Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Adjustments in LR vs PS. workflow advice needed  (Read 3665 times)
Dajm
Guest
« on: May 26, 2012, 03:29:14 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm new to both LR and PS and am still trying to figure out my workflow. I'm doing all my adjustments in LR because I'm still having a hard time learning all the complex manoeuvres in PS. Most of the time it's all I need but sometimes I need to do more advanced stuff so I try to figure it out in PS. Now, I have read that many do the same thing, with only a small percent of the images going through PS but here is my issue. With the advantages with layers, wouldn't it be better to do all adjustment in PS? Also, as I understand it, when doing a lot in LR, there will be a loss in quality. And when I take an image through PS, I save it as .psd but then I got two edited copies of the image which clutter things up. What do you suggest. Should I start in PS with the heavy stuff and then do basic adjustment in LR on the .psd file?  Are the adjustments the same in both so if I'm already in PS, there is no need to do anything in LR? I think I confuse myself but I need to get my workflow right soon. My images are still mostly jpeg but includes (or will soon) many scanned tiffs (which will need some retouching in PS) and later will also include RAW/dng.

Any suggestions and advise are welcome. Thanks
Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2131


« Reply #1 on: May 26, 2012, 04:24:03 AM »
ReplyReply

You have asked a large question mainly I think because you have not done enough research into the topic.

If you are really shooting JPEG's then your editing possibilities are severely limited in any software.
Shoot RAW and then you can play.

The differences between PS and LR are bigger than you think. LR edits are parametric so anything you do is stored in a file as commands that are only ever activated once an image is exported. Thus the original image is never harmed. In PS most edits are messing directly with the image file - once made there is no going back.

It seems silly to me that you you are considering using layers in PS yet your fundamental knowledge of digital workflow is absent. Essentially you are talking of flying fighter jets but you can't ride a bicycle yet.

LR is a robust and very well featured image editing program - most of editing that in the past needed to be done in PS is now much more simply achieved in LR. One certainly does not need layers to do nearly all regional editing with the current abilities of LR.

PS is excellent when needed but is simply redundant for most editing processes.
Learn LR well - get the tutorials on LR4 as well as those dealing with printing and presentation called Camera to Print and Screen. Once you know LR very well then consider what kind of image editing might require PS.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
Hans Kruse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 706



WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 26, 2012, 05:26:21 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree with the recommendation to take a look at the Lightroom 4 tutorials with Reichmann and Schewe. In fact even very experienced Lightroom users will benefit as there a lots of small but important tips that comes out of Jeff in-between (and you won't find anywhere else) Smiley If you are not very familiar with Lightroom 4 you will after watching these videos know that there is a lot that does not meet the eye at first glance. So until you really have mastered Lightroom 4 you will not really know when you would need Photoshop. But when you do, there is a veyr nice feature that makes it almost seamless to move you parametric edits from Lightroom 4 into Photoshop CS6 and maintain these edits and being able to reedit them. You select edit as smart object in Photoshop CS6 from LR4. This means that the RAW file plus the parameters for editing coming from LR4 will be embedded in the PSD or TIFF file that you will edit in CS6. Choose 16 bit for the transfer and I would recommend also working space Prophoto RGB. Now you can do the edits in Photoshop CS6 and if you need to reedit the edits you did in Lightroom you open the smart object and get into ACR 7 (!). This means that you need familiarize yourself with the different look of the same editing tools as you have in LR4 in the develop module. But if you can accept this you have a very powerful way of combining the editing capabilities from LR4/ACR7 with Photoshop CS6.

I use LR4 for almost all my editing work, but from time to time I need CS6 for doing panoramas, HDR, content aware fill, manual or semi-manual exposure blending using layers, cloning etc. that LR4 cannot do.

Photoshop CS6 HDR Pro 32bit files can from LR4 RC2 be edited in LR4!!
Logged

Dajm
Guest
« Reply #3 on: May 26, 2012, 08:06:41 AM »
ReplyReply

@ Tony
Don't even know where to begin to reply to your patronising post so I make it short; Not a very helpful or answer

@Hans
Thanks for the tip on smart object. I'll check it out. seems promising.
It's for the same reasons, and other, you use PS that I want to use it. Many of my scanned old prints would benefit from some PS magic. I will check out the tutorials to see if indeed I will need PS to do what I want. I'm quite sure I do, I know that much about LR and PS.


Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5951


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 26, 2012, 08:30:53 AM »
ReplyReply

... Essentially you are talking of flying fighter jets but you can't ride a bicycle yet...
+1

I'll make it short too: start with LR, and when you master it, move to PS.

P.S. everything Hans said is correct, just too much for you at the moment
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
John Cothron
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 170



WWW
« Reply #5 on: May 26, 2012, 09:01:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Now, I have read that many do the same thing, with only a small percent of the images going through PS but here is my issue. With the advantages with layers, wouldn't it be better to do all adjustment in PS?

In my opinion it would actually be the reverse of this.  Since Lr edits are not performed on the image until export or printing, you are able to maintain the original file "as is".  This allows you to go back and start your editing from the beginning if you're not happy with the first result.

Quote
Also, as I understand it, when doing a lot in LR, there will be a loss in quality.


Again, I would say that between Ps and Lr, the reverse of this statement is more true.

Quote
And when I take an image through PS, I save it as .psd but then I got two edited copies of the image which clutter things up. What do you suggest. Should I start in PS with the heavy stuff and then do basic adjustment in LR on the .psd file?  Are the adjustments the same in both so if I'm already in PS, there is no need to do anything in LR? I think I confuse myself but I need to get my workflow right soon. My images are still mostly jpeg but includes (or will soon) many scanned tiffs (which will need some retouching in PS) and later will also include RAW/dng.

Any suggestions and advise are welcome. Thanks

What I find to be an effective workflow, whether working with digital images OR scanned film images:

1.  With digital, shoot RAW.  This is the most information your camera can record.  It allows you the largest window of processing later.  For scanning, I scan 16 bit TIFF images. 

2.  Import into Lr, for either of the above.

3.  Personally, I do the vast majority of my processing in Lr and either export or print from Lr.

4.  I do use Ps for stitching, and on very rare occasions content aware filling.  In those cases I take the image into Ps from Lr, with the Lr adjustments applied.  I do all of my Lr processing before doing this.

This workflow allows me to maintain the original file, and if I'm not happy with the images I do take to Ps, I can basically trash that copy and start the Ps process over.

Hope this helps.
Logged

Dajm
Guest
« Reply #6 on: May 26, 2012, 09:32:31 AM »
ReplyReply

+1

I'll make it short too: start with LR, and when you master it, move to PS.

P.S. everything Hans said is correct, just too much for you at the moment
So you're saying that one can't start to learn how to use PS before mastering LR? That is just ridiculous and a high degree of snobbery Roll Eyes


Hope this helps.

Yes, thanks, that helps.

Your workflow makes very much sense to me as it's similar to what I'm doing myself atm. Good to know I'm not doing anything stupid. The main difference is that I haven't got a RAW capable camera yet but will soon and then of course I will shoot RAW too. My scans are in 16 bit TIFF but I have thousands of jpegs that I'm not going to throw away just because they are not RAW. I'm well aware of the limitations of jpegs which is why I'm getting a new camera and trying to learn more about post processing  Smiley
Logged
b2martin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 132


« Reply #7 on: May 26, 2012, 09:45:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Edits in Photoshop's Camera RAW (ACR) are nondestructive just like edits in Lightroom, this is true for RAW, JPG, TIF, PSD.  Edits in Photoshop do change the image file, but edits in ACR do not change the image data.

I do all my processing using ACR in Bridge and use Photoshop when required, which is a small number of the images.  ACR in Photoshop uses the same algorithms as Lightroom, the user interface is different and some capabilities exist in one and not the other.  Lightroom handles all images as a database, which is different than Photoshop/Bridge. 
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4026



« Reply #8 on: May 26, 2012, 10:01:01 AM »
ReplyReply

So you're saying that one can't start to learn how to use PS before mastering LR? That is just ridiculous and a high degree of snobbery Roll Eyes

Well, congratulations. You have no need to ask questions, since you already know the answers. I'm sure we can all learn a lot from you.

Jeremy
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5951


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 26, 2012, 10:05:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Sounds like ZoranC all over again Wink
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5951


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 26, 2012, 10:22:19 AM »
ReplyReply

So you're saying that one can't start to learn how to use PS before mastering LR? That is just ridiculous and a high degree of snobbery Roll Eyes ...

No, that was not what I was saying, and you obviously have a problem with logic, as with some other elements of your personality.

As for snobbery... let me see... PS is about 10x more expensive than LR, so a true snob would actually advise you to go PS, right?

LR is almost 100% meant for and used by photographers, while only 10-15% of PS users are photographers.

Given that you are going to start with "thousands of jpegs", LR is the right choice, as it is not going to cause file deterioration every time you save a jpeg after manipulation, as PS does.

« Last Edit: May 26, 2012, 01:35:56 PM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Keith Reeder
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 252


WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 26, 2012, 01:08:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Don't even know where to begin to reply to your patronising post so I make it short; Not a very helpful or answer

You're wrong.

Tony's right.

And you might want to drop the attitude - it's plain from your first and subsequent posts that you really are out of your depth, and if by your own admission you're new to Lr and PS, it might behove you to show some humility and gratitude to someone who is far better informed on this subject than you are, and who has provided you with a very useful "reality check".
Logged

Keith Reeder
Blyth, NE England
Hans Kruse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 706



WWW
« Reply #12 on: May 26, 2012, 02:35:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the tip on smart object. I'll check it out. seems promising.
It's for the same reasons, and other, you use PS that I want to use it. Many of my scanned old prints would benefit from some PS magic. I will check out the tutorials to see if indeed I will need PS to do what I want. I'm quite sure I do, I know that much about LR and PS.

Ok, I didn't know you were going to handle scans of old prints. It's not really something I have done, but I suspect you would still be able to a lot in Lightroom and the go to Photoshop for the remaining tasks. My advice is still to get the tutorials and learn LR as you go. It's probably going to be an interative process to see what workflow works the best for you. I also recommend to edit in Photoshop from Lightroom such that when you close the image in Lightroom the edit will get back into Lightroom so you can print from there and have all the cataloging there. You can add keywords to keep all the scans in order.

For photos from your camera shoot in RAW and import into Lightroom and edit as much as you find works well within Lightroom.
Logged

john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2805



WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 26, 2012, 02:51:57 PM »
ReplyReply

A lot depends on how crap the scans are, but get them in Lightroom first so you get them under control and start organising them with keywords. Assuming there's a lot of cleaning to do, then open the picture from Lightroom as a smart object in Photoshop - so there's no chance of accidentally overwriting the original scan's pixels. For the same reason, you might even decide to save these original scans as DNGs rather than as TIFs.

Do all the cleanup on as many separate layers as you need and don't be tempted to do too much cloning on one layer. As you get more familiar with PS tools, you'll find you want to revisit earlier work and separate layers makes it easy to do so without screwing anything up.
Logged

Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2131


« Reply #14 on: May 27, 2012, 12:45:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Dajm:

You asked a broad question and I gave you a general answer - one that is valid and will be substantiated by people on this forum who are true experts in digital workflow - these people write and publish the books you ought to be reading.

LR is most definately the image editing program of choice (as much for its digital asset management capabilities as anything). The same things can be done with ACR but one has to buy PS first - and it is a very expensive buy if you don't need it. Lots of individuals who contribute to this forum are consummate experts using PS yet nearly all of them will preferentially edit in LR and only go to PS when absolutely necessary. Hint- LR is not second best - just different. The ability to edit parametrically is what makes LR a winner (no pixels were harmed in the making of the image).

You do appear to be at the very beginning of a journey into digital image making and I will say this without apology - the tone of your posts suggests that you do not know enough on the subject to have the first clue about what you are talking about. The suggestion that there is a loss of quality when editing an image in LR as opposed to PS is a testament to your fundamental ignorance of the subject.

Your attack on me was silly - you do need to learn to walk before you can fly.
Slobodan makes reference to another individual who had a bad attitude and who would not listen to anyone - he took on Jeff Schewe to argue the toss about aspects of digital workflow and sadly lost out - Jeff Schewe is a world expert on this very topic. I posted a comment to try and take the heat out of Jeff by suggesting that: ...one can only lead a horse to water...
Hopefully, you'll pull your head in and realize that you can learn a lot on this forum rather than become a "one hit wonder" like ZoranC was.

Regards

Tony Jay
« Last Edit: May 27, 2012, 12:57:52 AM by Tony Jay » Logged
Dajm
Guest
« Reply #15 on: May 27, 2012, 01:11:34 AM »
ReplyReply

@b2martin
Thanks for the input. I have been looking at using bridge as I'm more comfortable with the browser vs catalog in LR. I'm coming to terms with the catalog and can see it's advantages but sometimes it still bothers me. I'll stick with it though, I like a lot about it and since it is for images only, I feel LR suits me better.

@Hans
Thanks again for your suggestions. Yes, I do need to fix some of the scans up and I hope to learn as I go. I have only just started and are now saving them as .psd so I can go back and improve as I learn new tricks. Don't need to print anything yet, I got plenty of time so I hope that's the way to go. As I mentioned earlier I still don't have a camera that can shoot in RAW but will soon and I will follow your advise. 

@Johnbeardy
Thanks for the good advise. Many of the scans are "ok" to "pretty good" and just need some basic adjustments and spot removal etc. There are lots that are pretty bad, you know the old stack of family prints that has been bashed around in drawers and boxes for decades (no, not by me, I'm more careful with my prints). I haven't started on them yet, need to learn a bit more in PS first.
When you say I should save in dng, do you mean scan in dng (Vuescan) or copy into LR as dng (and keep the tifs as is)? I have already started scanning in tif but could still get hem into LR as dng.

Well, congratulations. You have no need to ask questions, since you already know the answers. I'm sure we can all learn a lot from you.

Jeremy

What are you on about? Of course I need to ask questions, sometimes even stupid questions, but I was not asking if anyone think I am intellectually capable of learning PS at the same time as LR because I do already know the answer to that. And I sure have not learned anything from you either.

No, that was not what I was saying, and you obviously have a problem with logic, as with some other elements of your personality.

As for snobbery... let me see... PS is about 10x more expensive than LR, so a true snob would actually advise you to go PS, right?
Let's see, what did you say exactly...oh, look, here it is
+1

I'll make it short too: start with LR, and when you master it, move to PS.

P.S. everything Hans said is correct, just too much for you at the moment

I interpret that as I should not touch PS until I have mastered LR. What is wrong with my logic and what the hell are you implying about my "other elements about my personality"? Too much for me atm? This is sinking to a very low level here.

About snobbery; It is snobbery when you suggest I should not/can not join your exclusive PS club because you don't think I'm capable to handle it. It has got nothing to do with money, I already have access to both LR4 and CS6 but you are saying it's too much for me so I shouldn't go there. Very helpful   Roll Eyes

You're wrong.

Tony's right.

And you might want to drop the attitude - it's plain from your first and subsequent posts that you really are out of your depth, and if by your own admission you're new to Lr and PS, it might behove you to show some humility and gratitude to someone who is far better informed on this subject than you are, and who has provided you with a very useful "reality check".

Wrong about what? That I found his post patronising or that I dared to ask a "big" question?

"It seems silly to me that you you are considering using layers in PS yet your fundamental knowledge of digital workflow is absent. Essentially you are talking of flying fighter jets but you can't ride a bicycle yet."

I am humbly asking questions stating that I am new to this and he is saying that I am silly to consider using layers. Who has got a bad attitude? Who should show more humility here? Me? Great post!

You think I'm out of my depth? Well, THAT"S WHY I'M ASKING QUESTIONS. I'm sure you mastered PS the first time you opened it up, right? I will not show any gratitude to those who respond to an honest request for help with unhelpful and non constructive put-downs like that. I will be very grateful to those that spend their valuable time to try to HELP me.

Tony has replied to this thread as I was writing this way too long reply so I just continue on

Ok, Tony, I accept that you think I'm fundamental ignorant about this. I did state that I'm new to this so you are somewhat correct. I have tried to digest a huge amount of information the lats couple of weeks and I do find it very complex and sometimes overwhelming. However, I did not attack you, I did find "the tone" of your reply as patronising and there was no reason for you to say I was silly to contemplate using layers. Why shouldn't I when I know it's there for me to learn?

I guess I'm better than some members to multi task so I don't see any problems learning both LR and PS when I have an opportunity to. I'm using LR by far more as it it obviously a lot easier to get a handle on but why not play around with PS too? That's what I don't get, the almost hostile respond from some members that I DARE try it before mastering LR  Huh

Yes, I have already learned from this site and i hope I will continue to do so but I don't appreciate the elitist attitude that is so common among experienced people whatever hobby/profession we are dealing with.

This post is too long so I stop here and lets move on

Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2131


« Reply #16 on: May 27, 2012, 02:17:22 AM »
ReplyReply

There is nothing elitist in any of the advice given to you.
You have chosen these words yourself.
You have chosen to react aggresively to very sage advice.

People on this forum will help you if you let them, but, to use a colloquialism, they will get pretty jack of it if you continue taking wild swings at everyone.
If you want to get down to the nitty gritty of your digital workflow issues so the rest of us can actually help you we can get somewhere.

My patience is starting to wear a little thin.

Tony Jay
« Last Edit: May 27, 2012, 02:34:08 AM by Tony Jay » Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2805



WWW
« Reply #17 on: May 27, 2012, 02:44:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the good advise. Many of the scans are "ok" to "pretty good" and just need some basic adjustments and spot removal etc. There are lots that are pretty bad, you know the old stack of family prints that has been bashed around in drawers and boxes for decades (no, not by me, I'm more careful with my prints). I haven't started on them yet, need to learn a bit more in PS first.
When you say I should save in dng, do you mean scan in dng (Vuescan) or copy into LR as dng (and keep the tifs as is)? I have already started scanning in tif but could still get hem into LR as dng.

Yes, I mean make them DNGs as early as possible, and once they are in this format you wouldn't need the original TIF scan as all the data would be in the DNG. Their being DNG would indicate they are originals and would preserve the original scan data - compare that to TIF and ask how you distinguish a TIF that's the original scan from a TIF to which you saved beginners' quality edits? You would then do as many corrections as possible in LR before opening as smart object in PS.

PS your original post gave a clear impression of a poor level of knowledge and understanding. The responses seemed more like tough love than arrogance.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5951


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #18 on: May 27, 2012, 11:53:42 AM »
ReplyReply

... What is wrong with my logic...

For starters, see non sequitur logical fallacy.

Look... most of us here started with PS years ago, for a simple reason: LR did not exist back then. Most of us spent years learning PS, resulting in various degrees of mastery (I consider myself somewhere half-way to it). People go to formal classes and get certified, attend workshops, buy books and videos... all that takes time. My guesstimate would be that an average newcomer to PS might spend between months and years until mastering it, depending on the amount of time, energy and talent for learning one is investing. If you are a casual user (like myself), just when you think you mastered one version, the new one is already out. I am saying all this matter-of-factly, no elitism or snobbery there.

PS is complex and time consuming. We did it because we had no choice, i.e., no LR.  With the arrival of LR, it was like a breath of fresh air, intuitive, user-friendly, geared toward photographers. Most of us "elitist snobs" do 90% of our work today in LR and roundtrip to CS only for the most demanding tasks. Thus, it is not snobbery or elitism to suggest to newcomers today to reverse the order and start with LR, it is just a commonsensical, friendly advice.

It does not follow (non sequitur) that no one should dare to peek into PS, start using it, or start learning it before LR. It is just a common sense to start learning something that is easier to conquer and will generate results faster than a more complex tool. It also makes sense to concentrate on learning something well before embarking on something else, otherwise you might end up with a half-knowledge of both and the risk that you might find both tools inadequate. It is often the case with those who just try LR for free for 30 days, do it superficially, and then comment how subpar it is compared to whatever they are quite used to.

You stated that you already have a task at hand: thousand of jpegs. We replied that, in that case, LR is a better choice to start using and learning, for reasons already mentioned above.

So, once again, if you really want our help, why don't you simply start with your workflow and, as you go, come back with specific questions, rather than continuing this bickering about the tone of our advice?

Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5489


WWW
« Reply #19 on: May 27, 2012, 04:59:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Yes, I have already learned from this site and i hope I will continue to do so but I don't appreciate the elitist attitude that is so common among experienced people whatever hobby/profession we are dealing with.

Wow, with just 6 posts on LuLa you're already trying to change our behavior? Talk about arrogant...

Ya might want to spend some time learning how to interact here before you start complaining about others. You admitted you were new to PS & LR, don't you think you should also admit to being new here and try to blend in and make friends before you start trying to be the forum police? We have others who can do that...
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad