A&P Question: What can Lightroom do that Photoshop cant?

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by Suazo, Oct 22, 2007.

  1. Suazo

    Suazo New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,057
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    :hsughno: just wondering....
     
  2. Sympathy

    Sympathy OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2006
    Messages:
    31,010
    Likes Received:
    79
    in for answer as well
     
  3. ZCP M3

    ZCP M3 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Messages:
    11,999
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    From what i understand, Lightroom is non-destructive in its editing, whereas Photoshop always applies everything directly to the photograph. I think the idea is that you can fuck up in lightroom as much as you want and it wont hurt the photo, so you get everything as perfect in LR as possible, only using PS when its absolutely necessary.
     
  4. LifeBurnsFaster

    LifeBurnsFaster New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Messages:
    13,391
    Likes Received:
    0
    LR, ftw
     
  5. CornUponCob

    CornUponCob New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    15,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    LR is designed more for high-volume photo processing while still keeping some of the more intensive image tweaks. PS is non-destructive so long as you do everything in layers, but it does indeed fail at tweaking multiple images.

    I still use DPP. I just wish it had image rotate and a vibrance slider.
     
  6. 19Godfather86

    19Godfather86 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    1,398
    Likes Received:
    0
    The only thing I use lightroom for is colour correction. Everything else I still do in photoshop.
     
  7. jared_IRL

    jared_IRL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,726
    Likes Received:
    51
    Lightroom = Bridge

    Photoshop would be where you go after LR or Bridge.


    Typically, your fine art or fashion photographer will spend much more time 'working' on an image to make it aesthetically perfect, where as a professional or journalism photographer will do much less work to an image, either in the interest of time, or photographic integrity.

    For the latter, working in LR/Bridge may be sufficient. However, for the fine artist, photoshop allows for a MUCH more precise editing of the image, ranging from simple things such as removing unwanted distractions in an image, to selectively highlighting particular parts of the image, to controlling how light and color flow through the image.

    Here's a good, but quick, set of 'best practices' to use when editing from a RAW file (for fine art photographers):

    1: open image in Bridge/LR - edit image to be slightly flat, but with correct color balance and decent color saturation (no shadows or highlights should be clipped - all data should be usable.)

    2: save raw settings to raw file (usually done automatically.)

    3: open image in photoshop in 16bit, prophoto. during correction process, ensure ALL changes are made to layers OTHER than the background. label each layer based on the changes it makes. Create a layer for each different change -(I.E. black point and white points should be in seperate layers.) Mainly you're doing color/contrast/saturation/cleanup in these layers.

    4: When you're happy with the image, save it as a master file. Leave it full sized, unsharpened and fully layered. Since you're happy with the way this looks, and you have all of the layers and it's full sized, you can always refer back to this as your 'perfect canvas'.

    5: resize image, sharpen image, convert to required color space, and save as required file type - WITH A NEW NAME!!! Do NOT save over your 'master'.

    There. done.

    The reason behind this, is that you can refer back to your master file for several different purposes. If you want to print something, you resize, sharpen and save for print purposes. If you want to put something on the internets, you sharpen, resize and convert to sRGB. Typically, the size, sharpening and color space for your printer and the internet are completely different, so now, with your 'master' file already in place, it takes you 2 seconds to prepare the file for different purposes. and if you realise you f'ed up the image, you can go back to the master and fix the layer that isn't right, instead of starting over...


    Make sense? Questions? Comments?
     
  8. johan

    johan Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sahasrara; magnetic violet infinite
    I find LR useful for a first run through.
    Cataloging, tagging, sorting, rating, tossing out bad ones.
    Then a quick check of exposure, wb, straightening and before/after comparisons.
    It's good at handling high volume.
     
  9. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    its a digital asset management, so it manages your library
    its amazing at editing multiple images at once
    edit RAW or jpeg (or other formats) with out any destruction
    unlimited history pallete
    adjust your curves, split toning, etc faster and save a preset or sync with other photos
    selectively target colors, tones etc for adjutment much easier
    make slideshows
    better printing module
    decent web module
    its customizable
    its expandable
    its cheaper
     
  10. Suazo

    Suazo New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,057
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    oh ok thanks for the replies, so most of you guys prefer LR?
     
  11. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    its not really a one or the other, they work together. Though the majoirty of my time is in LR, just special retouches and finishes like sharpening are in PS. PS is also a graphic design tool so I use it more for that sort than purely editing photos
     
  12. FusionZ06

    FusionZ06 /\__/\__/\__0>

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    86,918
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sunshine State
    I use both...

    I'm much better in PS
     
  13. Derrict

    Derrict No, I am not Amish OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,484
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Amish Country, PA
    I prefer PS. I never got the hang of the work flow in LR.
     
  14. Trlstyle

    Trlstyle New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    6,563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    AC-130W
    Same here. Im still pretty new at LR, ive seen quite a few versions of photoshop in my time though.
     
  15. ThexToddster

    ThexToddster New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    20,748
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Woodcrest, CA
    Capture One Pro> *
     
  16. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    :nono:
    Lightroom > *
     
  17. ThexToddster

    ThexToddster New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    20,748
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Woodcrest, CA
    nuuuu uhhhh, no you didn't.

    I'm sure it's pretty cool. I like Capture one Pro 'cause I can go through hundreds of RAW files and have them edited and ready to go in a couple hours max.

    but then again, I'm sure you can do the same with LR. It's just how good you get at your work flow.
     
  18. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    you can do that and a whole lot more ;)
     
  19. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    fixed
     

Share This Page