whu-1 wrote in post #13124663
I’ll rephrase the question if work flow/Cataloging was not a issue and you had ddp and elements 9 , what would you miss from lightroom 3 that’s not possible not in ddp/elements ?
Well, I'll hazard a guess that most of us Lightroom users find Lightroom to be quite efficient in how we can do most if not all of our work on most of our photos.
This is from a combination of the integrated interface and a lot of tools and capabilities that can make a person's workflow really flow.
Now you did make a comment that you don't shoot much of a volume of photos, whereas those that do tend to look to Lightroom and then Photoshop CSx because of their abilities to do so much with large shoots and such.
So, I find myself working on all kinds of sizes, anything from one or two quick shots of something up past a thousand on an active event day.
My typical walk-around is, I'd say, in the area of 200 photos, unless it's a full-day or at least a several hour excursion.
And, Lightroom makes working on that a pretty smooth and efficient process in various ways.
So, as my photographic activity was picking up (as an amateur/enthusiast, not a professional), I had been happy with Elements (using version 4 back then), but began to feel the constraints on my productivity. At the time the "step up" was to Photoshop CS2. Lightroom was under development and was talked about, and I kept my eye on things because there was a lot about the talk that made sense, but at the time CS2 gave me a real boost, so I was a happy camper.
And then, the LR Beta came out and I went for it, but it was buggy, and when the first release came out the various bugs had not been worked out, so I kept on with Photoshop and upgraded to CS3.
But, when LR1.2 came out, that second upgrade produced some great reports, and yeah, I jumped on it and have been happily using it ever since. And again, there was for me a productivity boost from the efficiencies I've mentioned.
So, as to your question, I'd say it boils down to the fact that Lightroom had all the tools of the Adobe Camera Raw software, and then by building up the interface and various nice tools with that Raw processor, it provides a platform where we can do a whole lot and do it more efficiently than either Elements or DPP, and we even prefer the efficiencies of the CSx apps, for as much work that we can do in LR.
But, as I said before, there will come a time when you will want/need an image editor, whether you are using Lightroom, DPP or the Camera Raw app, and then you will want either Elements on hand or Photoshop CSx, or one of the other capable apps that are out there.
And, I'll go back to what I said before...you are using DPP, an app that I do enjoy using, especially for the shorter, quicker shoots, and if I were you I wouldn't rush away from that too quickly, but I would pick up an image editor, and I consider Elements to be great to supplement your DPP work when needed.
Then, in time, you can learn about what else is out there, including Lightroom, but there are other nice apps out there as well. Take your time, read up on something that catches your interest, and be aware that many of these apps have free trials, so when you are ready to "get serious" then take advantage of the free trial.
In the meantime, have fun and enjoy your photography!
, 
)
!
