About Lightroom

SciAggie · 08-10-2011

Ok, I will reveal my ignorance. Can some one explain Lightroom to me? I have PSE 7 and PS CS4 that are supplied on my work computer. Rather than just do some blind googling, I thought someone might share some brief insight as to what it does and why I might need it in addition to or instead of photoshop.

SciAggie · 08-10-2011

Can lightroom presets be used in photoshop?

SciAggie · 08-10-2011

I went to Adobe's website and since Lightroom and photoshop are both editing software, I don't see the reason to spend $299 on Lightroom. Then again, lots of folks use it and talk about the presets.

Doug · 08-10-2011

Gary, I have a history with CaptureOne, but haven't used PS in many years (although I do have CS4). A LR license came bundled with a camera I got last year, and I delayed using it because it seemed so impenetrable. I can often poke around with the controls and menus of a program and figure much of it out, but not LR.

There are some resources on the Adobe website that can help. I chose to buy their "Classroom in a Book" for Lightroom, which comes with a DVD of sample lesson material. I'm very pleased with that choice, as it got me productive pretty quickly and thoroughly. And now I'm happy to use LR...

SciAggie · 08-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug

Gary, I have a history with CaptureOne, but haven't used PS in many years (although I do have CS4). A LR license came bundled with a camera I got last year, and I delayed using it because it seemed so impenetrable. I can often poke around with the controls and menus of a program and figure much of it out, but not LR.

There are some resources on the Adobe website that can help. I chose to buy their "Classroom in a Book" for Lightroom, which comes with a DVD of sample lesson material. I'm very pleased with that choice, as it got me productive pretty quickly and thoroughly. And now I'm happy to use LR...

Thanks Doug,

My question still is what is it that lightroom does that photoshop does not do?

Doug · 08-10-2011

Ah, I see you're shopping for LR, not already in possession, so it's early for purchasing learning materials. There is a downloadable trial version, but without good instruction that wouldn't do me much good.

I see PS as a wide-ranging program with a very broad capability, whereas LR is dedicated to photography related tasks, more focused, if you will.

I'm not really familiar with PS so can't help with comparisons. Except I think PS has some HDR merging and stitching features that would be a good adjunct to LR.

mto'brien · 08-10-2011

LR is good for processing a bunch of images rather quickly. It also neatly catalogs your images. Saves and adjustments are "non destructive". 99.9% of my images are processed through LR, but if there is an image that requires extra attention -more powerful tools- it goes through PS. I don't think there are presets for PS, could be wrong, but I use them all the time in LR. Maybe you could download a demo copy and give it a whirl.

SciAggie · 08-10-2011

Thanks guys. The trial version may be worth a test drive. Are most presets a freeware sort of thing or do you purchase them?

Ranchu · 08-10-2011

The conversions use the same engine and profiles as ACR, there are a few more sliders to goof around with, and it has an integrated library system for the photos, and various versions of them. I never used it as I never thought much of Adobes conversions, or their "hey change all your photos from the camera manufacturer's file type to our DNG. Trust Us! We'd never hold you hostage to upgrade, Promise!" BS. But Mainly the conversions. There's nothing more to lightroom than CS4 Bridge and ACR as far as I know.

srtiwari · 08-10-2011

Gary,
I have an old version of PS, and Lightroom 3
As a Photographer, LR3 allows me to " batch-fix " bunches of images, and catalog the pictures. The Presets and the editing tools are more than enough, and I never use PS (now) except to apply some filters, or use layers etc. I Luuuv LR and hope to never use PS, as LR does 90% of what PS does, and many other things it doesn't.
(Psst: It is currently available for $100 off from B&H until the 20th of August)
YMMV
Subhash

cosmonaut · 08-10-2011

Light room is the best and easiest to use raw developer on the market. If you are really good at PS you might not need it. You can process files much easier and faster than PS Plus LR has grad filters, noise reduction and many presets for b&w conversions and many more. My E5s raw files are not usable in ACR. You won't regret the purchuse.

Bob Michaels · 08-10-2011

I can tell you that the steep learning curve we went through in Photoshop seems to have very little carry-through to Lightroom. I have about 10 years using Photoshop but Lightroom baffles me. I own the latest versions of both.

I do know that Lightroom has a predetermined way that it wants to manage your files. I have my own file management system that I use for .PSD and other files. That is the conflict that has kept me from following through with Lightroom.

Lightroom appears to be designed for someone who wants to make common adjustments to hundreds of files (those with digital cameras). I shoot film, edit tightly from the negs, and scan very few. So every file I work on and every adjustment I make is unique.

However, many rave about Lightroom. That is why I bought it. I am sure they will chime in with good information. I am going to read the responses as well. But today I remain unable to select a file, open in Lightroom, adjust, save and print.

Can anyone suggest a good tutorial explaining the current version of Lightroom to experienced Photoshop users?

SciAggie: you should thank someone in your school administration for getting you Photoshop and Lightroom. Do I remember correctly that you are not an upper level arts educator, the ones whose curriculum would use these?

mto'brien · 08-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by SciAggie

Thanks guys. The trial version may be worth a test drive. Are most presets a freeware sort of thing or do you purchase them?

there are tons of free ones around just google "lightroom presets" and have fun!

SciAggie · 08-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Michaels

SciAggie: you should thank someone in your school administration for getting you Photoshop and Lightroom. Do I remember correctly that you are not an upper level arts educator, the ones whose curriculum would use these?

You are correct that we should be thankful. We do not have lightroom - just photoshop - both elements and CS4. Our small district is very blessed. Students grades 5-12 ALL have latops. Teachers have interactive white boards, documents cameras, digital cameras, student response systems, and easy access to video equipment. I don't teach arts; I am a middle school science teacher. Our county has the highest percentage of welfare recipients in the state and our county has an extremely high percentage of low socio-economic children. Despite this, our standardized test scores compete well with districts that have fewer social and economic hardships. I feel priveledged to be one of a group of educators in our school that has worked very hard to provide our teachers with great resources. It is our goal to offer students the best opportunity for an education that has the potential to change their lives.

mto'brien · 08-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by SciAggie

You are correct that we should be thankful. We do not have lightroom - just photoshop - both elements and CS4. Our small district is very blessed. Students grades 5-12 ALL have latops. Teachers have interactive white boards, documents cameras, digital cameras, student response systems, and easy access to video equipment. I don't teach arts; I am a middle school science teacher. Our county has the highest percentage of welfare recipients in the state and our county has an extremely high percentage of low socio-economic children. Despite this, our standardized test scores compete well with districts that have fewer social and economic hardships. I feel priveledged to be one of a group of educators in our school that has worked very hard to provide our teachers with great resources. It is our goal to offer students the best opportunity for an education that has the potential to change their lives.

Good on you, man! There are a few teachers that really made a big difference in my life. Thanks to all teachers like you that do!

david.elliott · 08-10-2011

I find lightroom very intuitive and easy to use. I have a very difficult time in photoshop.

All of my edits are performed in lightroom and in my opinion it is a very powerful tool. It does everything I need. I do wish dodging and burning were a bit better, but whatever.

Feel free to check out my photos via the link in my sig.

If you can get an educational license, lightroom is very reasonably priced at $99 (last I checked anyway).

SciAggie · 08-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by mto'brien

Good on you, man! There are a few teachers that really made a big difference in my life. Thanks to all teachers like you that do!

That is the kind of feedback that makes teacher come back and do it all over again - year after year. I hope you let those folks that touched your life know it - no matter how long ago.

mto'brien · 08-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by SciAggie

That is the kind of feedback that makes teacher come back and do it all over again - year after year. I hope you let those folks that touched your life know it - no matter how long ago.

I do, indeed. I teach for the first time this fall and I hope to pass it on...

venchka · 08-10-2011

I bought LR 1 the week it hit the market. Skipped LR 2 and now have LR 3.4.1. I use it for all of my files: from film or Canon digital. I also use Microsoft ICE for stitching. FREE. I use a LR plugin called LR/Enfuse for exposure and focus blending without the HDR "look". $10.
Presets: I haven't found many-3 or 4 - that I thought useful. LR allows you to make your own. That is more useful to me. I even made pseudo-EXIF data for my analog lenes, developers, etc.
My theory: If I can't do what I want with the 3 software packages above, I don't need to do it.
The LR print module is amazing.
I'm a self-taught fan. YMMV.

Bob Michaels · 08-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Michaels

..............................
Can anyone suggest a good tutorial explaining the current version of Lightroom to experienced Photoshop users?
...............................

Asking again. I paid good money for Lightroom and sure would like to see what everyone raves about. I just don't want to start over from Photoshop.

So far my use of Lightroom has shown no advantages over Photoshop working on individual files. And I don't work with groups of files. Is there something I am missing?

The Meaness · 08-10-2011

Probably not, Bob. To me the biggest advantage of LR is batch editing. When I am editing an event, I can see the timeline very clearly of all my photos. In my mind I separate the event based on different scenes with dramatic light changes, I do one run of edits very quickly (by applying the same basic adjustments each scene), tweak, then bring selected photos into Silver Efex, Photoshop, or Viveza for more select/powerful edits.

If you want single photos managed in very selective ways, steer clear of LR. Get Silver Efex or Viveza to go with Photoshop.

hteasley · 08-10-2011

I've been using PS professionally since version 2, and have used all versions of Lightroom and Aperture.

Lightroom organizes your photo library, and makes metadata editing of your photos very easy. All edits are non-destructive, so you can go back years later and still back out of all Lightroom changes to an image (external editor changes are handled differently).

For global edits, like exposure correction or canvas rotation, Lightroom is just a lot faster than PS, and provides more global edit options, with a better UI. For local edits, or issues where you have to do any masking at all, you want to edit in PS. Lightroom also makes it easier to deal with RAW files.

The library maintenance of Lightroom is much of its appeal. PS has Bridge, which is terrible, and should not be considered to be a useful substitute.

photokalia · 08-10-2011

I moved from Photoshop to Lightroom when it first came out, and now I do almost everything in Lightroom. From what I understand, Lightroom was built from the ground up with photographers in mind, and Adobe worked closely with actual photographers in designing Lightroom. The aim was to take the tools that photographers often used in Photoshop, and put them into Lightroom. At the same time, they also added a photo organisation/selection workflow and made batch processing of photos much easier in Lightroom.

Of course, you do end up losing some functions from Photoshop, e.g. the liquify tool, layers, etc, but the end result is that photographers end up with a dedicated piece of software that can do 90% of what they used to rely on Photoshop to do.

So the next question is why not just stick with Photoshop? Well, you can, and some photographers who do a lot of post-processing have good reason to. However, for majority of us who just need some levels adjustments, colour balancing and sharpening, Lightroom will do the trick faster and more efficiently than Photoshop. For one thing, the tools are easier to access as you don't need to wade through a menu system to get to them, and you don't have to remember shortcut keys or mess with layers.

And it isn't a case where you have to only use one or the other. I always start out using Lightroom, but if I need a tool from Photoshop, I will right click on the photo and opt to edit it in Photoshop. Once done, I will then go back to my Lightroom workflow, and the photo will then appear in Lightroom, with my edits from Photoshop. For example, I find that cloning out dust spots is faster in Photoshop than Lightroom.

Photoshop is good if you need to work intensively on one photo at a time, or need tools that Lightroom doesn't offer. Lightroom is better when you have a whole lot of photos shot under similar lighting conditions, and you want them processed in similar ways. It is also very good for helping you to decide which photos to keep and which to trash, and for tagging of metadata. They are different tools, and each with their own strengths and shortcomings. So there is no right or wrong, and I'd say that you should just use whatever you are more comfortable with.

kgb144 · 08-10-2011

It is simple. Lightroom is used for image manipulation and Photoshop is for pixel manipulation.

Lightroom is the closest digital programme to working in a darkroom.

I have ditched PS3 and now use Lightroom 3 with Elements for any pesky pixels that need training.

ft

rayfoxlee · 08-11-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgb144

It is simple. Lightroom is used for image manipulation and Photoshop is for pixel manipulation.

Lightroom is the closest digital programme to working in a darkroom.

I have ditched PS3 and now use Lightroom 3 with Elements for any pesky pixels that need training.

ft

Spot on, kgb144! PS is a far more complex program, with selections, layers etc for very advanced work, but I have found that a lot of those features are largely irrelevant to me. LR handles so much of what is needed with consummate ease, IMO - except cloning, which I do think PS handles far better than LR. The other area that PS is probably better is the initial treatment of scanned B&W negs - but that is another story. Exposure, white balance, contrast, vibrancy, colour, sharpening are all handled well with easy to use tools in the right hand tray. The improvements in LR3 adds some very useful additional tools that can replicate graduated filters etc.

The best way to get a feel for LR is to take the 30 day trial, download a few unprocessed images and edit them in the develop module by working your way down the tools on the right hand side - taking them in order from top to bottom will do to start with. Make sure you have the image at 1:1 while you are editing. The beauty of LR is that the changes are non-destructive and can be easily undone. Only after the completed image is exported are the changes 'fixed' in the exported image, but this does not stop you from editing the basic file again in LR for a different look. Also, LR lets you create a cloned copy of your image and you can edit these differently and then compare them side-by-side.

Take the plunge. I doubt you would be disappointed - in fact, I reckon PS would gather dust!

Good luck

Ray