Adobe Photoshop Lightroom vs. Adobe Photoshop CS5
Lightroom vs. Photoshop?
“Do I need to buy both Adobe Photoshop Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop CS5?” Digital photographers ask me this question whenever I give lectures or lead workshops on either program. It’s a good question and one that deserves more than just a simple yes or no answer.
Each program has its own strengths, and although the two programs share some common features, they are not competitors. By design, each program fills its own unique niche.
Photoshop is the world’s leading pixel manipulator. There is no other program like it for complete control over the look and feel of your digital image. No other program offers the same level of local image repair or allows such artistic creativity. If you can dream it Photoshop can make it happen!
Photoshop rocks, but it is not an organizer of digital images. Photoshop is useless when you need to find your favorite images. Searching, sorting, and organizing are not part of its capabilities. These are Lightroom’s strengths.
Not only can Lightroom help you organize all of your files but it can also help you manage the whole digital imaging workflow. Lightroom is designed to help you from start to finish. You get the most bang for your buck once you learn to use Lightroom to empty your memory card, to sort through your files, to set your initial raw file conversion, and to push the finished product over out to the web or to your printer. Lightroom handles the whole chain of events with speed and grace whereas Photoshop really only functions as an image enhancer.
See the Adobe engineers never meant for one program to replace the other. For someone like me, who needs help both finding and enhancing my files, both program are essential. Knowing how to use them together is even better!
For more on what Lightroom does and how it interacts with Photoshop please click here.
Filed Under: (12) FAQ
About the Author: David Marx is a digital photography instructor whose engaging teaching style inspires photographers of all skill levels. David is an Adobe Certified Photoshop and Photoshop Lightroom Expert. David has led Adobe Photoshop / Photoshop Lightroom seminars and digital photography field workshops for The Rocky Mountain School of Photography, FirstLight Workshops, The American Society of Media Photographers, and the world-renowned Blackberry Farm Resort. To learn more about David's software seminars and field photography workshops, please visit 
Or use bridge with precision to organize images
Sounds like people aren’t using image processors with PS. It is easy to edit the raw files in PS . Then batch process the images from raw to Jpeg with a push of a button into a folder created my the user
You say adobe photoshop does not organize, but it does. You can easily mark each picture or groups of pictures and more than once. You can easily put them into albums. So if I take a birthday party I can make an album George’s 3rd birthday. Than I can take all the pictures of George, but if I can also tag grandma, uncle lee,etc. Much later say on georges 16th bday, I want to make a slide show of George I can search George and come up with every picture of him i took and tagged all the way back to the 3rd birthday. If during the party I took a picture of flowers or cake or kids I can take as such and when I need a picture of birthday cake can search that. It all depends if you take a few minutes when uploading to tag and sort. So with that in mind, what other advantage is Lightroom over photoshop? I too am sorting if there is an advantage to Lightroom. Thanks.
Dear Grammy,
The difference is that the Adobe Bridge is a multi-media browser. It was never designed for professional-grade image organization. Adobe Photoshop Lightroom, on the other hand, was designed for maximum speed and efficiency. Perhaps a demonstration like the one in our tutorial on Searching with Metadata in Adobe Photoshop Lightroom will better demonstrate how much faster Lightroom is than the Adobe Bridge.
–
David Marx
So, I’m running into a problem of trying to decide what I want to get. I thought I had it all figured out until I was looking closer and found out Lightroom 4 won’t run in Windows XP. I can still get Lightroom 3 to use, but wonder if I should get CS6 instead since it will actually run on XP. The cheapest option would be to just go with Lightroom 3, second would be to upgrade to Windows 7 and get Lightroom 4, but I’m happy with XP and don’t want to upgrade until I really need to. What would your recommendation be?
Dear Melanie,
I am not sure that I can give you good advice here. If you are happy working with Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3 and Windows XP right now then why change anything? If there are holes in your workflow or new tools that you think will help then perhaps an upgrade will help. But Adobe Photoshop Lightroom and Photoshop CS5 / 6 serve very different purposes so the next question would have to be which tools do you really need?
Ultimately the answer is going to be a more modern operating system, something that can handle 64-bit processing code, and lots more ram. Essentially I am saying that eventually a new computer is the answer by why make this leap right now if everything is working and you are happy?
–
David Marx
Hi , i really want to know the principal different between lightroom and the programs of graphic design , like photoshop ..
But the differences in the edition of the photos more than the organization.
THANKS
Dear Daniela,
The difference is that Adobe Photoshop Lightroom is not a graphic design program. Lightroom is a photographer’s workflow tool. It helps folks like me organize, enhance, and share photography in a fast and efficient manner. Adobe Photoshop is not strictly photographer’s tool nor is it fast and efficient. Adobe Photoshop is a huge program that serves a diverse market base of photographers, web designers, graphic designers, animator, videographers, etc. It is vastly more creative and more powerful than Lightroom.
But this creative freedom and the power come at a price. Photoshop is very hard to master and even in the right hands still a very inefficient tool for repetitive tasks like emptying a memory card or posting photos to a social media site. Each program serves its own purpose. The truly clever will learn to utilize all of these tools and more in their quest for unlimited artistic creativity.
–
David Marx
Wow, David Marx … I just recently came across some of my notes from your digital class @ SI, and here you are writing the first post in my google search for advice on the question Photoshop or Lightroom? (Or, both?)
Can you say a bit about whether one or the other works better for printing, particularly when using paper profiles? Does one or the other play better with Genuine Fra…er … Perfect Resize? Also, is the organizing possible with Lightroom really better than with Bridge?
thanks!
Dear Michael J,
Nice to hear from you again. Glad to hear that I finally made to the top of the Google Pagerank for something!
All of these answers are just my biased opinions but I would suggest that Lightroom is the vastly superior program for photographic organization. Bridge is a far better tool when dealing with multimedia projects that include photography, audio, video, illustration, etc. Bridge is more powerful but less efficient for someone working with just photography. For image enhancement Lightroom + Photoshop + additional toys like the plugins from Nik Software is the ultimate combination.
Printing is a bit more complicated to answer. Printing from Adobe Photoshop Lightroom is far easier and far more efficient especially now that Lightroom 4 offers soft-proofing. Photoshop probably gives the ultra-fine artist a bit more control but it is just so much more difficult to repeat all the steps print after print.
I think that either of these programs will play well with Perfect Resize (Genuine Fractals.) I think this but don’t know it because I gave up on that software years ago. Now that our camera’s create such high mega-pixel files, and with the interpolation improvements to both Photoshop and Lightroom, I no longer feel the need for third-party resizing software. Again just my misguided opinions and I am sure that there are blog readers out there who will vehemently disagree with all of these suggestions!
More than anything else I would recommend Adobe Photoshop Lightroom because it is a lot of fun. Once you master it working on images is fast, fluid, and efficient.
–
David Marx
I appreciate the discussion but what about using Photoshop with Bridge.
I have found that it works well for me in organizing photos and deleting what I do not want to save when I unpack a camera memory.
What does lightroom do that I can not do in Bridge plus photoshop, (besides make books and movies)
Also I occasionally shoot raw. How is Lightroom better for this?
Dear Jon Weber,
Both Adobe Photoshop Lightroom and the Adobe Bridge are professional-grade tools. Both have their strengths and their weaknesses. Lightroom shines when searching, sorting, and repairing blocks of images. Bridge shines when you need to work with photos, videos, animations, and audio files at the same time. Once you master Lightroom it’s fluid integrated workflow is much than the faster than the Bridge. Power Photoshop users though who learn to write actions, batches, and scripts can accomplish amazing using the Bridge.
–
David Marx
I recently started using Lightroom 3.6 64bit and am very very happy with the quick results it returns. In a matter of minutes, almost all of my photos are transformed from ‘okay’ to works of art and the best part is that it happens so quickly and simply. Of course learning about digital editing techniques and needing a good knowledge of various color compositions and blends etc is a prerequisite for fast editing and bringing out the masterpieces in each photo but even with a few hours, a novice can use Lightroom and churn out amazing edits one after the other. I can only however speak from Lightroom’s perspective as I haven’t used Photoshop yet but am considering it for some pixel level editing I want to have the options to.
Picasa is a really simple program to use and good results can be obtained from it too in a minute or two. Lightroom I found seems to miss some of the simpler but more user controlled tools that Picasa has for example and Lightroom doesn’t. A handy tool that love about Picasa is the ability to apply soft focus on a specific area and even more, the user being able to specify where exactly the user wants soft focus to be. Simple things like that I feel are sadly overlooked in Lightroom.
I sometimes use Corel PaintShop Pro X4 for some small effects tasks that Lightroom cannot do if I want to finnish of a perfect shot. I feel that if Lightroom could have an improved Effects section where the user can specify EXACLTY what is needed where and how much, I would probably never look at any other software package other than Lightroom.
Lightroom is almost all I ever use and BY FAR the program recommended by me for my touch up needs apart from a small effects editing supplement that I prefer from Corel PaintShop Pro.
Dear Winston,
Thanks for sharing your experiences. I have never worked with PaintShop so I am glad to hear that it plays well for you with Adobe Photoshop Lightroom. If localized soft focus is your goal then PaintShop, or Photoshop, is probably the best tool but you can create similar effects using the Local Adjustment Brush in Lightroom with a negative clarity or sharpness setting. Laura Shoe has a video demonstrates these techniques on her website.
–
David Marx
After using Photoshop for a while and recently trying Lightroom, I can say that Lightroom is confusing and completely obtuse. Photoshop is very easy to get into. Lightroom, I just don’t get. I’ve only spent about 3 hours with it, but within 3 hours of using photoshop, I understood the menus and how to use the tools. Lightroom is just… obtuse.
Hi Mike,just a little tip, when you need to edit your image, go and used Photoshop, but if you want to Enhance the overall tonality or want to organize your image(s), go with Lightroom. I recommend Lightroom in Enhancing images as you can enhance bunch of images in a single click. Do include both Application in your Digital workflow and you will achieve the best result.
Cheers
Hello there, You’ve performed an incredible job. I will certainly digg it and in my opinion suggest to my friends. I am confident they’ll be benefited from this web site.
Photoshop is the best for me. Photoshop is easier to edit, cut my photos. Both of them have their own strength. But i like Photoshop. PH CS6!
Being a full time professional wildlife guide has given me the chance to take 100,000′s of images, but no time to do anything with them – and in 90% of the time I download to DVD’s and storage drives without having time to even scan through the images. The recession has given me the break and have bought a new computer Lightroom 3 and photoshop CS5. I have so far uploaded 78,000 images into Lightroom 3, key-wording as I go and for the first time I have a quick easy way to find any image from across all those years of clicking – fantastic. I have two more years of images to upload from CD’s, DVD’s and small storage drives and then i will make a start with CS5. But Lightroom has been an incredible program to work with – fast, intuitive, user friendly and seemingly unlimited options for the task I am undertaking – getting a huge number of images cross referenced, filed and Key-worded. – my thanks to the Lightroom team.
While reading this post I actually downloaded the trial version of Lightroom to test it. I am a digital painter/designer/wedding photographer and the photographer in me could really use Lightroom as I can quickly edit hundreds to thousands of photos as opposed to Photoshop where it would take me significantly longer. For things like paintings, effects, heavy manipulation, etc. Photoshop is my weapon of choice. It seems that most if not all editing features in Lightroom can be found within Camera Raw and Photoshop but to me that increase in workflow that Lightroom offers makes it worth buying.
I tried Lightroom 3 and Photoshop CS5 in college. So far, I like photoshop more than lightroom because it was easier for me to edit and using scripts, actions, filters, etc. In lightroom, it is limited to some point where photoshop can handle. Furthermore, Lightroom is organizer workflow and editing program, you can do the organizer in Adobe Bridge same way as Lightroom which is free with Photoshop CS5. I do most of HDR processing with Photomatrix and Topaz Adjust. Here my recommendation, dont take my word for it, just see it for yourself.
Adobe Bridge + Photoshop CS5 + Photomatrix
If I could only have one of the programs, I’d have Photoshop, recognizing it is at least twice the price of LR3 and at least three times as complicated.
… furthermore, if PS will do everything and MORE, why would I want LR instead (besides price)?
Dear O,
There are no rights and wrongs here. One program does not replace the other. Adobe Photoshop Lightroom is a workflow tool. It handles the entire process. Adobe Photoshop CS5 and to some extent Photoshop Elements are specialists in the image enhancement phase of the game only. Running a photography business at the professional level these days requires understanding the strengths and weaknesses of multiple programs. My advice– try the free trial of each and see what works for you.
–
David Marx
Again, I am still left extremely puzzled on a decision. I read one post and decide to get LR, and then I read the following post and I’m sold on PS. lol
I take a lot of pictures, but I am an organized person, so I don’t feel like that is a selling feature for me just to get LR. I want to be able to change colors, piece together panoramas, overlap 2 layers from 2 different exposures to get the best of both clouds and foreground… so what program sounds like it would be best for that? I take lots of animal, outdoorsy, scenic shots.
I think of it as this, LR is a nice paint brush to cover and make the whole canvas pop out as well organize em with a little finesse, where as PS is the small precision tip pen for if you need the complicated quirks or quibbles to be done you can clean it well.
Most of my peers think more highly of PS than LR, but as someone who often works multiple photos and I need them done and organized within a professional time limit, LR is where its at!
Dear Jamie Heron,
Adobe Photoshop CS5 is the better program for this sort of pixel manipulation.
–
David Marx
Whinch one is better for adding and taking out, I want to take pics of women for there Husbands but alot want me to take out Tattoos or make their heels a diff color…. So Lightroom or Photoshop?
I am finally taking the step into serious photography and do not have either program. I am wondering which to buy. I can’t afford both right now and want to get the biggest bang for my buck, could you suggest which one to buy first? I do a lot of equine, and landscape, but am also doing a lot more in special events (ie, restaurant openings, weddings, etc) Can you suggest one? Thanks
You’ll get the most bang for your buck with Lightroom. I almost never use Photoshop for photography-related work any more.
PS Rocks, LR Sucks
Hi Brenda, I would recommend Lightroom as your concern is more into Photography, Lightroom allows you to organized your Photographs and you can easily enhance the overall tonality, exposure, lens correction, etc. of several images at a single click. You will need Photoshop if you need to edit / composite your image(s), enjoy…
I’m hoping this thread hasn’t been closed, because after reading through the questions and answers…I have more questions.
I’m still a beginning photographer and new to post-processing. I have Elements 8 and I’ve been considering moving to Lightroom or Photoshop in the future. So, am I understanding correctly that Lightroom doesn’t handle layers and textures? I use textures on a lot of my photos to create painterly images. And, my other question…I was told by a flickermate that when processing images to always flatten the layers rather than merge them. I think the idea was to save space and that flickr could handle the flattened images better. From what I’m reading here, my images should be stored at their full size? What is the difference between flattened layers and merged layers when printing the image?
I hope these questions aren’t to elementary, but, like I said, I’m am really just beginning in my journey with photography.
Thank you!
Suzette
Re read the article, LR´s forte is organizing, RAW to jpegs manipulation, doesn´t have layers, if you need layers buy PS or PSP
PS also has Bridge to do not as much but some of LR functions, you can also try Picasa which is free
Dear Semi Pro,
Thanks! Contractions, commas, and the proper use of “than” vs. “then” are not my strong suit. I appreciate the careful proofreading.
–
David Marx
I am using the LR3-PhotoshopCS5 combination. Very well integrated. I am concerned about the file sizes. Every time I come back from Photoshop the file size increased considerably. Can I do some work in Photoshop using smart objects etc to keep the file size down, i.e. not convert into pixels.
What are the enhancements that can be done in Photoshop before going back to LR3 without file bloating?
Tom
Dear Tom Bryant,
There is a trade-off here between file size and long-term flexibility. There are a number of things that you could do in Adobe Photoshop that would reduce the size of your .psd, or .tif files, but I don’t advise doing so. Using a lower bit-depth, or flattening your layers, would dramatically reduce your file’s size but at a terrible price. My advice is don’t worry about it. Disk space is so cheap these days that I cannot justify making any changes to your Photoshop routine simply to save storage space. If you really need more storage space then please check out our external hard drive recommendations before making irreparable changes to your Photoshop files.
–
David Marx
So this information is very good but I am still very confused as to what I need.
I am a start up photographer. I am hoping to start a business in family photography. I also will shoot other things as a hobby but want to focus my business around family.
I currently am just using Paint.net to make slight adjustments to my photos but I need more power. I want to be able to make all the basic adjustments (brightness, contrast, hue etc..) but I also want to be able to get creative with colors, colorization, vignettes, borders and such. I also want the ability to touch up blemishes, remove objects that distract from the image, and well, I am not quite sure what else.
As a student I have the option to purchase a student license at a greatly reduced price so initially I thought I would just go with PS CS5 since I can get it so cheap. But as I read this board I am not sure if that is the right choice. I want something powerful but also don’t want a huge learning curve or something that takes a ton of time. I am sure I can get by with Elements but if I am going to pump $80 into something I want to make sure it is going to hold me for long term. So putting the extra money in up front for something better appeals to me rather than buying again down the road. But then again, I don’t want to get CS5 if it is going to be a too complicated and time consuming.
It is my goal to take technically good photos and just alter to perk them up but lets be real, there is going to be many times when you get “that look” from someone in a photo that you have to have but the photo is sub-par and needs a lot of help.
So, with that……any suggestions??
Thanks
Dear Nikki,
Best of luck with the new business. This is not a one shoe fits all world. No one tool does everything. Adobe Photoshop CS5 is a wonderful tool for things like serious portrait retouching, compositing, and artistic effects like borders. Adobe Photoshop Lightroom is a superior tool for the workflow– copying files off your memory card, enhancing the raw data, marking your favorites, and sending them to social media sites like Facebook or Flickr. Learn to use the best of both tools and you will be happier then if you try to do everything with just one option.
–
David Marx
Bite the bullet get Photoshop, and meanwhile download Picasa which has a lot of fun and nice features for $0
I have been struggling with this choice forever. Just using the programs I got the point that light room was more for management and photoshop was for editing. I really wish they would integrate both programs seamlessly.
Dear Mike Behnken,
I would argue that these two programs are very well integrated. I use Lighroom for all of my image management, raw file enhancement, slideshow, and printing needs. When I need Photoshop’s precision and power I just press the Edit in Photoshop button. (Edit > Edit in Photoshop.) Lightroom starts up Photoshop for me and then it automatically passes a copy of my raw file over. When I am done working in Photoshop I simply hit Save and Close. As soon as I jump back into Lightroom my file’s thumbnail and preview automatically update themselves to reflect the changes that I just made in Photoshop. It’s pretty seamless as long as you understand how digital camera raw files differ from other file formats and as long as you always use the Edit > Original command when working with your existing Photoshop (.psd) files.
What I would like to see is much tighter integration between Lightroom and Adobe’s video editors like Adobe Premiere and Premiere Elements. Although Lightroom can organize and preview video files it cannot send them over to Adobe’s video editing tools yet.
–
David Marx
Lr was born as a more advance version of the free-with-Photoshop Adobe Bridge, which still ships with PS
Thanks for the response!
but I am finding that tagging and culling images in Photomechanic, then doing the processing in LR3 is meeting my needs.
Sorry for the delay.
I am on the trial of CS5 and it is faster than CS3
I usually do two things that are manipulating an image: Selective color and black “framing” or vignetting. I believe both can be done in LR3 but still haven’t grasped them as quickly as PS due to familiarity.
Sidenote. I get asked too which program. If I had to choose one, it would be LR, as I used to use ACDSee way back when. If Adobe had both products doing the same thing, then that would be bad business on their part. Why have a 300.00 program do everything an 800.00 program can?
Great discussion. Thanks to all.
I went from Elements to CS4 last year, and honestly, now I wonder why. CS4 isn’t as user friendly and I don’t find myself doing anything more intensive than what I did in Elements.
In speaking with a pro nature photographer recently, he said he uses Lightroom exclusively. He says he wants to make the shot “right” in the beginning and would rather spend more time in the field than in front of his computer, something I can certainly relate to.
Having just purchased CS4, I am hesitant to buy LR, but may have to take a closer look at it.
My question about LR: someone said earlier that it’s non-destructive, but you mention that it doesn’t work with layers. Is there preservation of the original file, or does the user have to create a new file after each action?
Thanks.
Dear Glenn,
Different software takes different approaches to non-destructive image enhancement. With Adobe Photoshop, and Photoshop Elements, features like layers, alpha channels, and smart objects allow for non-destructive editing. The Adobe engineers took a different approach with Lightroom. In Lightroom, like in Adobe Camera Raw, all changes are saved to the file’s metadata. Everything that you do–keywords, colored labels, dust spot removal, white balance correction, even cropping–is stored at the metadata level. ACR and Lightroom then use this information to change the file’s thumbnail or preview image. Regardless of file type, the actual pixel are never altered.
So a better way of putting it might be to say that Lightroom ALWAYS uses layers but that the layered changes are hidden from the user and that these changes can never be flattened down into the original image.
–
David Marx
Before plunking some $$$ try Google´s Picasa, which organizes, reads RAW, exports other formats, has many action-like features like Lomography in a non destructive manner as LR for the price of $0
I do a handful of weddings a year and tons of sporting events ranging from kids soccer to NCAA Final Four Lacrosse.
Over a year ago I invested in Photomechanic, strictly for weeding out images and tagging them. IMHO, nothing comes close to the speed because the software takes the embedded jpeg in your raw file as the preview. I then go into ACR and make changes there and in CS3.
I am on the fence as to whether or not switching to LR would be of benefit. I like doing selective coloring and find it a bit easier in PS.
Thoughts?
Dear Anthony,
Nothing beats Photomechanic for speed or Adobe Photoshop CS5 for total image control. Adobe Photoshop Lightroom is not designed to replace either of these programs but in my opinion it surpasses all others when you need a searchable database of your own photography and for working with digital camera raw files. While it is true that Lightroom and Photoshop CS5 share the same raw processing algorithms, Lightroom’s interface is so much smoother and far more efficient.
In my opinion, professional photographer’s need to learn to use the best of each program and to continually refine their workflows. Rather than looking for a single program that does everything I think you should look for ways to use the best features of X program plus the best features of Y.
–
David
[...] The Lightroom Lab [...]
Hi there,
I have Photoshop 6. Can I upgrade this to any Photoshop CS at all or will have have to buy a new full version?
Is it a better option to buy Lightroom 3 and use my PS6 for retouching?
Many thanks.
Elisabeth
Dear Elisabeth,
You cannot upgrade from Photoshop 6 to Photoshop CS 5. Sadly, your version is too old. If you want the features of CS 5 then you will have to purchase the complete product rather than just the upgrade. That part is easy for me to answer.
Part two of your question is harder because it depends on what you do. If you are shooting with a modern digital camera, particularly using a raw file format, then I would definitely encourage you to invest in Lightroom 3. Photoshop 6 is a fine choice for simple repairs to pixel-based images but its ten years behind in its tool set. It cannot work with raw files, smart objects, or any of the cool new content aware options. It’s also really limited in the way that it handles 16-bit files. But without seeing your work and knowing more about what you do I cannot say for sure that you need any of these new features…..
–
David
[...] Center – Lightroom 2 | Learn Adobe Photoshop, Lightroom and Digital Photography | NAPP Lightroom vs. Photoshop | TheLightroomLab.com | Written by David Marx The Photographer's Life Lightroom 2 vs Photoshop CS4: Pro Digital Talk Forum: Digital Photography [...]
Alex,
Not sure which specific plugins you’re referring to. There are no layers in Lightroom; that’s correct. There’s also no “Fade” command in Lightroom to reduce an effect that you’ve previously applied. That being said, Lightroom offers lots of control in ways which are easier to manage that they are in Photoshop.
Some plugin manufacturers may have opacity or fade commands built in, but I’m not familiar with any of those. Let us know which plugins you’re looking at so we can try to help out.
-Scott
I have both CS5 and Lightroom and I’m now trying to decide whether to buy some plug ins for either one or both. Because of the price difference (half to buy the plug ins for Lightroom than it is to buy it for CS5) I’m leaning towards this version but I have a quick question….
I believe Lightroom does not work with layers therefore, when I apply a specific correction / enhancement, etc. can I change its “opacity or strength” (this is possible in photoshop ..) or do I have to apply it fully ?
Thanks for your help
Kevin,
You bet! Lightroom is a powerful image editor/enhancer. As David mentioned above, Photoshop is the gold standard for pixel-level image editing, but Lightroom allows users to do a wide variety of both global (image-wide) and local (specific areas of an image) adjustments quickly and efficiently.
Start by reading David’s Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Introduction to get a good overview of what Lightroom can do and how it interacts with Photoshop (when needed).
You can then proceed to read articles in our Enhancing (Basic) and Enhancing (Advanced) categories for more in-depth instructions on enhancing your images with Lightroom.
I’ll end by saying that although I still use Photoshop a lot for experimentation and design, almost all of my image processing and enhancement is done right in Lightroom!
Enjoy,
Scott
Can Lightroom instead of Photoshop be used for image enhancement?
Yes, with limitations. Also it works in a non destrutive manner. It doesn´t do layers.
Try Google´s Picasa, it´s Free, Easy and Fun
[...] This article is a follow-up to a recent post on how Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Photoshop Lightroom differ. [...]
Dear Tom,
I liked your question on how the Adobe Bridge and Adobe Photoshop Lightroom differ so much that it turned my answer into another post. You can read all about it here.
http://thelightroomlab.com/2010/02/adobe-photoshop-lightroom-vs-the-adobe-bridge/
–
David
Good comparison between Lightroom and Photoshop, however where does Adobe Bridge fit into the mix?
Thanks
I have been using Photoshop since V3 but the more fluent I become in Lightroom the less I do in PS. I wish that LR would let me keep the image at 100% when I want to use the angle tool to straighten an horizon. (Can’t remember if I have checked that in LR3).
Hi David,
Thank you for the reply. Your opinion is very helpful. I will then go after the 64 bit versions of the softwares as I can afford them. Priority will be the Elements upgrade so I can work in 16 bit. I will wait for Lightroom 3 due around the end of April. My Mitsubishi Diamond Pro will have to suffice for a while. I have been doing a lot of reading on monitors and have decided it will be a NEC higher end model or the DreamColor.
The issue for me is a monitor that actually displays the image as it should be seen. Since most do not do this, the advantages will be control of the color for printing. I am also doing some IR panoramic stitching but the noise in IR is a pain to deal with. Visual control will be nice.
I have noticed the photographic field is especially weak on Monitor reviews. These are so critical and yet there is damn little available out on the web. It is surprising how little this is discussed even in the photography forums and the related social groups.
So did you have fun working with Mr. Dewolf? IT is his book what is driving the component upgrade. I found the book at the University of Washington bookstore about a year and a half back. BTW, the book is not new, I think it is from 2006, unless you are talking about an updated edition. It has a lot of great information and the approach to image processing. I found a couple key facts buried in the book that would have better displayed up front. the use of good images showing his adjustements visually were better than most books. Last year when I was looking to do the upgrade then, I checked with Reindeer Graphics to see if they had a 64 bit version of Optipix. At the time they did not but maybe they have done it now.
I was out on one photo stitching site and found it interesting that people had not really found a way to make money from their images on the web. I suggested hitting the galleries and seeing if their images were a fit. Not to mention the possibilities of catering to the tourist trade, that is, with postcards, smaller prints in mats or rolled in carboard tubes. Cost wise for the market, is it cheaper to print your own or do it in bulk through Costco? I do not have the type of printer that would do larger prints for framing. For myself I use Moonphoto in Seattle. For everyone else I have used Costco. The issue for me is paper choice. I prefer a satin or semigloss finish, not gloss or lustre. I do as much as I can with as little as on hand.
CHEERS…Mathew Hargreaves
Thank you for the clarity of the products from a users point of view. My reading of the official Adobe literature would not have brought out how they were different.
The process of a complete new computer system for me to use is daunting. My main interest is panoramic photo stitching and actual paper printing. It is my view that what you see on the computer means nothing until it is printed.
The computer I have is a 12 year old pentium 2, 500 mgz, with a 20 gig hard drive. And utilizing photoshop 4, Elements 2 (that came with my Canon 300D), and PTgui 6.3. However I could only work in 8 bit images. Sigh. My old workhorse cost me $100 or less than $1 a month but not including actual electrical charges for it constant operation. What it all means is I could only stitch 4 photos together due to the 1.1 gig on the file memory cap.
So I now have a HP, 64 bit, 8 gigs and a quad core, with a 750 and 500 gig hard drives. The software upgrades will be immensly helpful and time saving. God, stitching in seconds rather than 10 to 15 minutes per stitch
Lightroom was the obvious choice for photo handling. Just add the top end PTgui in 64 bit and I will be having loads of fun again. Though some of the plugins will be acquired as I can afford them. Would the current Elements compliment Lightroom and be a good substitute over the full photoshop?
The goal with this new computer is to be able to develop vastly better images along the approach of George Dewolf for fine art photo printing. Hmmm, maybe I should learn how to shoot better pictures
The future is looking exciting for me again.
CHEERS…Mathew
Dear Mathew Hargreaves,
Sorry about the delay and thanks for the kind words. I too feel like the Adobe product descriptions fail to highlight the crucial difference here which is that Lightroom is a digital asset management and workflow tool whereas Photoshop is the world’s most powerful single image enhancer.
For your needs, I think that Photoshop Elements is an excellent choice and it plays very well with Lightroom. I think that the Lightroom + Elements combo is a very good use for your money. In all honesty I think that most photographers, even a lot of the professionals that I teach, would be perfectly happy with Lightroom and Elements. The Photoshop CS4 (soon to be CS5) is way more powerful but very few photographers ever need or utilize its full potential.
On a separate note, have you seen the new George DeWolfe’s Digital Photography Fine Print Workshop book? I am not a print master but I sure enjoyed reading it and assisting some of his classes.
best wishes with the new computer,
David
Thanks to all here for your excellent comments. I didn’t mean to imply that Lightroom is “just an organizer.” Like you Nat, I do 90% of my work in Lightroom too because;
a: Lightroom is non-destructive.
b: Lightroom is faster and more efficient than Photoshop.
c: Lightroom is a workflow program. I love the way that it carries me from import to image enhancement and then off to print, email, and the web. Photoshop has more options but without a lot of training its really hard to take a raw file process it, save an appropriate sized copy, and upload it to a site like Flickr. With Lightroom this flow from image ingestion to photo-sharing is a snap.
My point in this post though was to highlight the things that are completely unique in each program. For Lightroom thats the image database and for Photoshop its the power of layer masks and the creativity of compositing multiple images together plus all of the filters.
Thanks again and please keep those excellent comments going.
–
David
Thanks for this.
Just wanted to add that I think LR is far more than just an organizer. I do 95% of my edits in LR, saving myself an unbelievable amount of time, energy, and disk space. Then, for images that need more work, I open just those up in Photoshop. I don’t think I could give up either one!
In my case, as a photography “amateur” -so certainly not Pro- my winning couple is LR2 + Pixelmator.
All good points, David. I get this same question all the time, too. I’d like to add another perspective, from my own experience.
Since the early 1990s I’ve used Photoshop for editing/processing photos. Since Lightroom’s emergence, I now do probably 90% of all my photo work in Lightroom. The remaining 10% is only for specific situations requiring more than what Lightroom can do.
In my work, Photoshop (or Elements etc.) is still required for these situations:
1. Blending multiple images. If you need to merge exposures, make a panorama, or otherwise composite more than one photo together, you still need to do that outside Lightroom.
2. Heavy retouching. If you need to replace a section of dead, brown grass with a patch of green grass, remove a reflection from within a window, or other kinds of complex retouching, you need to do it in Photoshop.
3. Advanced processing and special effects. There are countless image processing plug-ins on the market for doing specialized processing in Photoshop. For example, if your image needs sophisticated noise reduction, you can use the Noiseware plug-in with Photoshop to do a much better job or noise removal than Lightroom can do. And, many people are really getting into the plug-ins from Nik, like Viveza and SilverFX. (Although these are also starting to be available as Lightroom plug-ins too.)
The bottom line is that Photoshop still reigns for heavy-duty, pixel-level processing, on an image-by-image basis.
That said, the more you use Lightroom, the less you’ll need Photoshop. I’ve found that using Lightroom encourages me to work harder to get shots right in the camera. Composition, cropping, exposure, etc. If you really nail it in the camera, your Lightroom workflow becomes super-easy and fast, and you can do everything you need right within Lightroom.
And even if you own Lightroom and Photoshop, I recommend you really work hard to do as much as you can in Lighroom before ever considering going into Photoshop.
In this way, I think Lightroom does compete with the comparatively clumsy combination of Bridge/ACR/Photoshop. For folks just getting into digital photography, or more experienced shooters who want to really simplify and streamline their workflows, Lightroom will often be the only software they need.