This content has been marked as final.
Show 13 replies
-
1. Re: CS4 versus LR2
Lee Jay-7OQGJF Mar 2, 2009 5:10 PM (in response to MikeV99)LR is about managing and editing many images, and taking them efficiently from import to output (currently, files, prints, web, or slideshow to a limited extent). Photoshop is about editing a single image (or creating an image from scratch). Bridge/Camera Raw allows some of the high-volume aspects that LR does for editing images. -
2. Re: CS4 versus LR2
Wolf Eilers Mar 2, 2009 10:57 PM (in response to MikeV99)You've just got back from a photo shoot. You have 5000 images and can choose to use Lr or Bridge/ACR.
I would choose Lr every time. The work gets done faster and I enjoy the process more. -
3. Re: CS4 versus LR2
MikeV99 Mar 3, 2009 7:30 AM (in response to Wolf Eilers)On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 22:57:10 -0800, Wolf_Eilers@adobeforums.com wrote:
> You've just got back from a photo shoot. You have 5000 images and can choose to use Lr or Bridge/ACR.
>
> I would choose Lr every time. The work gets done faster and I enjoy the process more.
That is pretty much the issue that I have to resolve. I have gotten back
from a trip and have about 600 raw images that I need to process (not to
mention another 2000 from previous trips that are still waiting for me).
Bridge does not work for me in the initial stages since I sometimes want to
view the histogram to see if the photo has any editing potential and Bridge
does not have a histogram feature.
Unfortunately, LR 2 takes forever to render the previews.
I am testing a product called Photo Mechanic that is a browser that is 100
(or so it seems) times faster than LR.
My testing makes me think that Photo Mechanic is the ideal initial view or
image browser tool. It can also make global metadata changes. So I use it
for my browsing (it has histogram info as well).
However, once I have trashed the rejects and I am ready to take a closer
look at the images do I use LR Developer or go straight to CS 4. In this
scenario, what will LR add to my work flow (especially when considering how
slow it is to render previews)? {Yes, I am going to get more memory and
video card memory...} I have a LR book open on my left and a CS4 book open
on my right and do not know enough about the products to know where I
should put my focus.
So, back to the bottom line question, which way to go now, LR or CS4?
Thanks
Mike -
4. Re: CS4 versus LR2
Bennett Richards Mar 3, 2009 10:02 AM (in response to MikeV99)CS4 is a MUCH more powerful program... that being said it is MUCH MORE or everything. It is would be more aptly named GraphicsShop as many of the tools a photographer will never need or use. I see Adobe developing LR not just as a DAM, but more as the Adobe program for photographers... In many ways more intuitive if not yet as powerful. The next thing I see coming in LightRoom is SoftProofing... All-in-all I like LR a lot. I also have CS4 -
5. Re: CS4 versus LR2
(David_Woeltjen) Mar 3, 2009 12:28 PM (in response to MikeV99)Lets say you get back from your photo shoot, as mentioned above, you now have 350 RAW files taken indoors at a basket ball tournament. You enlarge the first image and tweak white balance, saturation and maybe the tone curve just a little. In LR you can hit one button and "Sync" the remaining RAW photos in an instant. I have both programs also, but at least 95 percent of my work flow is through LR. -
6. Re: CS4 versus LR2
JimHess-8IPblY Mar 3, 2009 12:38 PM (in response to MikeV99)David,
The workflow you just described can be executed just as easily into Photoshop/Bridge in a number of different ways. Your argument that Lightroom is needed is misleading. In reality, I think it boils down to which workflow you like better.
And just for clarification. Lightroom does not use ACR. Lightroom and ACR share the same technology, but the two are completely separate and unrelated. -
7. Re: CS4 versus LR2
don solomon Mar 3, 2009 12:49 PM (in response to MikeV99)Mike V99,
If you want a browser to do initial sorting and culling, nothing beats Photo Mechanic for workflow effectiveness for those tasks. It is designed for professionals who do a lot of that. LR is the last place I would go for initial culling, rating, etc.
LR is first and foremost a DAM. Everything has to be brought into the DB before anything else happens. In most circumstances,there is simply no point dumping 5000( just how many usable images are there in a batch of 5000?) or 500 unculled images into LR. Normally, they should be culled first.
If you have 50, or even a hundred unculled images, and aren't doing editing for a living, then those numbers are certainly manageable in LR. So, in fact are the larger numbers if you haven't got anything better to spend your time on:)
If you work like David does, making a few tweaks and synching the whole lot shot in identical light, such as a basketball game, then obviously LR will serve you well--that is if you intend to keep all 350 of them, or even 90 percent.
Jim's response is the best one. Mileage varies.
By the way, Mike, why are you considering LR, if you don't need a DAM? -
8. Re: CS4 versus LR2
Bennett Richards Mar 3, 2009 12:52 PM (in response to MikeV99)I actually like LR2's adjsutment tools more than I like its DAM -
9. Re: CS4 versus LR2
Lee Jay-7OQGJF Mar 3, 2009 1:05 PM (in response to MikeV99)I routinely do 2000 images in LR, and there's no program that would be faster for initial rating and culling because LR imports them faster than I can go through them anyway. If it were 100 times faster, it would still take the same amount of time because I'm the holdup, and last I checked no practical CPU upgrades were available. -
10. Re: CS4 versus LR2
(David_Woeltjen) Mar 3, 2009 4:22 PM (in response to MikeV99)Thanks Jim, I wasn't aware that those minor adjustments could be made in bridge and synchronized. If you are working in RAW (mostly for WB in my case) can you make the adjustments as quickly or quicker? When it comes to exporting the RAW images to a useable jpg for the web, emails, proofs, etc... LR seems pretty quick. -
11. Re: CS4 versus LR2
(xbytor) Mar 3, 2009 6:26 PM (in response to (David_Woeltjen))> If you are working in RAW (mostly for WB in my case) can you make the adjustments as quickly or quicker?
Select all of the raw files in Bridge. Open in CameraRaw. Do your WB and any
other global mods. Select All. Synchronize. Done.
Quick and painless. -
12. Re: CS4 versus LR2
(Jim_Strenk) Mar 3, 2009 6:40 PM (in response to MikeV99)Personally, I'd use both applications. They are complimentary products, not competitors.
My workflow has been a two application process.
With Lightroom, I gather, catalog (database), sort, select and develop my RAW files. If no further processing is required, I also print from Lightroom. That takes about 90% of my digital photographic needs. The Library Module is sensational. Having a database manager to find your files is always a plus! Photos found on your local computer, NAS or network server are easy to locate. There's no need to remember where exposures are currently located.
With Photoshop, I process RAW files from Lightroom that need additional non-destructive attention. Dodging and Burning, selecting cloud formations from one exposure to the one your working on are just some examples.
Rather than putting focus on one application or the other, I would suggest that you consider using both, since they were designed to compliment each other, not compete with each other. -
13. Re: CS4 versus LR2
MikeV99 Mar 3, 2009 8:37 PM (in response to don solomon)On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 12:49:44 -0800, don_solomon@adobeforums.com wrote:
> By the way, Mike, why are you considering LR, if you don't need a DAM?
My thanks to all that responded.
I already had LR before I realized the issues of a DAM.
Mike


