Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: A little poll..  (Read 1625 times)
Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


Editing Allowed


« on: November 04, 2013, 10:13:43 PM »
ReplyReply

LR or CS?

Does anyone find an overwhelming advantage to one over the other for photographic editing, sans file storage, etc.?

I've always used RAW, Bridge and CS for everything even though I had LR which I found awkward for file storage and have also discovered the NIK collection to fulfill any tomfoolery tricks which I may wish to employ.

So, it would be nice to get other opinions.

Thanks
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8069



WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 04, 2013, 10:27:01 PM »
ReplyReply

LR for me 98% of the time. I just hop into PS for the few things I can't do easily in LR.
The first version of Bridge that I ever used was so painfully slow that I have never bothered with it since.
The ability to make custom presets in LR makes printing much easier than in PS.

I will stick with LR 5.2 and CS 6 as long as I am able to.
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7640


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 04, 2013, 10:44:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

99% LR for my part. Own and use C1 (Capture One), too. I do some editing in CS5. I don't see your point on LR and file storage. The files are stored on disk,
I use a normal root/year/month/day file structure (corresponding to a standard MacOS X/UNIX file system.

I see benefits in C1, from my horizon mainly less aliasing artefacts then LR and ACR, but there may be better raw converters than either. So I use LR as a workflow/library solution and when needed use external tools like "RawTherapee" or C1.

I do think that C1 is usable as a workflow solution, but we make no friends.

Personally, I am addicted to a parametric workflow, that is postponing raw conversion until needed and avoiding TIFF & PSD when possible.

Best regards
Erik

LR or CS?

Does anyone find an overwhelming advantage to one over the other for photographic editing, sans file storage, etc.?

I've always used RAW, Bridge and CS for everything even though I had LR which I found awkward for file storage and have also discovered the NIK collection to fulfill any tomfoolery tricks which I may wish to employ.

So, it would be nice to get other opinions.

Thanks
Logged

wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5791



WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 05, 2013, 12:40:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Almost entirely in LR.  I only use external editors for things LR can't do.

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6870


« Reply #4 on: November 05, 2013, 02:32:43 AM »
ReplyReply

LR most of the time (95% of my images) but I use other applications for panoramic stitching, HDR (Enfuse LR plugin) or things that are impossible in LR (context aware fill).
Logged

Francois
Christoph C. Feldhaim
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2509


There is no rule! No - wait ...


« Reply #5 on: November 05, 2013, 03:25:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Definitely both, but not for all images.
Logged

Mike D. B.
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 98



WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 05, 2013, 05:45:00 AM »
ReplyReply

LR 99% of the time.  CS only for (rare) panoramas.
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6401



WWW
« Reply #7 on: November 05, 2013, 06:30:55 AM »
ReplyReply

LR for cataloging but CS, and now, CC for everything else. I've been using CS since it first came out -- long before LR existed. There are things you can do in CC that are impossible with anything else.
Logged

Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


Editing Allowed


« Reply #8 on: November 05, 2013, 06:36:42 AM »
ReplyReply

LR for cataloging but CS, and now, CC for everything else. I've been using CS since it first came out -- long before LR existed. There are things you can do in CC that are impossible with anything else.

Several for instances as to what CS can do that LR cannot, please.
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8069



WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 05, 2013, 02:19:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Several for instances as to what CS can do that LR cannot, please.
Layers, a decent healing brush, and the context-aware stuff come immediately to mind. Also a huge variety of strange filters that I never use.
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
WalterEG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1157


« Reply #10 on: November 05, 2013, 03:03:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I find PS far more capable and intuitive when it comes to working with scans of B&W negs.

Like others, Layers is a game changer for me also.

I have always had both applications since LR came along.  But I so seldom use LR.  I am sure it suits many  people who require its cataloguing abilities but I don't.

Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #11 on: November 05, 2013, 03:27:36 PM »
ReplyReply

I find PS far more capable and intuitive when it comes to working with scans of B&W negs.

Like others, Layers is a game changer for me also.

I have always had both applications since LR came along.  But I so seldom use LR.  I am sure it suits many  people who require its cataloguing abilities but I don't.




Without Layers, I might as well just sell the cameras and optics. It's the single most-used function I require. Even with the cellphone.

Rob C
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7640


WWW
« Reply #12 on: November 05, 2013, 03:36:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

LR 5 has both a healing brush and content aware stuff. ACR has same functions as LR, so it all can be done from Photoshop. Anyway LR is a different approach than PS. Personally, LR suits me fine, but I make detours to PS when I feel a need. On the other hand I feel that PS used to be too expensive for what I do and I don't think Elements is a replacement. I guess I will sign up for CC. Or I will just throw out PS and use Photoline 32.

Best regards
Erik

Layers, a decent healing brush, and the context-aware stuff come immediately to mind. Also a huge variety of strange filters that I never use.

Logged

NancyP
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 971


« Reply #13 on: November 06, 2013, 06:39:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Rank Amateur here.
LR 4. I am a beginner at post-processing, and wanted to learn one base application well enough to feel comfortable. LR keeps me organized and handles basic file manipulation. I have not acquired competency in CS to any degree. I also use Nik, and haven't really acquired competency in those programs either. For the Sigma Foveon files, I use Sigma Photo Pro by default - it is free, and works after a fashion. I may try Iridient RAW Developer.
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6401



WWW
« Reply #14 on: November 06, 2013, 08:26:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Several for instances as to what CS can do that LR cannot, please.

Chris, I don't have time to track them all down and describe them here, but check the Upright function in CC's Lens Corrections. I can straighten a building, a whole block of buildings if necessary, with a single click. Maybe there's something similar in LR 5, which I use for cataloging, and occasionally for minimal "developing," but I haven't been able to find it. There may be similarities to several of the finest features in CC in LR 5, but I've been using CS since the beginning, and I'm used to it. I'd rather fight than switch.
Logged

Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


Editing Allowed


« Reply #15 on: November 06, 2013, 09:28:49 PM »
ReplyReply

the consensus from a variety of sources was summed up by Rob C rather well...if you can't work in layers, what's the point? I appreciate everyone's input and while I realize many use LR, like Russ, fo rme it is simply a storage system for my files...an even in that, I find Bridge to be its equal.
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7640


WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 06, 2013, 11:39:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

It is under lens corrections under the Develop tab.  What you can do in ACR you can generally do in Lightroom as they share the processing pipeline.

Best regards
Erik
Chris, I don't have time to track them all down and describe them here, but check the Upright function in CC's Lens Corrections. I can straighten a building, a whole block of buildings if necessary, with a single click. Maybe there's something similar in LR 5, which I use for cataloging, and occasionally for minimal "developing," but I haven't been able to find it. There may be similarities to several of the finest features in CC in LR 5, but I've been using CS since the beginning, and I'm used to it. I'd rather fight than switch.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7640


WWW
« Reply #17 on: November 06, 2013, 11:50:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

LR will not work if you need pixel level edits. The way LR works you just save processing instructions. So what you do is, you have an original file and an XMP file describing what you do that files. There are a couple of benefits. Here are some:

- The instructions are sort of a stack, you can change any at any time without redoing the rest
- The instructions are executed in an optimal order (according to Adobe's views)
- The files are kept as raw or DNG, keeping them small
- If a new raw conversion is developed, you can reuse it your images without much effort

No, I don't say that everyone should use Lightroom, but it is a very different philosophy than Photoshop.

Best regards
Erik


the consensus from a variety of sources was summed up by Rob C rather well...if you can't work in layers, what's the point? I appreciate everyone's input and while I realize many use LR, like Russ, fo rme it is simply a storage system for my files...an even in that, I find Bridge to be its equal.
Logged

mezzoduomo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 199


« Reply #18 on: November 07, 2013, 07:34:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Rank Amateur here.
LR 4. I am a beginner at post-processing, and wanted to learn one base application well enough to feel comfortable. LR keeps me organized and handles basic file manipulation. I have not acquired competency in CS to any degree. I also use Nik, and haven't really acquired competency in those programs either. For the Sigma Foveon files, I use Sigma Photo Pro by default - it is free, and works after a fashion. I may try Iridient RAW Developer.

I'm right where you are, Nancy. I've bounced back and forth between LR and Aperture with a little NIK thrown in. But I'm starting to really get the hang of SPP with the DP-1 Merrill. It's been at least 2 months since it has crashed on me!!   Wink
Logged
HSakols
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 383


« Reply #19 on: November 07, 2013, 08:23:53 AM »
ReplyReply

I think it comes down to what you know and are comfortable with.  I started using photoshop well before lightroom.  Now I start out in lightroom and then usually go to photoshop.  I find that at times I need multiple layers of curves to give the image a bit more depth.  I also like to dodge and burn in layers. In lightroom making adjustments in one curve doesn't always do it.  I like having multiple layers. 
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad