1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Lightroom v Photoshop

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by finerflower, Jan 29, 2015.

  1. finerflower

    finerflower Amin Fangrrl

    181
    Dec 11, 2013
    New Jersey (South)
    Holly
    Lightroom, I can handle. Photoshop, such a learning curve.

    I get so frustrated, I know what I want to do in Photoshop. However, when I start a little project, I get side tracked by all of the other features that it has. I have such intensive ADD when I mess with photoshop. Dang, I'm impressed by those who master the beast!
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    Photoshop was designed for graphic artists, so it's extremely complex and I believe that you can do university courses that predominantly focus on Photoshop. Lightroom was designed for photographers, who simply didn't need the complexity of Photoshop. Very few Photoshop owners have mastered its intricacies.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    What is it you are actually trying to do in Photoshop? These days I only use Photoshop merging images (like replacing eyes/faces/etc). Pretty much everything else I do in Lightroom, especially since they added the clone tool.
     
  4. robbie36

    robbie36 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2010
    Bangkok
    rob collins
    Photoshop is pretty brutal to begin with. I remember when I first started learning it - it would take me an hour to get through a 10 minute youtube 'how to' video. The problem is that a lot is quite counter intuitive - like blurring to sharpen. If you stick at it though, after a couple of months, you start picking things up much much faster.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Lawrence A.

    Lawrence A. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 14, 2012
    New Mexico
    Larry
    For me it is not a LR vs Photoshop matter. I develop my raw files to tiffs in LR - usually 16 bit - and then do the final work in Photoshop. I like using high pass masking to sharpen in Photoshop, and I like using a layer to sharpen part of the image selectively if it calls for it, or even adjust WB selectively in mixed light images, making a correction and then erasing the layer where it does not apply. It's a lot easier than dodging and burning with color filters, like in a darkroom. I like Lightroom, but any program that gave me a good tiff to work in Photoshop would work for me, provided I did not not hate it, like I do Silkypix. But Photoshop I simply can not do without. It is what I've been editing photos with for too long, and the stuff I use is second nature to me. That's not a prescription for everyone. Just saying how I like to work.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    I'm like Holly. I found PS to be so frustrating that I simply wouldn't do it. The tutorials had dozens of steps and I just didn't want to go there. I know it's okay once you are over the hump, like my daughter, but the time it takes to get there!

    So I was almost on my knees with gratitude when LR came out.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    I'm the same, I was using C1 in the early days, but because they were so slow at updating camera compatibility, I moved to LR.
     
  8. Clint

    Clint Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 22, 2013
    San Diego area, CA
    Clint
    Photoshop is very daunting and an extremely powerful program. I've been using it since 1994 and only felt proficient (meaning able to do most everything I wanted without doing research or buying book) with it after about three years. Today I'd bet I'm only proficient at 80% of what the program has to offer.

    For photographers, most simply do not need it let alone today's version. Almost all of what a photographer needs can be done in Photoshop 5.5. Changes since Photoshop 5.5 have just made some things easier and quicker.

    I came up with the following analogies to help some decide -
    Shooting JPEG is like using film and having a photo lab develop and print your photos.

    Lightroom is a cataloguing program as well as like custom film development and printing, at an advanced level.

    If you shoot thousands of photos and buy Lightroom simply for the cataloguing capabilities, it is worth the cost for that reason alone. And one can do basic editing in Lightroom and learn fairly quickly.
    Or if one becomes real proficient with the editing tools in Lightroom, you can do an extreme amount of photo editing without Photoshop. With some Lightroom plugins you can even use layers making it possible that Photoshop would never be needed, for many that go this route.

    Photoshop is for when one wants to alter the pixels or have total control over every editing detail that there is. But it comes at a cost of money and time. And with Adobe's change to the subscription model, if you no longer subscribe, you will lose most of what one would want Photoshop for to begin with.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    Want to see someone who is an expert at Photoshop: http://www.petereastway.com/f187518170. Many/most of his images don't even represent what was in the scene (reality in the remotest sense), he often creates things, combining images, yet keeps wining awards for his photography. While the images are very good, they are often artificial, you might as well have created them in a virtual reality environment like games.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Lawrence A.

    Lawrence A. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 14, 2012
    New Mexico
    Larry
    It is quite possible to use photoshop as a digital darkroom, though. You probably don't need the latest version. I could get by on PS7, for which I have a disc, but subscribe to CC mostly because it keeps me updated with LR and raw support.

    I am not interested in strange surrealistic effects, but I just find Photoshop to be an excellent photo processing program for my purposes. It is indeed more than I need, but I definitely need layers. It is not more outrageous than flashing paper or indulging in split development in a traditional darkroom, of color dodging and burning or splitting exposure between filter grades using multigrade papers. Photoshop can indeed be used to mostly graphic purposes, but it can be nicely targeted to traditionally representative photography too.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    At the moment, LR is fully supported with updates in the standalone mode, whether that continues is another issue. I suspect that Adobe is watching this space carefully, as there is much more competition than with PS.
     
  12. robbie36

    robbie36 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2010
    Bangkok
    rob collins
    Of course there is a sort of middle way which is Lightroom and PS Elements. For a lot of people Elements is easily enough for what they need (it isnt expensive and it is perpetual although it may well not be a lot cheaper that the LR+PS CC program.) With some people, at some point, your photos do become rather more graphic than photographic at which point you do really need PS.

    aaa4_1_of_2_.

    aaa4_2_of_2_.

    aaa5_1_of_1_.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  13. I had a brief look through his images but didn't specifically see any that had been merged or added to. Did you have any particular examples that I didn't find?

    I'm actually curious to know whether anyone is paying the prices that he is asking for prints; $390 for an unframed 20" print, $1090 for a 40" canvas. For the price of a few prints I could travel to most of those places myself and make prints from my own images!
     
  14. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    I tried to find one specific example where he actually combined/removed elements and created an image that physically didn't exist (it was fully explained in one of his magazines years ago and I think may have been online). Eastaway is so good at PS that you won't know that he's more or less created an image that doesn't exist. I guarantee that were you to go to any of the locations that he attributes to his images, you won't see anything but a vague resemblance of what he shows, if that.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. robbie36

    robbie36 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2010
    Bangkok
    rob collins
    My feeling is that there are a lot of grey areas between what 'is', and 'is not' acceptable in PS. I dont have any commercial interest in my photos so I do just what I like. But here as an example is a photo I took last week....

    aaa6_1_of_2_.

    And here is the edited version... I clearly didnt like the motobike in the photo so I took it out. It is fine by me but I guess others would not be so keen...

    aaa6_2_of_2_.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    I'm old school, if there's something in the scene you don't like, move it; if you can't move it, change your perspective; if you can't change your perspective, crop it; if you can't crop it, deal with it. Otherwise, don't take a photograph.
     
  17. I think that we all know that there is much that you can with a photograph that can take it away from reality. The constant use of a heavy vignette is something that I really don't like, but otherwise I don't take too much issue with Peter Eastway's processing effects.
     
  18. Harvey Melvin Richards

    Harvey Melvin Richards Photo Posting Junkie

    Feb 15, 2014
    Southwest Utah
    I have had PS for a couple of months, and I finally opened it the other day. It wasn't as painful as I expected, and without any help from anywhere, I turned this first photo into the second photo. Obviously, not a complicated transformation, but I was happy with the results and with how little effort it took.

    16344646535_6b1735576c_b.
    M1017369-1
    by Harvey Richards, on Flickr.

    16364223081_d39f9478c0_b.
    M1017369-2
    by Harvey Richards, on Flickr
     
    • Like Like x 2
  19. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    In his photo magazine, he regularly showed how he manipulated images to get the results that he shows on his website. I always remember one shot (for which I think he received an award) that involved almost the creation of the image from other image using PS. It was a shot of a building in Iceland I think. At least in his magazine he is quite open about manipulation, but this is where the debate about where photography ends and Photoshopping begins often comes about. While his results are stunning, they don't reflect anything that you or I would see were we to go to the same spot. I'm not averse to using PS myself, but rarely do I try and go to those extremes and when I do, it's patently obvious. I guess this is the eternal debate about when is it photography and when is it PS.
     
  20. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Jay
    I hear you! Photoshop was a very steep learning curve (and still is) for me coming from Lightroom. So much so that I didn't use PS for a couple of years. I finally found my key to getting off the ground with it was to follow along with a couple Scott Kelby and Calvin Hollywood videos on KelbyOne such as Scott's "Light It, Shoot It, Retouch It" that walk you through the steps.

    I have to say that I truly believe that mastering even a few basic things in Photoshop like portrait retouching, dodging & burning, etc. have really taken my work to the next level in the past 6-9 months.

    It's not about creating things that aren't there or turning your work into photo-illustrations, but more about being able to selectively emphasize and put on a final polish to a photograph that goes beyond what LR really offers. Frequency separation techniques, sharpening tools, dodging and burning, tonal controls, etc. in PS are simply more flexible and powerful. For some images I definitely find it worth breaking out the somewhat more complicated Photoshop toolset, even if I don't need it all the time.
     
    • Like Like x 2