Lightroom vs Adobe Photoshop

Moppie wrote in post #15923101
You can batch edit with ACR, not as smoothly and easily as you can in LR, and you can't add and remove files to the selection in ACR with the same level flexibility you have in LR.

Ok, so we've moved from flat out can't, to, not the same flexability.

Audionut11 wrote in post #15923134
Ok, so we've moved from flat out can't, to, not the same flexability.

The ability to batch edit in ACR is very different to how LR works.
There is no Sync, or Auto Sync in Bridge or ACR.

hmm I use the Lightroom for the majority of my work also and the CS5 for the more detailed stuff dodge and burn , skin and eyes or for cutting out the target and placing against different background both are nice tools to have and play on but the CS5 took me the longest to learn and still learning may pick up the CS6 soon.

Moppie wrote in post #15923218
The ability to batch edit in ACR is very different to how LR works.

That may be the case. But there is quite a significant difference between, "it can't", and, "well actually it can, just not the same"!

Moppie wrote in post #15923218
There is no Sync, or Auto Sync in Bridge or ACR.

Audionut11 wrote in post #15923089
You're talking about syncing RAW options (develop settings) right?

ive been using all those for yrs now & other ones
Ps for post edit has too many features u will rarely use & if u are cpu limited its not a handy prog
unless ur actually gonna try to manipulate the picture Lightroom is all good & is less cpu hungry
, but their is other progs that do the same & as much like Acdsee Pro or one that i felt in love with Perfect Photo Suite 7

so this is my prefered order of use

Simple post edit Lightroom /

Simple post edit with a lil twist Acdsee ( its pretty much the same as Lightroom but has more xtra fx)

Over the top Post edit & easy to use Perfect Photo Suite 7 <- this one if u dont have it in ur tools , i heavily suggest to go & get it
( i do have a few examples of the use of this super neat prog here http://k-liss.deviantart.com/ga​llery/ )

I have CS6, LR4.4, PSE11 and the latest DPP. I mostly use LR4.4 and I really like it. DPP is for when I shot raw. PSE11 used rarely. CS6 is just too complicated for me. I can't figure out where to start.

id suggest getting use to PS element before getting into Cs6 so yull get use to the tools & unless u actually need all those tools & are gonna do big photo manipulation Cs6 is not handy for post edit & do need alot of Cpu
Lightroom / Acdsee & Perfect Photo Suite 7 all takes Raw files

When you say ps is destructive what do you mean? I'm learning a lo from this thread! Is light room totally non destructive?

primoz wrote in post #15921278
PS CS2 is indeed several versions back, but that doesn't mean it's bad tool, and it certainly doesn't mean it's any worse then CS6 if you don't need few new functions CS6 brings (ok finally somehow managing more then one CPU is huge plus of CS6), CS2 is not any worse then CS6.

But don't you need something newer than CS2 to take advantage of the full dynamic range with 16-bit and 32-bit editing?

ed rader wrote in post #15922877
that's exactly what I do -- open my files in LR and finish them off in CS5. that way PS does not need to be current.

Same here except that after LR4, it's either PSE 10 or CS2 (just got CS and still less than a novice with it ).

Frodge wrote in post #15923714
When you say ps is destructive what do you mean? I'm learning a lo from this thread! Is light room totally non destructive?

Yes, Lightroom is totally non destructive.

Frodge wrote in post #15923714
When you say ps is destructive what do you mean? I'm learning a lo from this thread! Is light room totally non destructive?

Think of PS being mostly a pixel editor. LR edits are sets of metadata, such that you have the original pixel data + a set of recorded edits. That's an oversimplification (as PS can do some non-destructive edits) but it means you can have multiple copies of a file with edits in LR (e.g. a copy that's been edited to keep colours in gamut for a print) and the extra data that's stored is much smaller than a whole copy of the image.

You can, as already mentioned, also then copy a set of edits to another image; so for instance, if you had a horizontal panorama of several shots you could do a set of edits for colour temperature, clarity, brightness, saturation, and even grad filter effects on the sky and cropping, then copy those edits to all the images in the sequence with just a few clicks.

I started photo editing in PS but I found that with PS being destructive if I didn't like how an edit turned out it was a real pain to reverse it (keeping in mind I started on PS pre CS series). I love how LR handles edits in that if something really goes awry I can click a button and I'm back to the original photo without any of the changes OR I can simply step back one change if need be.

icacphotography wrote in post #15924257
I started photo editing in PS but I found that with PS being destructive if I didn't like how an edit turned out it was a real pain to reverse it (keeping in mind I started on PS pre CS series). I love how LR handles edits in that if something really goes awry I can click a button and I'm back to the original photo without any of the changes OR I can simply step back one change if need be.

You can also back out edits one at a time, go back a bunch of edits using the history, or create virtual copies to try out different approaches for the same photo and keep the one you like. LR is very cool!

icacphotography wrote in post #15924257
I started photo editing in PS but I found that with PS being destructive if I didn't like how an edit turned out it was a real pain to reverse it (keeping in mind I started on PS pre CS series). I love how LR handles edits in that if something really goes awry I can click a button and I'm back to the original photo without any of the changes OR I can simply step back one change if need be.

With the current versions of LR and PS you can work non-destructively in both - including back and forth non-destructive editing between LR and PS. Very powerful. Very convenient.

It is interesting and worth noting that conceptually LR is conceived to work alongside of PS. It's right there in the name of the software. "Lightroom" is not actually the full name. It is actually "Photoshop Lightroom".

I love using Photoshop - it's my favorite software application. But, lately I've been doing a lot of thinking about Photoshop on account of the new Adobe "Cloud" strategy. The Cloud is working great for me at the moment, but I've been reflecting on some aternative strategies. LR in conjunction with third party applications (OnOne as mentioned, and my favorite: Google's Nik Collection, and Topaz) may offer a satisfying alternative to Photoshop. It's an alternative I'm going to explore.