Adobe Lightroom.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 02, 2010 9:45 PM GMT
    So I recently got to use a friends copy of Adobe Lightroom. I should have been warned, there is no going back. Photoshop is dead to me. Lightroom does things for me Photoshop could never dream of.

    I have seen the Light(Room)!

    Anyone else been converted into a true believer?
  • coyler

    Posts: 78

    Dec 02, 2010 9:52 PM GMT
    I haven't heard of it icon_redface.gif I know all the in's and out's of photoshop so i'll need a bit of convincing to switch, what makes it worthwhile?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 02, 2010 10:03 PM GMT
    coyler saidI haven't heard of it icon_redface.gif I know all the in's and out's of photoshop so i'll need a bit of convincing to switch, what makes it worthwhile?


    If you use a DSLR and shoot .RAW (zing) it streamlines the importing process by creating specific folders for your photos. All of which can be customized. It's also like having Adobe Bridge on the bottom of the screen and Photoshop in the rest of the screen. You can even apply the same edits to multiple photos at one time.

    It can still probably be useful if you don't shoot .RAW, but I think it was mainly designed for this purpose. You do still need to export to PS or GIMP to do things like re-size.
  • joncfernan

    Posts: 216

    Dec 03, 2010 3:00 AM GMT
    interesting! I will check it out. Is it good for digital drawing?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2010 3:03 AM GMT
    I love Adobe Lightroom 3. It's amazing. Try the 30 day trial version and I swear you will love. I've been using it for quite some time now and its just so fun to use.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2010 3:32 AM GMT
    makarov99 saidinteresting! I will check it out. Is it good for digital drawing?


    Nah, think of it as a digital darkroom, hence the name icon_smile.gif
  • offshore

    Posts: 1294

    Dec 03, 2010 3:50 AM GMT
    Can you briefly explain the work flow to me?

    I am very traditional in my work flow. I back up all my photos to a central location (actually 2 locations just to be safe), get rid of the ones I know I will not want and organise the folders by either special events or dates.

    I then have a working copy of the whole archive, which contains the processed JPEG (via Camera Raw), and any edit I apply to them.

    How does Light room simply the work flow? I actually have a trail copy and I can't seem to get used to it's interface. in Photoshop I know where all my tools are. In Lightroom if I want to do anything special it will have to open up Photohop (eg, HDR, Panoramic, or my collection of Topaz plug ins) anyway.

    Maybe I need to learn from an expert.

    Thank you.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2010 4:50 AM GMT
    I love lightroom! I mainly use it for cataloging my millions of digital pictures. If I need to tweek an image, ill still use photoshop, since that pogram is more like a third language to me and I use it for other purposes outside of image editing (AutoCAD being second language).

    Long story short, Adobe made a smart move with the addition of lightroom.

    There is also a "camera raw" plug-in when let's you open/create lossless dng files. Its like editing images directly in the film roll!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2010 4:53 AM GMT
    offshore saidCan you briefly explain the work flow to me?

    I am very traditional in my work flow. I back up all my photos to a central location (actually 2 locations just to be safe), get rid of the ones I know I will not want and organise the folders by either special events or dates.

    I then have a working copy of the whole archive, which contains the processed JPEG (via Camera Raw), and any edit I apply to them.

    How does Light room simply the work flow? I actually have a trail copy and I can't seem to get used to it's interface. in Photoshop I know where all my tools are. In Lightroom if I want to do anything special it will have to open up Photohop (eg, HDR, Panoramic, or my collection of Topaz plug ins) anyway.

    Maybe I need to learn from an expert.

    Thank you.


    That process will take al of 5 minutes with lightroom. Its a photographers dream come true!!!

    You can go to adobe and download the trial for lightroom. Try it, you will never experience such bliss!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2010 4:58 AM GMT
    I used the trial a couple years ago, but haven't put the full version in my budget yet.
    Maybe that'll be on next year's agenda. It is an excellent tool.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2010 5:03 AM GMT
    Seeing so many photo savvy people on here makes me happy icon_biggrin.gif

    Totally random, but if anyone else had issues with uploading pics to flickr and your colors were "dry" or muted, try exporting them from Lightroom as sRGB and then saving them again as Jpeg.

    I thought I was going nuts for awhile.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2010 6:02 AM GMT
    I love LR. Essentially, Photoshop is for pixel pushers, and Lightroom is for photographers. Photoshop is overkill for my needs. I don't do a lot of post-processing on my photos anyways. LR has just enough features to let me make some light/color corrections, do some cropping, and then export. The other cool thing about LR is that the original photos are untouched. All your edits are saved in the internal database. The real sucky thing about LR is that it costs so much. When Adobe offers Photoshop Elements for $90, it's hard for most people to justify paying $300 for Lightroom.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2010 6:16 AM GMT
    Everyone should share a photo that they edited with LR!

    <a href=/www.flickr.com/photos/doomsdaypanda/5221737961/" title="Deoxyribonucleic Acid by DoomsDayPanda, on Flickr">Deoxyribonucleic Acid">


    I'm a little overly excited tonight, I've had a bit too much coffee (I don't normally drink it)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2010 6:48 AM GMT
    paulflexes said... It is an excellent tool.


    Tell us, Paul. How excellent is your tool? icon_twisted.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2010 6:52 AM GMT
    Well I am kinda of a free lancer graphic artist and I havent tried lightroom yet or downloaded the trial. Im still stuck on CS2 hahaha cause it has all the tools I need and its basic. Light room looks awesome though.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 04, 2010 12:49 PM GMT
    Lightroom is a great powerful tool for what it's designed for but really, if you know what you're doing you can do most [if not all, I haven't gone past LR2] of that stuff in Photoshop.

    I believe it's intended for old school photographers going digital but don't want to [or need to] invest in Photoshop. If you have a current [CS4 or 5] version of Photoshop, you really don't need Lightroom if all you're doing is photography.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 04, 2010 6:51 PM GMT
    Hmm, some light misinformation is being disseminated here (in my opinion). Adobe Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop are very different products, made for different purposes. I like to think of it this way:

    Adobe Lightroom = Adobe Bridge + Adobe Camera Raw

    Adobe Photoshop = Adobe Lightroom (via Camera Raw and Bridge) + the ability to perform significant digital editing.

    Lightroom can be photographers best friend because it catalogs thousands of photos superbly and does so using metadata that is stored in a central database away from the photos themselves. This combined with Lightrooms ability to perform non-destructive and dramatic adjustments to RAW digital files make it a premier tool. It does not, on the other hand, replace Photoshop's ability to perform significant digital editing to photos and make artistic, finite adjustments to details.

    Here's a link to a photo I editing for my potfolio: http://www.flickr.com/photos/daxalexander/5230919502/

    I took it using my Nikon DSLR tethered to my laptop using Lightroom 3's Capture function. I made some exposure adjustments (basically fake bracketing) in Lightroom, and then took it into photoshop for a great deal of finite airbrushing, making, and compositing. I wouldn't have been able to achieve the photo without using both.

    Again, this is just my opinion for what it's worth.

    D.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 11:36 PM GMT
    daxmillion saidHmm, some light misinformation is being disseminated here (in my opinion). Adobe Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop are very different products, made for different purposes. I like to think of it this way:

    Adobe Lightroom = Adobe Bridge + Adobe Camera Raw

    Adobe Photoshop = Adobe Lightroom (via Camera Raw and Bridge) + the ability to perform significant digital editing.

    Lightroom can be photographers best friend because it catalogs thousands of photos superbly and does so using metadata that is stored in a central database away from the photos themselves. This combined with Lightrooms ability to perform non-destructive and dramatic adjustments to RAW digital files make it a premier tool. It does not, on the other hand, replace Photoshop's ability to perform significant digital editing to photos and make artistic, finite adjustments to details.

    Here's a link to a photo I editing for my potfolio: http://www.flickr.com/photos/daxalexander/5230919502/

    I took it using my Nikon DSLR tethered to my laptop using Lightroom 3's Capture function. I made some exposure adjustments (basically fake bracketing) in Lightroom, and then took it into photoshop for a great deal of finite airbrushing, making, and compositing. I wouldn't have been able to achieve the photo without using both.

    Again, this is just my opinion for what it's worth.

    D.

    Agree completely. LR is excellent in cataloging photos, enabling you to store them efficiently if you build a smart folder structure, and can facilitate an efficient workflow. It also lets you do many basic editing functions without having to go to PS. However, if you are into more advanced PS editing features, LR will not replace them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 06, 2010 12:23 AM GMT
    daxmillion saidHmm, some light misinformation is being disseminated here (in my opinion). Adobe Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop are very different products, made for different purposes. I like to think of it this way:

    Adobe Lightroom = Adobe Bridge + Adobe Camera Raw

    Adobe Photoshop = Adobe Lightroom (via Camera Raw and Bridge) + the ability to perform significant digital editing.

    Lightroom can be photographers best friend because it catalogs thousands of photos superbly and does so using metadata that is stored in a central database away from the photos themselves. This combined with Lightrooms ability to perform non-destructive and dramatic adjustments to RAW digital files make it a premier tool. It does not, on the other hand, replace Photoshop's ability to perform significant digital editing to photos and make artistic, finite adjustments to details.

    Here's a link to a photo I editing for my potfolio: http://www.flickr.com/photos/daxalexander/5230919502/

    I took it using my Nikon DSLR tethered to my laptop using Lightroom 3's Capture function. I made some exposure adjustments (basically fake bracketing) in Lightroom, and then took it into photoshop for a great deal of finite airbrushing, making, and compositing. I wouldn't have been able to achieve the photo without using both.

    Again, this is just my opinion for what it's worth.

    D.


    That makes a lot of sense, for me I guess it works so well because all I ever do is adjust light/color/noise adjustment. But it looks like your work requires much more powerful tools than mine.

    The quick collection has cut my post processing time in half.