fyi - I Posted this originally over on NPC, but figured I would throw it out over here to get the best of both worlds... :)
I admit it, I have been in a little bit of a foto-funk lately. I figured a good way to break out of that is to upgrade my version of CS3. After all, I hear about the cool new features added to ACR 4, and since I am in the stoneage with CS2 I can't play in the fun.
I figured that checking out the new features might give me a little incentive to get back to processing images and get over the photo blahs. I still have a bunch to edit from the Fall 07 trip...
So, while looking at the upgrade cost, I thought why not give Lightroom a whirl? Initially I thought I should just stick with what I know and just upgrade to CS3 rather than spread my limited knowledge over two applications. Honestly, I hadn't really looked into Lightroom when it first came out. Since getting my 5D over the summer I have been drowning in files, a lack of efficient digital workflow, wasn't real impressed with Bridge in CS2...the list goes on.
So I downloaded the 30 day trial and installed it last night. After just an hour or so of playing around, I must say that I was really impressed!! It was a breath of fresh air in terms of the photographer focused workflow and interface. I love the functionality of the Library module to compare images side by side to evaluate comp variations, the before and after views when using develop - just some really nice features that are implemented really well in my opinion.
So - here is where you all come in. For those that have tried LR or are using it currently - is it really as good as it seems? I'm just scratching the surface, but I plan to spend a lot more time playing around, and get out there and educate myself on it's full feature set. I would really appreciate feedback from people on LR - has it replaced CS2/3 for you? I figure intensive processing would still be done in CS, but for your average photo seems like Develop does a pretty good job. At this point I wonder if I should just get Lightroom and stick with CS2 rather than upgrade to CS3? It appears that Lightroom has all the new ACR 4.x features that I am currently lacking with CS2/ACR 3.7?
Overall, I felt like editing my images down and then processing was less of a dreaded chore thanks to the improved focus on a photographers needs...but then again, maybe it was the couple brews I was enjoying...
Thanks all for your input!
Michael
Posted by John Mumaw on January 16, 2008 at 9:15 PM
I can't see a need to own both CS3/Bridge and Lightroom.
The RAW processing in ACR 4 is exactly the same as in LR, and the digital asset management of Bridge is just as good.
Add to that the excellent new features in CS3, and it's an easy choice to make, IMO.
Posted by Brent Murphy on January 16, 2008 at 11:36 PM
Hmmm..... If I could only have one, I'd probably stick with Photoshop, since I'm not completely comfortable in Lightroom yet. Even using LR, I still find it nice to go back to PS once in a while.
Using Bridge for nearly anything gives me conniptions, so I can't imagine trying to use it in place of something like Lightroom.
Anyway, the best thing to do would be to use both LR and PS in tandem. But as I said, if I had to choose only one, I'd stick with PS.
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on January 16, 2008 at 11:54 PM
If you do pano stitching, the CS3 upgrade is worthwhile - a VERY big improvement!
Otherwise, I could function with just Lightroom and CS2, limiting all raw processing to LR.
Anything that I print, or needs layers/blending, goes through CS for final processing., otherwise Lightroom takes care of 90% of my processing, and the file sizes stay small, since only instructions are stored.
Posted by Arthur Lund on January 17, 2008 at 12:22 AM
Not even a close choice. Get Lightroom and keep at it until you really learn it. It is not the
easiest program to learn. Your CS2 will do the things that Lightroom won't.
Posted by Brent Murphy on January 17, 2008 at 12:48 AM
Sorry. Didn't consider that you already have CS2. Yeah, if you already have CS2, I would definitely get LR. No question. The CS2/Lightroom combo will be much more versatile than just CS3/Bridge.
If you need to do stitching, there are plenty of other programs out there that do a great job. You don't need CS3 to do that.
Another vote for Lightroom. I wasn't a fan of Bridge for DAM either and I've finally got most of my images keyworded and filed with Lightroom.
Posted by Nat Coalson on January 17, 2008 at 11:20 AM
IMHO if want the best quality images and need to manage a large image library it's critical to own both CS3 and Lightroom.
Hobbyists can get everything they need from Elements 6 (on Windows now and soon to be released for Mac).
Most "serious photographers", whether pro or amateur, have already spent thousands of dollars on camera gear... if you're taking the time to process your own photographs on the computer, I don't understand the inclination to skimp on software.
I'm currently using Lightroom for cataloging, metadata, developing (raw processing) and presentations (slideshows and web galleries). And sometimes printing.
I use Photoshop for sharpening, noise reduction, soft-proofing, compositing and complex retouching. And most printing.
CS3 is an important upgrade with several major improvements over CS2, check the feature update comparisons on Adobe's site.
Bottom line, if you're serious about photography you owe it to yourself to stay current with the software.
Posted by Doug Andrews on January 17, 2008 at 12:25 PM
Interesting discussion. I have a similar situation and would appreciate reading others opinions. Currently (being a cheap bastard) I'm using RAWshooter Essentials, cause it was free to download, to process my NEFs and Paint Shop Pro 9 to do all the image editing (Levels, Curves, sharpening, etc.). I've been using Paint Shop Pro since version 5 because I liked it better than Elements (version 3 at that time) and I wouldn't pay for the full Photoshop (the cheap bastard in me again) Well both of those apps are pretty long in the tooth now and its time to get back up to speed. I figure I will get Lightroom as it seems that is what RAWshooter Essential evolved into when Adobe purchased them. However, sometimes I get the impression that Lightroom isn't just for RAW processing but also an image editor as well. I know not on the level of Photoshop CS3, but it does have some image editing functionality, yes?? Would there still be a need to purchase a dedicated image editing application to go with Lightroom?? I don't really use layers, masks, etc. because I never learned how to do that with Paint Shop Pro. Would Elements 6 be a good image editing application to go with Lightroom or is that really not gonna give me anything useful that Lightroom doesn't already have?? Not interested in continuing with Paint Shop Pro because I haven't cared for the upgrades since Corel purchased them and its time to join everyone else using Aldobe products as it will be easier to find help when questions arise. Ideally I'd love for Lightroom to be my only application, but gotta feeling I'd be selling myself short. Oh yeah, for stitching images I've been using PanoramaMaker by Arcsoft and have been pleased with it.
Posted by Nat Coalson on January 17, 2008 at 1:01 PM
I'm currently using Lightroom for probably 60% of all my image processing work. But the 40% that Photoshop represents is absolutely critical.
You will find that the more "perfect" your shots are, straight out of the camera, Lightroom may be all you need.
If you are compositing or blending multiple exposures, doing heavy-duty retouching or need to soft-proof prior to printing, that's all still Photoshop's domain (along with any operation needing layers and masks).
Elements and Lightroom together is an excellent combination; However, Elements also uses a database (the Organizer) so if you buy Elements you may not even need Lightroom. Elements has layers but limited compared to the full Photoshop.
Lightroom's major strengths are cataloging/organizing (especially Collections), working with metadata (including searches), raw processing and printing. These strengths are based around the need to process large numbers of images, so batch processing is a key element of Lightroom.
Considering that Lightroom is a free 30 day trial I'd strongly recommend downloading it, buying the Luminous Landscape video tutorials, and working with a few batches of images to get the feel of it.
Adobe offers huge discounts to people purchasing with an educational ID. Check out Academic Superstore
After using literally all of the major imaging processing and cataloging software released over the past 20 years, I'm most confident in Adobe's solutions. This is not to say that certain products don't beat Adobe's in specific areas, but on the whole, Lightroom with Photoshop CS3 (plus a few plug-ins) is all you need for top-end production.
Thanks Nat - I was hoping you would chime in. Your perspective on this is very valuable. On a side note - do we forsee a CS4 coming down anytime soon? It would seem that CS3 still has a lot of life in it, but what do I know...
Posted by John Mumaw on January 17, 2008 at 5:27 PM
IMHO if want the best quality images and need to manage a large image library it's critical to own both CS3 and Lightroom.
...Elements also uses a database (the Organizer) so if you buy Elements you may not even need Lightroom.
Interesting.
On the one hand, one needs both Lightroom and CS3 for the reasons noted above, yet if you buy Elements, then you may not even need Lightroom.
Anyway, I think that the main market for Lightroom are folks who don't use PS and who shoot a high volume of RAW images on a fairly constant basis.
Seeing that I fit into neither category, ACR/Bridge in CS3 and Lightroom have too much in common for me to consider adding another layer to my workflow.
Posted by Scott Borger on January 18, 2008 at 12:14 AM
If you could only pick one, CS3 will always get the job done...just not as fast for batch processing.
Posted by Stephen Weaver on January 18, 2008 at 12:23 AM
I totally agree with Nat. I use both CS3 and Lightroom and consider both essential in my workflow. All ingesting, cataloging and major Raw processing are done in Lightroom with selective adjustments( localized burning and dodging, etc and printing on CS3. They are both important tools.
Posted by Nat Coalson on January 18, 2008 at 11:10 AM
John, I understand where you're coming from but actually most pros using Lightroom also use Photoshop extensively. The two programs do significantly different things. Most fundamentally, Lightroom is a metadata editor; Photoshop is a pixel editor.
My point about Elements is that if your main priority is to save money that Elements is a totally capable package for the enthusiast/hobbyist. But it lacks the pro-level editing and management capabilities found in the combination of CS3 and Lightroom.
Scott - The advantage of Lightroom over Bridge is the database. As a metadata editor it is more robust than ACR/Bridge because of the workflow.
Micheal - as for release dates, Adobe never divulges that. But typically Photoshop versions are released about every 18 months. So yes, there's still lots of life left in CS3 (released Spring 2007).
Posted by Paul Beiser on January 18, 2008 at 1:04 PM
IMHO, Nat's advice is right on.
Posted by Brent Murphy on January 19, 2008 at 5:19 PM
I agree with Nat that some video tutorials can be helpful for learning Lightroom, but before you go shelling out your money, you should try just watching some free video podcasts first. I've got tons of Photoshop and Lightroom podcasts that I watch on a regular basis, and they can be very informative.
To find some, just install itunes on your computer, if you haven't already. Then, go to the itunes store and search the podcasts for "photoshop" and "lightroom". You'll find a lot of different ones, some good some bad, but all free.
Note: If you've never watched or listened to a podcast before, you might not be aware of this, but you don't need an ipod to watch or listen to podcasts. You can just watch them right on your computer instead, through itunes.
Posted by Nat Coalson on January 20, 2008 at 1:24 AM
Good point, Brent... and George Jardine's series of podcasts is excellent.
Discussion
19 repliesI admit it, I have been in a little bit of a foto-funk lately. I figured a good way to break out of that is to upgrade my version of CS3. After all, I hear about the cool new features added to ACR 4, and since I am in the stoneage with CS2 I can't play in the fun.
I figured that checking out the new features might give me a little incentive to get back to processing images and get over the photo blahs. I still have a bunch to edit from the Fall 07 trip...
So, while looking at the upgrade cost, I thought why not give Lightroom a whirl? Initially I thought I should just stick with what I know and just upgrade to CS3 rather than spread my limited knowledge over two applications. Honestly, I hadn't really looked into Lightroom when it first came out. Since getting my 5D over the summer I have been drowning in files, a lack of efficient digital workflow, wasn't real impressed with Bridge in CS2...the list goes on.
So I downloaded the 30 day trial and installed it last night. After just an hour or so of playing around, I must say that I was really impressed!! It was a breath of fresh air in terms of the photographer focused workflow and interface. I love the functionality of the Library module to compare images side by side to evaluate comp variations, the before and after views when using develop - just some really nice features that are implemented really well in my opinion.
So - here is where you all come in. For those that have tried LR or are using it currently - is it really as good as it seems? I'm just scratching the surface, but I plan to spend a lot more time playing around, and get out there and educate myself on it's full feature set. I would really appreciate feedback from people on LR - has it replaced CS2/3 for you? I figure intensive processing would still be done in CS, but for your average photo seems like Develop does a pretty good job. At this point I wonder if I should just get Lightroom and stick with CS2 rather than upgrade to CS3? It appears that Lightroom has all the new ACR 4.x features that I am currently lacking with CS2/ACR 3.7?
Overall, I felt like editing my images down and then processing was less of a dreaded chore thanks to the improved focus on a photographers needs...but then again, maybe it was the couple brews I was enjoying...
Thanks all for your input!
Michael
The RAW processing in ACR 4 is exactly the same as in LR, and the digital asset management of Bridge is just as good.
Add to that the excellent new features in CS3, and it's an easy choice to make, IMO.
Using Bridge for nearly anything gives me conniptions, so I can't imagine trying to use it in place of something like Lightroom.
Anyway, the best thing to do would be to use both LR and PS in tandem. But as I said, if I had to choose only one, I'd stick with PS.
Otherwise, I could function with just Lightroom and CS2, limiting all raw processing to LR.
Anything that I print, or needs layers/blending, goes through CS for final processing., otherwise Lightroom takes care of 90% of my processing, and the file sizes stay small, since only instructions are stored.
easiest program to learn. Your CS2 will do the things that Lightroom won't.
If you need to do stitching, there are plenty of other programs out there that do a great job. You don't need CS3 to do that.
Hobbyists can get everything they need from Elements 6 (on Windows now and soon to be released for Mac).
Most "serious photographers", whether pro or amateur, have already spent thousands of dollars on camera gear... if you're taking the time to process your own photographs on the computer, I don't understand the inclination to skimp on software.
I'm currently using Lightroom for cataloging, metadata, developing (raw processing) and presentations (slideshows and web galleries). And sometimes printing.
I use Photoshop for sharpening, noise reduction, soft-proofing, compositing and complex retouching. And most printing.
CS3 is an important upgrade with several major improvements over CS2, check the feature update comparisons on Adobe's site.
Bottom line, if you're serious about photography you owe it to yourself to stay current with the software.
You will find that the more "perfect" your shots are, straight out of the camera, Lightroom may be all you need.
If you are compositing or blending multiple exposures, doing heavy-duty retouching or need to soft-proof prior to printing, that's all still Photoshop's domain (along with any operation needing layers and masks).
Elements and Lightroom together is an excellent combination; However, Elements also uses a database (the Organizer) so if you buy Elements you may not even need Lightroom. Elements has layers but limited compared to the full Photoshop.
Lightroom's major strengths are cataloging/organizing (especially Collections), working with metadata (including searches), raw processing and printing. These strengths are based around the need to process large numbers of images, so batch processing is a key element of Lightroom.
Considering that Lightroom is a free 30 day trial I'd strongly recommend downloading it, buying the Luminous Landscape video tutorials, and working with a few batches of images to get the feel of it.
Adobe offers huge discounts to people purchasing with an educational ID. Check out Academic Superstore
After using literally all of the major imaging processing and cataloging software released over the past 20 years, I'm most confident in Adobe's solutions. This is not to say that certain products don't beat Adobe's in specific areas, but on the whole, Lightroom with Photoshop CS3 (plus a few plug-ins) is all you need for top-end production.
Forget about Paint Shop.
Interesting.
On the one hand, one needs both Lightroom and CS3 for the reasons noted above, yet if you buy Elements, then you may not even need Lightroom.
Anyway, I think that the main market for Lightroom are folks who don't use PS and who shoot a high volume of RAW images on a fairly constant basis.
Seeing that I fit into neither category, ACR/Bridge in CS3 and Lightroom have too much in common for me to consider adding another layer to my workflow.
My point about Elements is that if your main priority is to save money that Elements is a totally capable package for the enthusiast/hobbyist. But it lacks the pro-level editing and management capabilities found in the combination of CS3 and Lightroom.
Scott - The advantage of Lightroom over Bridge is the database. As a metadata editor it is more robust than ACR/Bridge because of the workflow.
Micheal - as for release dates, Adobe never divulges that. But typically Photoshop versions are released about every 18 months. So yes, there's still lots of life left in CS3 (released Spring 2007).
To find some, just install itunes on your computer, if you haven't already. Then, go to the itunes store and search the podcasts for "photoshop" and "lightroom". You'll find a lot of different ones, some good some bad, but all free.
Note: If you've never watched or listened to a podcast before, you might not be aware of this, but you don't need an ipod to watch or listen to podcasts. You can just watch them right on your computer instead, through itunes.