Photoshop and Lightroom questions..

Sevenup

Senior Member
Is the cloud the only way to use PS anymore?

What would one start with, LR or PS?

What is the difference between the programs?
 

J-see

Senior Member
LR is basically PS fleshed out for photography. It's purely designed for that and even while you can do pretty impressive adjustments, it's no match for photoshop. But that is designed for all sorts of graphic manipulation.

You can buy LR if you don't desire monthly payments. For photography it does a good job. With some additional plugins, it might be all you need.

PS is cloud only.
 

J-see

Senior Member
You can download and try LR to check if you like it.

While you can remove and replace parts in LR using the spot removal, it's not a that great tool compared to what you can do in PS.
 

Pretzel

Senior Member
LR has some basic correction built in, but for something that spans that far, PS is going to be MUCH better at it... you can get both for 10/mo, and that includes all the updates that we used to have to buy new versions for.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
Is the cloud the only way to use PS anymore?
Creative Cloud is Adobe's current distribution channel. You can probably find retail-box versions of Photoshop if you look around but the simple fact is, Photoshop's future is Creative Cloud. Lightroom is still available in retail boxes and probably always will be.


What would one start with, LR or PS?
I'd suggest you learn the key differences between the two applications (see the link below) then start learning the application you think you'll to wind up using long-term for the bulk of your processing. They're very different applications but they can and do work together. Many people will tell you Lightroom is easier to learn but in my experience with using both, neither application is easier than the other; Photoshop is a much more comprehensive application but that doesn't make it harder to learn; it just means there's more to it. Having learned to use Photoshop, though, I could never see myself using Lightroom as my primary editing tool. There's nothing you can do in Lightroom you can't do in Photoshop, but there are things you can do in Photoshop you can't do in Lightroom (like layers and masks).


What is the difference between the programs?
This article Photoshop vs. Lightroom gives a good explanation. The key difference, for me anyway, is that Lightroom is database-driven image file manager; meaning it works with your photos via image catalogs it creates. I don't really like that particular aspect, preferring to handle file management myself but that's me. Many people consider this organizing aspect of Lightroom one of its strongest assets.

Luckily you can download free trials of both applications and see which one you prefer. The free trials are good for 30-days and there are no limitations.

....
 
Last edited:

J-see

Senior Member
LR has some basic correction built in, but for something that spans that far, PS is going to be MUCH better at it...

For little details LR's correction is good enough but if they're in the wrong part of the shot, or a bit bigger, I have often more work fixing my correction than I had correcting it.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
LR is basically PS fleshed out for photography. It's purely designed for that and even while you can do pretty impressive adjustments, it's no match for photoshop. But that is designed for all sorts of graphic manipulation.

You can buy LR if you don't desire monthly payments. For photography it does a good job. With some additional plugins, it might be all you need.

PS is cloud only.

This couldn't be more wrong. Lightroom is Adobe Camera RAW laid out in a more user friendly interface. Photoshop is the entire backend to Camera RAW and has lots of facilities LR doesn't (though I hear it may have layers in version 6).

You can find box copies of Photoshop CS6, but it's no longer being updated (all improvements since the CC announcement are only available by subscription). Lightroom is supposedly going to be maintained as a standalone product moving forward, but now I'm hearing speculation on that. New versions of LR come out about every 18 months. Considering what you pay for the CC subscription, by the time you break even on LR alone they may be upgrading, so it's almost like getting Photoshop for free. I hated the idea at first, but after seeing what's been added since it launched I'm more than satisfied with coughing out $10/month. I couldn't do what I do without it, but I can certainly live without one six pack of craft beer a month (that I'd literally piss away) to pay for it.
 

J-see

Senior Member
This couldn't be more wrong. Lightroom is Adobe Camera RAW laid out in a more user friendly interface. Photoshop is the entire backend to Camera RAW and has lots of facilities LR doesn't (though I hear it may have layers in version 6).

I'd not necessarily agree. I had a pretty easy time adjusting from PS to LR once I realized it just had some basics repackaged in fancy sliders and buttons. Besides the cataloging, there isn't much in LR that wasn't in PS since years.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
Adjusting easily is not the same as calling it "PS fleshed out for photography". You are confusing Photoshop and its front end, Adobe Camera RAW, which is a totally separate product that just happens to be bundled with it. The only way to find the LR/ACR functions in their entirety is to invoke ACR as a filter, and that is not Photoshop.

I don't care if you agree with me, or even admit that you're wrong - but you are. ;)
 

J-see

Senior Member
Adjusting easily is not the same as calling it "PS fleshed out for photography". You are confusing Photoshop and its front end, Adobe Camera RAW, which is a totally separate product that just happens to be bundled with it. The only way to find the LR/ACR functions in their entirety is to invoke ACR as a filter, and that is not Photoshop.

I don't care if you agree with me, or even admit that you're wrong - but you are. ;)

There are parts of LR that even remind me of Imageready. I'm not sure if that still exists. It's developed by people all having worked in the PS arena so it would be quite an achievement to not be "influenced" at the least.

I'm still considering it Photoshop lite. Wrong or not. ;)
 

RockyNH_RIP

Senior Member
This couldn't be more wrong. Lightroom is Adobe Camera RAW laid out in a more user friendly interface. Photoshop is the entire backend to Camera RAW and has lots of facilities LR doesn't (though I hear it may have layers in version 6).

You can find box copies of Photoshop CS6, but it's no longer being updated (all improvements since the CC announcement are only available by subscription). Lightroom is supposedly going to be maintained as a standalone product moving forward, but now I'm hearing speculation on that. New versions of LR come out about every 18 months. Considering what you pay for the CC subscription, by the time you break even on LR alone they may be upgrading, so it's almost like getting Photoshop for free. I hated the idea at first, but after seeing what's been added since it launched I'm more than satisfied with coughing out $10/month. I couldn't do what I do without it, but I can certainly live without one six pack of craft beer a month (that I'd literally piss away) to pay for it.


Jake, good analysis... I have been looking at that option myself...

Pat in GA
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
There are parts of LR that even remind me of Imageready. I'm not sure if that still exists. It's developed by people all having worked in the PS arena so it would be quite an achievement to not be "influenced" at the least.

I'm still considering it Photoshop lite. Wrong or not. ;)

Consider it bacon and eggs, it matters not to me what you think of it. My concern is in the way you've misrepresented it as read by someone who has never used it. Sure, there are analogs to the user interface, but there are similarities between the way Mac OS-X and Windows 7 appear as well, and they're surely not the same thing, nor is one a "Lite" version of the other. So, when you tell someone who may have been told that Photoshop is "so hard to learn" that it's just "PS fleshed out for photography" some will walk away from it based purely on your presenting misinformation as simple fact. That's why being wrong matters.

Photoshop can be daunting, particularly with its layers, filters, tools and blend modes. Lightroom has none of those complexities. What it does have is a develop module containing the basic tools of Adobe Camera RAW, plus cataloging and workflow management functions, as well as multiple publishing and printing modules not available in Photoshop. It's almost nothing like Photoshop. It can remind you of it, and hell, it can remind you of Christmas, but it doesn't mean it's in any way the one product rearranged as another.

You want "Photoshop Lite"? It's called Elements.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
Good anologies, Jake.....thanks for clarifying these products.

I know like I seem like a dog that won't let go of a bone sometimes, but for me disinformation and malformed opinion in response to a query is worse than no answer at all. While it's OK to have your own viewpoint you need to understand what the words say to someone not stuck in your brain. And God forbid anyone be stuck in mine, which is why I'll get wordy explaining myself. I'd rather be over-understood than under.
 

J-see

Senior Member
I don't bother about being overstood, if anyone gets the essence of what I'm saying, I'm fine with that. Admittedly it might not be as obvious for another to read what I was thinking while writing.

If anyone buys anything taking my words as their gospel, and it turns out to be crap, they really do not deserve any less. My opinion does not necessarily need to be accurate or true, else it was fact.

Regardless us reading or asking other's opinions, we all got a brain pretty capable of making up our own mind before we do anything.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I don't bother about being overstood, if anyone gets the essence of what I'm saying, I'm fine with that. Admittedly it might not be as obvious for another to read what I was thinking while writing.

If anyone buys anything taking my words as their gospel, and it turns out to be crap, they really do not deserve any less. My opinion does not necessarily need to be accurate or true, else it was fact.

Regardless us reading or asking other's opinions, we all got a brain pretty capable of making up our own mind before we do anything.

Which is why your answers are so troublesome half the time. You speak to be heard but not understood. Opine all you want, but when someone asks for advice you're the blind leading the blind. You present your opinion with an arrogance that demands to be heard, but then you say that it doesn't need to be accurate. You're what's wrong with looking for advice on the internet. You're the guy who, when asked for directions to a place he's never heard of will give directions anyway just so you can appear to be helpful.

Someone with no information is ill equipped to parse what you're saying, gospel or not, and because of that you should be muzzled. You'll drive away more people than you'll ever assist.
 

J-see

Senior Member
Which is why your answers are so troublesome half the time. You speak to be heard but not understood. Opine all you want, but when someone asks for advice you're the blind leading the blind. You present your opinion with an arrogance that demands to be heard, but then you say that it doesn't need to be accurate. You're what's wrong with looking for advice on the internet. You're the guy who, when asked for directions to a place he's never heard of will give directions anyway just so you can appear to be helpful.

Someone with no information is ill equipped to parse what you're saying, gospel or not, and because of that you should be muzzled. You'll drive away more people than you'll ever assist.


I fear you confuse socially inept with emotionally needy. ;)

What's the use in trying to act like a nanny, teacher or guru all the time? Look at the light leak thing. I basically spell out what happens and why and some still don't get it.

If you wanna play the role-model, be my guest. I'm just me. I don't need ohs and ahs to function.
 
Top