self taught so I could be doing it all wrong!



I use the same process. Lightroom is excellent for organization and raw editing, and I use photoshop for more specific edits, cloning, etc.

Jake 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

KmH said:


> The bottom line is, if you want a complete photograph editing capability you will want BOTH - LR and Photoshop - and would then use tools, features and functions from both in your workflow.


now, you said something interesting. Why do I need LR if I have Bridge and ACR? What can LR do and ACR can't?


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

mmaria said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > The bottom line is, if you want a complete photograph editing capability you will want BOTH - LR and Photoshop - and would then use tools, features and functions from both in your workflow.
> ...



You don't. If you stick with bridge.

LR replaces both. Makes it easier to manage, organize, edit, and present your photos.

LR has all the features ACR has, while LR has way more features than ACR.

Think of LR as your one stop shop.

The only time you'll need PS, is when you want to do heavy photo editing, (clone tool, layers, etc)


----------



## JustJazzie (Jul 22, 2014)

Is Lightroom destructive like Photoshop?

(Sorry If this was mentioned and I missed it.)


----------



## Braineack (Jul 22, 2014)

JustJazzie said:


> Is Lightroom destructive like Photoshop?
> 
> (Sorry If this was mentioned and I missed it.)



no.  the actual file is not manipulated in any way.  It just display the image data in a different manner based on your slider settings.  It stores those settings in a separate file it refers back to when you open that image up.

you must save a new file out when you want to do something with it.


----------



## JustJazzie (Jul 22, 2014)

Braineack said:


> no.  the actual file is not manipulated in any way.  It just display the image data in a different manner based on your settings.



Thanks. That's what I thought, but I wasn't 100% sure since I don't have Lightroom. (Yet)

Imo, this is a HUGE bonus over using only Photoshop.


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> You don't. If you stick with bridge.
> 
> LR replaces both. Makes it easier to manage, organize, edit, and present your photos.
> 
> ...


 awww... so teaching has started 


I can't recall if I ever had a photo edited without layers nor I think I could edit just in LR/ACR without PS


----------



## Braineack (Jul 22, 2014)

mmaria said:


> I can't recall if I ever had a photo edited without layers nor I think I could edit just in LR/ACR without PS



youre not editing your photos in LR so much as processing them. LR manipulates data, PS manipulates pixels.


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

^ yeah I know the fact   I could have been more careful with my choice of words


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

Thats one thing I wish LR could do, was manage layers. Like when I did that detective photo, all I wanted to do was adjust the red of my shirt but it kept adjust my skin tone too, so in that situation I had to jump into photoshop and use a mask.

So you will need both, to handle certain jobs.

But most of the time, I only use LR.


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> ... when I did that detective photo, all I wanted to do was adjust the red of my shirt but it kept adjust my skin tone too, so in that situation I had to jump into photoshop and use a mask.


so LR doesn't have the adjustment brush like ACR does?


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

mmaria said:


> sscarmack said:
> 
> 
> > Thats one thing I wish LR could do, was manage layers. Like when I did that detective photo, all I wanted to do was adjust the red of my shirt but it kept adjust my skin tone too, so in that situation I had to jump into photoshop and use a mask.
> ...



It does.


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> mmaria said:
> 
> 
> > so LR doesn't have the adjustment brush like ACR does?
> ...



oh...ok... why didn't you use it on your shirt? ... nevermind

the point is... I'm used to ACR, the rest of you is used to LR and that's it. 

They are both great and it's a matter of a preference or, as I seem to hear all the time that LR is a bit more practical. So be it. We should just enjoy in what we like and make sure we use it to its max.

I liked GIMP also


----------



## JustJazzie (Jul 22, 2014)

mmaria said:


> oh...ok... why didn't you use it on your shirt? ... nevermind
> 
> the point is... I'm used to ACR, the rest of you is used to LR and that's it.
> 
> ...



I'm interested to hear your workflow with acr and Photoshop. Aperture has been giving me tons of trouble lately. I was going to just put up with it until I can get Lightroom, but if ACR could solve my issues perhaps it would be worth a shot!

I can pm you if you'd rather not derail the thread.


----------



## Braineack (Jul 22, 2014)

sscarmack said:


> Thats one thing I wish LR could do, was manage layers. Like when I did that detective photo, all I wanted to do was adjust the red of my shirt but it kept adjust my skin tone too, so in that situation I had to jump into photoshop and use a mask.



yes, it's _very_ annoying you can't do localized color/curves edits in LR.

If they could open up all the editing capabilities to their "filters" that would be great.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 22, 2014)

Braineack said:


> I like to ask: If you have LR, why even use PS?



I think Photoshop, almost ANY version dating back to Version 2.5, is better for spotting and cloning of blemishes and doing clone- and patching or content-aware fill type work than Lightroom. Lightroom is not that well-designed as a "spotting" application. Lightroom's workflow and layout is just better than Bridge as well. I find Lightroom just better designed than PS for most basic global editing and touch-up tasks.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 22, 2014)

KmH said:


> sscarmack said:
> 
> 
> > mmaria said:
> ...



I have always found that the major difference is that Bridge sucks, and Lightroom is easy to use and efficient...


----------



## JacaRanda (Jul 22, 2014)

This should really help anyone with more questions that perhaps have not been answered here already. (me thinks most have)

Adobe Lightroom 5 vs Photoshop CC: which software should you choose? | Digital Camera World


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 22, 2014)

Derrel said:


> I have always found that the major difference is that Bridge sucks, and Lightroom is easy to use and efficient...


yeah, but what do you really think ??
:lmao:


----------



## mmaria (Jul 22, 2014)

JustJazzie said:


> I'm interested to hear your workflow with acr and Photoshop. Aperture has been giving me tons of trouble lately. I was going to just put up with it until I can get Lightroom, but if ACR could solve my issues perhaps it would be worth a shot!
> 
> I can pm you if you'd rather not derail the thread.


well... I think you should ask guys for their workflow, because mine is wrong obviously  LR is the way to go!

and I also know nothing about Aperture...

you can ask me where ever you want, here or pm


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

If you have some time and want to learn lightroom, here is a great overview video


----------



## keyseddie (Jul 30, 2014)

I read all 5 pages. It's obvious a lot of you folks know more about PS and lightroom than I. I know the things I think I need to know in PS to get me to my destination. I bought lightroom 4 a couple years ago and thought it intuitive enough, but except for organization, i couldn't see that it did anything photoshop couldn't, so I went back to the way I do it and it seems nobody else does it this way. Perhaps I'm a dinosaur. After a shoot of any magnitude, I download to iPhoto. Then easily trash what I don't want, assign 3 or 4 stars to the most promising, and export the original file, always raw, I haven't shot a jpeg in years, one by one at my leisure to PS camera raw. I don't have many jobs anymore so I just save what I need for a slideshow and the very few that I know will sell. I try to get it right in camera so I don't need to batch process anything. My question is, I'm I doing it the easiest way? Or would it be better to get more familiar with lightroom, which I own?


----------



## KmH (Jul 30, 2014)

Braineack said:


> JustJazzie said:
> 
> 
> > Is Lightroom destructive like Photoshop?
> ...


Photoshop Camera Raw and Lightrooms Develop module are essentially the same software - ACR.

Photoshop has additional non-destructive editing abikity beyond Camera Raw/Develop module by using Photoshop's Adjustment Layers.


----------



## KmH (Jul 30, 2014)

mmaria said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > The bottom line is, if you want a complete photograph editing capability you will want BOTH - LR and Photoshop - and would then use tools, features and functions from both in your workflow.
> ...


LR's Develop module _IS_ ACR, though there are some minor differences.
for instance - LR has several crop guides you can use that Camera Raw does not have.
Camera Raw's RGB display shows RGB values as 0-255 under the left end of the histpogram display,.and the pixel sample size can be changed.
LR displays RGB values as %'s out over the photo being sampled
LR has 6 other Modules, but a lot of the functions in those other modules are available in Bridge.


----------



## KmH (Jul 30, 2014)

Derrel said:


> I have always found that the major difference is that Bridge sucks, and Lightroom is easy to use and efficient...


You may be an exception, but I have found few people that know how to use Bridge - effectively or ineffectively.
I routinely encounter long time Photoshop users that don't know Bridge or Camera Raw were included with their version(s) of Photoshop.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Jul 30, 2014)

keyseddie said:


> I read all 5 pages. It's obvious a lot of you folks know more about PS and lightroom than I. I know the things I think I need to know in PS to get me to my destination. I bought lightroom 4 a couple years ago and thought it intuitive enough, but except for organization, i couldn't see that it did anything photoshop couldn't, so I went back to the way I do it and it seems nobody else does it this way. Perhaps I'm a dinosaur. After a shoot of any magnitude, I download to iPhoto. Then easily trash what I don't want, assign 3 or 4 stars to the most promising, and export the original file, always raw, I haven't shot a jpeg in years, one by one at my leisure to PS camera raw. I don't have many jobs anymore so I just save what I need for a slideshow and the very few that I know will sell. I try to get it right in camera so I don't need to batch process anything. My question is, I'm I doing it the easiest way? Or would it be better to get more familiar with lightroom, which I own?



Well, right now you're using iPhoto to do what the import and library modules of Lr do.  

Me personally, I import via Lr.  While in the import module I will do my first cull of images.  I will then select the drive they are going into and create the folder or subfolder for the images, with the appropriate label (this is all done from within Lr).  This way I have my own desired folder structure (as I'm sure we all do) and I'm only importing the images I know I want to keep.  It just doesn't make sense to bounce between two different bits of software to do what can be accomplished in one.  From Lr I can open the images in Ps just as you would from ACR, going back and forth between the two.


----------



## keyseddie (Jul 30, 2014)

Scatterbrained said:


> keyseddie said:
> 
> 
> > I read all 5 pages. It's obvious a lot of you folks know more about PS and lightroom than I. I know the things I think I need to know in PS to get me to my destination. I bought lightroom 4 a couple years ago and thought it intuitive enough, but except for organization, i couldn't see that it did anything photoshop couldn't, so I went back to the way I do it and it seems nobody else does it this way. Perhaps I'm a dinosaur. After a shoot of any magnitude, I download to iPhoto. Then easily trash what I don't want, assign 3 or 4 stars to the most promising, and export the original file, always raw, I haven't shot a jpeg in years, one by one at my leisure to PS camera raw. I don't have many jobs anymore so I just save what I need for a slideshow and the very few that I know will sell. I try to get it right in camera so I don't need to batch process anything. My question is, I'm I doing it the easiest way? Or would it be better to get more familiar with lightroom, which I own?
> ...


Thanks, Scatterbrained.  I think I'm grasping it. You are saying to import to LR, where I can open from there directly to PS, correct? Directly to camera raw, I hope. So that would save me time it appears. Perhaps I should learn Lr. Is LR 4 sufficient? Thanks again.


----------



## JacaRanda (Jul 30, 2014)

I would say Lightroom 4 is more than sufficient especially since you have PS already.  There may be very little reason to work with ACR because most of it as Keith has mentioned is in the LR develop module.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Jul 30, 2014)

keyseddie said:


> Scatterbrained said:
> 
> 
> > keyseddie said:
> ...



Lr and ACR are the same on the processing end.  They use the same raw conversion engine.    Lr is a bit easier to use than ACR/Bridge however.    In Lr it's a simple as; Right click>edit in>Open in Ps.  If you have a version of Lr that is of the same generation as your version of Ps then it will open in Ps just as if you were going right from ACR (because you are), if your Lr is newer than your version of Ps it will ask if you want to convert to TIFF first (you do).  Once done in Ps saving the image brings it right back into Lr. Easy.


----------



## keyseddie (Jul 30, 2014)

Got it. Thanks.


----------

