Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Photoshop Lites?  (Read 801 times)
LesPalenik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 380


WWW
« on: February 01, 2014, 07:15:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Watching what's happening in the universe of editing tools, Adobe's decision to switch from the perpetual model to the subscription may one day turn out as one of their biggest blunders.

When that decision was made, Photoshop was an undisputed king in photo editing programs that allowed some optional plug-ins. In the short time since the PS CC announcement, tremendous strides were made by several companies making the photo plug-ins and the recent Topaz and OnOne releases make nowadays the Photoshop an option (and the race just started).

Although these tools don't cover the full breath of Photoshop, they do some things much better, and are more than adequate for many photographers. Just watch some of their demos.

The recently announced Dynamic Contrast tool in Photo Effects 8 by OnOneSoftware combines many LR and PS functions (i.e. nondestructive layers, content-aware fill) and adds some innovative features into one easy-to-use and very powerful program. Just add the plug-in to your existing LR and once you find that you can process your images without ever going to Photoshop, it may become very tempting to cancel that monthly CC subscription.



Logged

chez
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 302


« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2014, 07:41:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Watching what's happening in the universe of editing tools, Adobe's decision to switch from the perpetual model to the subscription may one day turn out as one of their biggest blunders.

When that decision was made, Photoshop was an undisputed king in photo editing programs that allowed some optional plug-ins. In the short time since the PS CC announcement, tremendous strides were made by several companies making the photo plug-ins and the recent Topaz and OnOne releases make nowadays the Photoshop an option (and the race just started).

Although these tools don't cover the full breath of Photoshop, they do some things much better, and are more than adequate for many photographers. Just watch some of their demos.

The recently announced Dynamic Contrast tool in Photo Effects 8 by OnOneSoftware combines many LR and PS functions (i.e. nondestructive layers, content-aware fill) and adds some innovative features into one easy-to-use and very powerful program. Just add the plug-in to your existing LR and once you find that you can process your images without ever going to Photoshop, it may become very tempting to cancel that monthly CC subscription.





What's nice about PS is that it does it all. I sure don't want to manage and maintain a bunch of individual apps that only do part of the processing. This not only slows down my processing time, but also makes managing these apps a bigger pain.

I also like to reward the company that brought us image processing...Adobe. Where were these wannabes 10, 5 or even 3 years ago? Why didn't they invest money to challenge Adobe long before Adobe became such a dominant force? I don't reward companies thst dive in only when they see an opening just to make a buck...I like companies that drive the industry and all around for the long haul. Over the last 5 years, we've seen many of these small app producing companies here today, gone tomorrow.
Logged
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2391


« Reply #2 on: February 01, 2014, 07:44:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Loads of posts on here with respect to your post. Personally I think the topic has been done to death. As a long time member of this forum you know this so why dredge it up again? Undecided
Logged

PhotoEcosse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 545



« Reply #3 on: February 01, 2014, 09:14:46 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't reward companies that dive in only when they see an opening just to make a buck...I like companies that drive the industry and all around for the long haul.

I don't buy anything to "reward companies". I buy whatever best meets my needs at the right price at the time.

And maybe just pick up on the OP when he says,

Quote
Although these tools don't cover the full breath of Photoshop, they do some things much better

I use CS6 and a whole raft of Nik and Topaz plug-ins, all from within Lightroom.

In reality there is nothing that any of those plug-ins do that could not be done by CS6 if you had sufficient time and expertise in Photoshop. What they do is allow amateurs like us to do the things we consider important and desirable much more intuitively and very much more quickly and simply.

Achieving a certain degree of photo-processing in Nik or Topaz from within Lightroom might allow me to obtain the desired result in 3 minutes. Achieving the same result in CS6 (or, I am sure, CC) might take me 30 minutes (although a Photoshop expert could probably do it more quickly).
Logged

************************************
"Reality is an illusion caused by lack of alcohol."
Alternatively, "Life begins at the far end of your comfort zone."
LesPalenik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 380


WWW
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2014, 10:00:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What's nice about PS is that it does it all. I sure don't want to manage and maintain a bunch of individual apps that only do part of the processing. This not only slows down my processing time, but also makes managing these apps a bigger pain.

Indeed, in Photoshop you can do almost everything what those new tools do, but doing it the old way takes much more time and that is what constitutes the real pain.

Quote
I also like to reward the company that brought us image processing...Adobe. Where were these wannabes 10, 5 or even 3 years ago? Why didn't they invest money to challenge Adobe long before Adobe became such a dominant force? I don't reward companies thst dive in only when they see an opening just to make a buck...I like companies that drive the industry and all around for the long haul. Over the last 5 years, we've seen many of these small app producing companies here today, gone tomorrow.

1. For every loyalist who likes to reward Adobe there must be fifty others who got pissed off by their greed and for pulling the rug under them in the direction of the cloud.
2. Yeah, where were those wannabes 10 or 5 years ago? Just imagine something like that would happen in other type of business. For example, a world leader phone maker equally loved by Obama, corporations, yuppies, and geeks completely annihilated by a few dreamers who saw an opening just to make a buck. What a ridiculous idea!

Quote
I like companies that drive the industry and all around for the long haul.
Good thinking. Just watch the first video clip from the link below. Matt Kloskowski, one of the guys on Scott Kelby's team who certainly knows Photoshop inside out, demonstrates some of the features of the new Photo Suite 8 program. Based on their record, there is a good chance that these guys will stay around and enhance their products even more.
 
http://www.ononesoftware.com/products/suite8/testimonials/
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7447



WWW
« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2014, 11:30:51 AM »
ReplyReply

I use CS6 and a whole raft of Nik and Topaz plug-ins, all from within Lightroom.
That is exactly my attitude. For me, CS6 is another Lightroom plugin that I sometimes make use of, perhaps a little more often than I do for Nik or Topaz. But the number of times in the last year that I have started anything directly in CS6 is almost zero.
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
thierrylegros396
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 602


« Reply #6 on: February 01, 2014, 12:00:39 PM »
ReplyReply

That is exactly my attitude. For me, CS6 is another Lightroom plugin that I sometimes make use of, perhaps a little more often than I do for Nik or Topaz. But the number of times in the last year that I have started anything directly in CS6 is almost zero.


+1

Thierry
Logged
chez
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 302


« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2014, 05:00:07 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't buy anything to "reward companies". I buy whatever best meets my needs at the right price at the time.

And maybe just pick up on the OP when he says,

I use CS6 and a whole raft of Nik and Topaz plug-ins, all from within Lightroom.

In reality there is nothing that any of those plug-ins do that could not be done by CS6 if you had sufficient time and expertise in Photoshop. What they do is allow amateurs like us to do the things we consider important and desirable much more intuitively and very much more quickly and simply.

Achieving a certain degree of photo-processing in Nik or Topaz from within Lightroom might allow me to obtain the desired result in 3 minutes. Achieving the same result in CS6 (or, I am sure, CC) might take me 30 minutes (although a Photoshop expert could probably do it more quickly).

Then you situation is simple...you don't need photoshop. Just continue to use Lightroom. And I am sure the majority of people complaining about the subscription model could do the exact same thing and achieve the exact same results.
Logged
chez
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 302


« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2014, 05:04:46 PM »
ReplyReply

That is exactly my attitude. For me, CS6 is another Lightroom plugin that I sometimes make use of, perhaps a little more often than I do for Nik or Topaz. But the number of times in the last year that I have started anything directly in CS6 is almost zero.


So then you really should not care that Adobe decided to go CC with photoshop. You really don't need it and I'm sure you can find a lot of Lightroom Plugins to replace any missing functionality.

I don't get it. People now are saying we reallyl don't  need CC, we can just use Lightroom with plugins. That is fine...but why care so much that photoshop went subscription then? Why all this angst if you really don't care.
Logged
jerryrock
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 553



WWW
« Reply #9 on: February 01, 2014, 05:17:56 PM »
ReplyReply

My guess is that those who leave Photoshop or only used it for special effects capabilities via plug-ins, never really took the time to learn to use the full ability of the program. Once you unlock that key, all the other programs (including Lightroom) are a waste of time and money.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2014, 12:30:40 AM by jerryrock » Logged

Gerald J Skrocki
skrockidesign.com
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2029


« Reply #10 on: February 01, 2014, 05:40:37 PM »
ReplyReply

My guess is that those who leave Photoshop or only used it for special effects capabilities via plug-ins, never really took the time to learn to use the full ability of the program. Once you inlock that key, all the other programs (including Lightroom) are a waste of time and money.
Far too extreme.
Lightroom and Photoshop offer complementary functionality - they are not in direct opposition.
Photoshop has rudimentary DAM functionality but the ability to edit images as smart objects using layers is obviously priceless.
Lightroom has very good DAM capabilities - in fact its principal strength - and the print module (in LR 5.x) leaves Photoshop printing for dead.

No less a personage than Jeff Schewe uses Lightroom as the primary image editor and only uses Photoshop when he needs to.
He also seems to much prefer printing from Lightroom.
If there is a single person on this forum who could really claim to know Photoshop, particularly as it pertains to photographic image editing, then it is Jeff Schewe.

Tony Jay
« Last Edit: February 01, 2014, 05:46:54 PM by Tony Jay » Logged
LesPalenik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 380


WWW
« Reply #11 on: February 01, 2014, 08:12:26 PM »
ReplyReply

I agree with Tony.
Many experts who elect to use LR as their primary tool, have used PS for a long time and they know it better than most. And in addition to Jeff Schewe, as I recall some posts by Michael and Kevin, they also happen to use LR.  And heaven forbid, some of them are even experimenting with those lowly plugins. So, here you have three heavyweights who don't spend as much time in PS as they used to, despite owning (or renting, I should say) the latest PS CC version.

When it comes to the next level of users, including one-click whippersnappers, old farts with their attention capability not exceeding two clicks, and freedom-loving starving artists, you can draw your own conclusions as to who will buy what.

I still use a 3-year old version of Photoshop for a lot of my image editing - in addition to LR and NIK or Topaz. And to set the record straight, I really like that program and respect the Adobe designers who created it.  I wish, I could say the same also about their other departments.




« Last Edit: February 01, 2014, 10:49:07 PM by LesPalenik » Logged

Alan Klein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 584



WWW
« Reply #12 on: February 01, 2014, 09:05:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Why is LR good for printing?
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5255


WWW
« Reply #13 on: February 01, 2014, 11:08:55 PM »
ReplyReply

No less a personage than Jeff Schewe uses Lightroom as the primary image editor and only uses Photoshop when he needs to.
He also seems to much prefer printing from Lightroom.

Well, yes, I know Photoshop pretty well...but really the older Photoshop pre CS. The reason I knew Photoshop so well is it was my day job...I was an advertising photographer who shot images designed for composition and then all the digital imaging myself. However, when CS first came out, Photoshop started adding a lot of functionality that I had little or no need for.

Because I essentially retired from commercial work about a decade ago and quit shooting film and adopted digital capture, I gravitated to first Camera Raw and then finally Lightroom. Since I don't get commissioned to do big huge image combos anymore, I've actually gone away from that and gone back to more traditional photography with far less Photoshop work.

I still am really pretty good in Photoshop for those things I still need to do but with each release of ACR/LR, there is less need to take things out of LR and into Photoshop. No, I could not give up using Photoshop...but I use a relatively small percent of Photoshop these days...mainly for the most accurate selections and layers & masking and full blown retouching...could I adopt a lesser application instead of Photoshop. I suppose, but why learn a new program when I know Photoshop so well. Photoshop is many things to many different kinds of users. It's actually remarkable that the program Thomas Knoll wrote way back in the late 1980's has kept growing and improving for over 2 decades...and that Thomas is still working at Adobe (Thomas doesn't "need" to work, he just can't help himself :~)

I agree that when Adobe killed CS7 and perpetual licenses they did a poor job of it. It was something Adobe felt they hard to do. But I think the reaction by many was way, way over the top. Yes, Adobe has given some other bright boy with some real skills an opportunity to come up with something that could replace Photoshop for those things photographers still need Photoshop for. We'll see...I don't see anything on the horizon but who knows what's being developed right now. But, sad to say, the market isn't really all that big for photographers and the nature of the industry is moving away from big iron big apps towards mobility and fast and easy. I think the time for somebody to come along with a "Photoshop Killer™" has long passed away...those users who still need Photoshop will keep using Photoshop, those that don't, won't.

But, I wouldn't bet against Adobe...they still have a lot of really bright people working for them.
Logged
jerryrock
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 553



WWW
« Reply #14 on: February 02, 2014, 12:56:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Far too extreme.
Lightroom and Photoshop offer complementary functionality - they are not in direct opposition.
Photoshop has rudimentary DAM functionality but the ability to edit images as smart objects using layers is obviously priceless.
Lightroom has very good DAM capabilities - in fact its principal strength - and the print module (in LR 5.x) leaves Photoshop printing for dead.
No less a personage than Jeff Schewe uses Lightroom as the primary image editor and only uses Photoshop when he needs to.
He also seems to much prefer printing from Lightroom.
If there is a single person on this forum who could really claim to know Photoshop, particularly as it pertains to photographic image editing, then it is Jeff Schewe.
Tony Jay

I'm not sure what you mean about Lightroom 5 advantage in printing, I don't use it but the forums are full of people experiencing problems with the printing module and Lightroom 5 in general.
http://forums.adobe.com/message/5949900
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/forums/thread32337.htm
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2013/08/lightroom-5-bug.html

I guess you got the answer YOU needed. Grin  There are thousands of image editors in the professional world that really KNOW Photoshop and would never give up using Photoshop. It is still THE industry standard. If you are satisfied with the capabilities of Lightroom, then by all means use it. Photoshop will always be my only program for image editing.
Logged

Gerald J Skrocki
skrockidesign.com
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5255


WWW
« Reply #15 on: February 02, 2014, 01:31:20 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm not sure what you mean about Lightroom 5 advantage in printing, I don't use it but the forums are full of people experiencing problems with the printing module and Lightroom 5 in general.

There are a lot of advantages using Lightroom to print vs Photoshop...and the fact some people are having problems does nothing to suggest otherwise. In my experience, a LOT of people have a hard time getting good prints.

As to why LR is easier and more efficient than printing out of LR, well if you don't know how to print from Lightroom, it's kinda tough to explain. As a highlight, consider the fact that in LR, you get to choose what printer profiles show up, that you create presets that correctly enter the correct parameters for Page Setup and the print driver, that those presets are consistent and repeatable and that if you want to make 10 prints from 10 images, all you need to do is select the 10 images, the template and click print. In Photoshop you have to open 10 images and correctly enter the page setup and print driver settings 10 times. No brainer...

Sorry, if you don't understand just how much more efficient LR is for printing, you don't know LR. Even if I didn't do anything else in LR, I would still prefer to print out of LR vs PS. PS is primitive and crude and really inefficient for a printing workflow.
Logged
jerryrock
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 553



WWW
« Reply #16 on: February 02, 2014, 02:15:38 PM »
ReplyReply

There are a lot of advantages using Lightroom to print vs Photoshop...and the fact some people are having problems does nothing to suggest otherwise. In my experience, a LOT of people have a hard time getting good prints.

As to why LR is easier and more efficient than printing out of LR, well if you don't know how to print from Lightroom, it's kinda tough to explain. As a highlight, consider the fact that in LR, you get to choose what printer profiles show up, that you create presets that correctly enter the correct parameters for Page Setup and the print driver, that those presets are consistent and repeatable and that if you want to make 10 prints from 10 images, all you need to do is select the 10 images, the template and click print. In Photoshop you have to open 10 images and correctly enter the page setup and print driver settings 10 times. No brainer...

Sorry, if you don't understand just how much more efficient LR is for printing, you don't know LR. Even if I didn't do anything else in LR, I would still prefer to print out of LR vs PS. PS is primitive and crude and really inefficient for a printing workflow.

I do rent Lightroom 5 as part of the photographer's package from Adobe. I own and use Adobe CS6 Master Collection but could not find a compelling reason to update the entire Package to CC, just as I have not found a compelling reason to start using Lightroom 5 or DNG for that matter.

I do agree printing from Photoshop's printer dialog is tedious, confusing and does not always produce the desired results. For the past six years I have printed from Canon's export module from Photoshop to my Canon iPF printer, which gives me the most accurate and consistent results than any other method I have tried. Granted I have not tried Lightroom 5 and should reserve judgment until I at least give it a chance.
Logged

Gerald J Skrocki
skrockidesign.com
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad