I have not, until now, seen the need to venture past Photoshop Elements 9 for my production needs. I am entertaining the probability of purchasing new software for my new computer that is soon to arrive. I shoot exclusively in RAW and was interested in opinions and suggestions of where to ramp up my software needs? Lightroom 3? CS5? Are they that much better than Elements 9?
Tim
I suggest downloading the (fully functional) trial version of CSx, and reviewing it along with a good book/tutorial (you are not likely to discover the full power of it in 30 days by trial and error). This will allow you to make the right call without risking too much.
Is there THAT much difference, Guy? What is the biggest benefit?
Posted by Bill Chambers on October 20, 2011 at 3:48 PM
I can't speak about PSE9 because I'm unfamilar with it, but I changed over to CS2 from Elements 2 years back and, at that time, I felt like it was quite a difference or, at least, there was still a fair learning curve. Perhaps someone who has transitioned from Elements 9 can join in.
As for Lightroom 3, I don't see the need personally. Let it be said that I'm in the minority there. I tried Lightroom when it first came out and was not impressed at all. I think Adobe either needs to make LR fully self sufficient so that one doesn't need CSx at all, or include the digital asset management section of LR into CSx, making LR unnecessary - the RAW processor is the same as CSx. I prefer Capture One 6 for my RAW processor.
Tim, I'm not familiar with all the differences but to my way of working things like curves and layer masks are essential and worth the price of admission.
Guy
Posted by Dan Borzynski on October 20, 2011 at 5:58 PM
I use CS5 for my work and regularly flip back to Elements 9 (or earlier) when working with others. I'll never go back to any version of Elements for my personal work, if I can help it. Far more control, features and ways to do things than Elements. That can also be a bit of a negative when you first start in the new workspace, but you'll adapt fairly quickly. Some of the automation tools (actions!) have saved me a lot of time.
Elements is much more of an advanced consumer software. Very powerful and loads of features, but still a bit limited when compared to the full CSx. You'll also find that there are some automated functions that don't exist in CSx which can be nice to have.
Depending on your shooting, Lightroom may or may not be a good investment. From an image prcessing standpoint, LR's biggest edge is to perform the same processing operation over dozens or even hundreds of images. Studio and Wedding photographers absolutely love those features. At the same time, you'll still need Elements or CSn to handle things like dust spotting or custom image processing one photo at a time, which LR really doesn't do well.
My personal recommendation would be CSn, keep Elements for some of its automatic features but try to learn how to do it in CSn, and LR if you are regularly working in a photographic production environment.
I have not worked in LR's cataloguing enviroment so I can't comment on that.
Posted by David Bostedo on October 20, 2011 at 6:09 PM
The biggest difference I've seen in my work flow is that the options and tools in ACR are much more extensive in CS than in Elements. I do a lot less PSD/TIFF/JPG editing, and a lot more RAW editing in ACR since I got CS4 (coming from Elements 4). I'm not familiar with Elements 9, except that I'm pretty sure that ACR in Elements is still pretty restricted.
I'd describe the difference as more power, more user control and batching; the trade-offs are a steeper learning curve and, of course, a steeper price.
Posted by David Prichard on October 20, 2011 at 11:36 PM
In the adult photo classes I teach my recommendation to students is Elements or Lightroom, largely due to price. If Adobe were to introduce layers and masks into Lightroom I doubt I would buy another copy of Photoshop. While Adobe has added many admirable features since the explosion of digital photography, Photoshop was designed for graphic designers to work with photographs. For that reason, I find a lot of what I am paying for in software, I don't have a need for.
I use lightroom and photoshop for pretty much everything I do photo related. Best investments I've ever made post processing wise. Mainly I use lightroom for cataloging, prep, and export. Photoshop for everything else. You can't beat layer masks when it comes to in depth post processing. For simple pp work, just get lightroom.
If you are looking for free software you could try GIMP. Sort of like a photoshop clone, but slightly more basic. It's open source still I believe.
Posted by Mark Deibert on October 21, 2011 at 1:19 AM
I use LR3 for organizing, cropping, and touching up photos that only need touched up. But when I have photos that need that extra touch (cloning, denoising, surgical sharpening, light enhancements), then I export the photo from LR3 in it's original form (RAW) to be opened in PS. This keeps all the adjustments I made in LR3, letting me continue my work. Currently, I use PSE9, but if I could get CS5 at a good price, then I would snatch it up in a heartbeat. PSE9 is powerful, but like Dan stated, "advanced consumer software." With CS5, you can really break a photo down into its basic parts, such as separate channels for color and luminosity, and just work on the basic parts that you need to work on.
Posted by Steve Uffman on October 21, 2011 at 9:05 AM
I know some pros that now do 90% of their editing in LR3 once you learn how to really unleash its power. Of course, they try to get it right in the camera first. But LR3 has pretty much all the power of ACR and ask how many pros do work there.
Another good consideration is to add the Nik Software suite to it. Their suite is extremely powerful with a short learning curve. you can download a 30 day free trial from their website but if you watch a few of the online videos you can be up and running that in as little as a few days.The Nik suite works within LR3 and CS5. My workflow starts with LR3 for cataloging and global adjustments Plus anything that I previously would have done in ACR.... then I regularly export as a smart object to Nik where I run dfine, vivenza, color efex4 and smart sharpener. I also will work on the same images in CS5 that need it....each tool has its own strengths.
Posted by Mark Stadsklev on October 21, 2011 at 10:08 AM
I also tried Lightroom years ago and was unimpressed, but last year I gave it a shot again and took a short course in it. It will not replace CS for my 'hero' images that go to print, but for cataloging and finding an image it is 1000% better than Bridge. It is simply amazing. That one feature alone justifies the cost. If you have an image and can't find it or are trying to use clunky file folders for everything then get someone to show you how Lightroom finds images and be impressed. I have 9 years and 55000 images on my hard drive, and it finds the image or group before I can finish typing the Keyword.
As for image processing I still see too many Lightroom adjusted globally shots, and it becomes obvious, not because of the software but because of the heavy handed use, ie auto adjustments.
Here's my insight: Coming from long history with PS, I seem to keep running into missing things when I try processing with Elements on a friend's computer. Made me nuts. But when he has sat down and used my computer and PS, his reaction is always the same. "What's the big deal?" He does just fine with out the extra features of PS.
Only way to find out where you fall in that spectrum is to try it. A month-long trial is a good thing. Try avoiding Elements for about 2 weeks of that, then go back to Elements. If you feel the difference, you know where you stand. Go back to PS for the remaining 2 weeks, and switch back to Elements once the trial period expires. You'll buy PS within the hour, or you will never get around to it.
Posted by Steve Uffman on October 21, 2011 at 1:18 PM
I know some pros that now do 90% of their editing in LR3 once you learn how to really unleash its power. Of course, they try to get it right in the camera first. But LR3 has pretty much all the power of ACR and ask how many pros do work there.
Another good consideration is to add the Nik Software suite to it. Their suite is extremely powerful with a short learning curve. you can download a 30 day free trial from their website but if you watch a few of the online videos you can be up and running that in as little as a few days.The Nik suite works within LR3 and CS5. My workflow starts with LR3 for cataloging and global adjustments Plus anything that I previously would have done in ACR.... then I regularly export as a smart object to Nik where I run dfine, vivenza, color efex4 and smart sharpener. I also will work on the same images in CS5 that need it....each tool has its own strengths.
Discussion
15 repliesTim
I suggest downloading the (fully functional) trial version of CSx, and reviewing it along with a good book/tutorial (you are not likely to discover the full power of it in 30 days by trial and error). This will allow you to make the right call without risking too much.
Guy
As for Lightroom 3, I don't see the need personally. Let it be said that I'm in the minority there. I tried Lightroom when it first came out and was not impressed at all. I think Adobe either needs to make LR fully self sufficient so that one doesn't need CSx at all, or include the digital asset management section of LR into CSx, making LR unnecessary - the RAW processor is the same as CSx. I prefer Capture One 6 for my RAW processor.
Guy
Elements is much more of an advanced consumer software. Very powerful and loads of features, but still a bit limited when compared to the full CSx. You'll also find that there are some automated functions that don't exist in CSx which can be nice to have.
Depending on your shooting, Lightroom may or may not be a good investment. From an image prcessing standpoint, LR's biggest edge is to perform the same processing operation over dozens or even hundreds of images. Studio and Wedding photographers absolutely love those features. At the same time, you'll still need Elements or CSn to handle things like dust spotting or custom image processing one photo at a time, which LR really doesn't do well.
My personal recommendation would be CSn, keep Elements for some of its automatic features but try to learn how to do it in CSn, and LR if you are regularly working in a photographic production environment.
I have not worked in LR's cataloguing enviroment so I can't comment on that.
http://photo-editing-software-review.toptenreviews.com/photoshop-elements-and-photoshop-cs3-comparison.html
http://graphicssoft.about.com/cs/photoshop/f/elementscompare.htm
I'd describe the difference as more power, more user control and batching; the trade-offs are a steeper learning curve and, of course, a steeper price.
If you are looking for free software you could try GIMP. Sort of like a photoshop clone, but slightly more basic. It's open source still I believe.
Another good consideration is to add the Nik Software suite to it. Their suite is extremely powerful with a short learning curve. you can download a 30 day free trial from their website but if you watch a few of the online videos you can be up and running that in as little as a few days.The Nik suite works within LR3 and CS5. My workflow starts with LR3 for cataloging and global adjustments Plus anything that I previously would have done in ACR.... then I regularly export as a smart object to Nik where I run dfine, vivenza, color efex4 and smart sharpener. I also will work on the same images in CS5 that need it....each tool has its own strengths.
As for image processing I still see too many Lightroom adjusted globally shots, and it becomes obvious, not because of the software but because of the heavy handed use, ie auto adjustments.
Mark
Here's my insight: Coming from long history with PS, I seem to keep running into missing things when I try processing with Elements on a friend's computer. Made me nuts. But when he has sat down and used my computer and PS, his reaction is always the same. "What's the big deal?" He does just fine with out the extra features of PS.
Only way to find out where you fall in that spectrum is to try it. A month-long trial is a good thing. Try avoiding Elements for about 2 weeks of that, then go back to Elements. If you feel the difference, you know where you stand. Go back to PS for the remaining 2 weeks, and switch back to Elements once the trial period expires. You'll buy PS within the hour, or you will never get around to it.
Another good consideration is to add the Nik Software suite to it. Their suite is extremely powerful with a short learning curve. you can download a 30 day free trial from their website but if you watch a few of the online videos you can be up and running that in as little as a few days.The Nik suite works within LR3 and CS5. My workflow starts with LR3 for cataloging and global adjustments Plus anything that I previously would have done in ACR.... then I regularly export as a smart object to Nik where I run dfine, vivenza, color efex4 and smart sharpener. I also will work on the same images in CS5 that need it....each tool has its own strengths.