Best $25 I've spent lately.

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by oldracer, Jan 1, 2012.

  1. oldracer

    oldracer Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 1, 2010
    Adobe Lightroom 3 Video Workshop: 15 tutorials on the Lightroom Develop Module

    I got an email from Adobe a couple of days ago and this guy's video training was mentioned. I looked at the free sample (Little Mule Productions - The Lightroom Video Workshop for The Develop Module), then signed up and spent most of the day yesterday going through the videos.

    It's a bargain. Well worth the tiny investment. I'm going to buy his series on the Library module today.

    Support is also great. I emailed him and got a response within an hour. YMMV, of course, but I was impressed.
    • Like Like x 1
  2. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    They look like well done tutorials but mostly for Lightroom. I have been a Photoshop user since version 5 and have never seen the use for an extra software package , especially at the price Adobe wants. Other than having a more user friendly interface is there anything Lightroom does that Photoshop doesn't?
  3. whatisinthebag

    whatisinthebag Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 23, 2011
    Central California
    Real Name:
    A few hundred to a few thousand dollars less cost wise.

    The learning curve is a bit shorter for lightroom as well, since it targets photography and not the entire image centered creativity gamut.
  4. John M Flores

    John M Flores Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 7, 2011
    Somerville, NJ
    Lightroom helps keep me organized. I can...

    - tag photos with keywords
    - rate photos from 1 to 5 stars
    - add Titles, Captions, Copyright, etc info
    - Filter and sort on any of the above parameters as well as EXIF info (i.e., "Show me all of the photos I took with the GH2 and 20/F1.7 lens that I've rated 3 stars and better", "show me all the photos I've tagged with the 'Family' keyword", etc...)

    Lightroom is also non-destructive. It saves the settings (i.e., WB, exposure, sharpening, etc...) you apply to each photo and applies them every time you look at it. This saves disk space, and allows you to quickly copy settings from one photo to another.

    I used to do 95% of my PP in Photoshop. Now I do 95% of it in Lightroom.
  5. drizek

    drizek Mu-43 Veteran

    Aug 5, 2011
    Lightroom is designed for photography from the ground up. Import, edit and , catalog and export. Every tool there is focused on RAW photo editing. Doing things in regular photoshop is just clumsy in comparison. You might be able to get the same effect in the end, but it isn't just about being "easy". Its about efficiency. When you're processing 500 photos, you want Lightroom. If you're just PPing one picture, and you're already a photoshop pro, you might not see teh advantages.
  6. spinyman

    spinyman Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 19, 2010
    San Diego
    thanks for the link.I have been a jpeg shooter for years until a few weeks ago.Broke down and bought Lightroom3 and have been trying to figure it out ever since to no avail.This tutorial is, for me too, the best bucks spent this Christmas.
  7. oldracer

    oldracer Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 1, 2010
    OK, my thread so I guess I can contribute to thread drift if I want. :)

    @speedandstyle: John Flores listed some of the differences. Another important one is that Lightroom provides very good tools for winnowing multiple similar exposures down to one or two. IMHO it really is the better tool for photographers, though there will be infrequent instances where you want to supplement it with Photoshop or Elements.

    Said another way, Lightroom is Adobe Camera Raw on steroids plus an extensive image management system. Neither of Jardine's free sample videos will really show you the extent of the differences but you might get some hints by taking a look at them. And even if you stick with PS, I'd guess you would benefit from his ACR videos. (Again, I just ran across this George Jardine guy a couple of days ago and have no involvement with his business other than being a very happy customer.)

    @spinyman, drizek (and others): Don't mentally pigeonhole Lighroom (or ACR, for that matter) as a RAW file tool. Everything works exactly the same for JPGs and the two tools are equally valuable for both formats. In fact there is no indication from the UI which you are working on. Straighten, crop, color balance, fix converging verticals or lens vignetting, ... whatever you want to do is there for JPGs too. Of course a JPG may have less highlight detail for you to dig out or have other small issues due to the reduced amount of information in the file, but for most work I don't notice any difference.
  8. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I may have to give Lightroom another look. I notice it is marked down at B&H right now , almost half off in fact.
  9. Luke

    Luke Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jul 30, 2010
    Milwaukee, WI
    Real Name:
    I just watched 5 minutes of that free preview video and it looks like it is worth the $25. I bought Lightroom on sale a month ago and it's still boxed up ready for its' maiden voyage.
  10. BrotherBlah

    BrotherBlah New to Mu-43

    Jan 3, 2012
    Lightroom being nondestructive is the biggest benefit to me. No worry of ever accidentally modifying the original.

    Well worth the price IMO.
  11. oldracer

    oldracer Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 1, 2010
    Yeah. I think you'll be pleased.

    I did buy the Library video series. It is not nearly as much fun as the Develop series, but then managing a library is kind of dog work anyway. But it definitely was worth the money.

    Because I had bought both, Jardine also gave me free access to his Adobe Camera Raw series. This is an offer he has sort of unofficially made in the "comments" to the Develop video series. I think you have to email him and ask for it. I haven't looked at the series yet but I's sure it will also be worthwhile.
  12. Luke

    Luke Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jul 30, 2010
    Milwaukee, WI
    Real Name:
    Oh no, it sounds like he might get an EXTRA $25 from me, too. YIKES! The library part is what has kept me from installing already. I'm sure there are a few things that are kinda important to get right the first time you run it and I don;t want to screw that up.
  13. oldracer

    oldracer Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 1, 2010
    Yes, he does have some sensible suggestions on how to organize a library, file naming conventions, backup practices, etc.

    Truth be told, though, if you are already pretty well organized with photos in folders according to shoot or date, Lightroom should support what you have. The only no-no, IMHO, would be to have photos organized by subject matter somehow. Lightroom (and probably any photo database system) does that for you by using keywords. Hence, folders by subject become confusing and counterproductive since most photos will have multiple keywords. i.e., "Africa", "lion", "Kruger Park".

    It is also fairly easy to reorganize folder structures after you have loaded them up in Lightroom. But if you start having to move large numbers of individual photos around that could become kind of a PITA.
  14. dcassat

    dcassat Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 16, 2011
    As an IT guy my whole life, I've seen A LOT of software (from 1980 on). Lightroom is a refined product that works extremely well. I wholeheartedly recommend it as software in general and for photography in particular. If you don't want to mess with post processing than shoot JPEG, otherwise Lightroom is at the top of it's game for PP and the way to go, in my opinion.