Why does Lightroom cost more than Photoshop Elements?

I don't understand this, as Elements is essentially a "thinner" version of the full Photoshop program, but has everything than the majority of photographers need IMHO: layers, curves, adjustments layers, blending modes, filters, healing brush, clone stamp tool and a lot more. The only things that make Lightroom better is its sorting & cataloging options, and its post-processing tools are not the most capable(comparing to those in Elements).
So, why does it cost more than Elements?

TIA

Elements is sold at Costco. Its aimed at the non-professional even though its quite a capable program. Lightroom is the standard for professional photographers who shoot and manage large numbers of photos. It used to cost a lot more. I think they dropped the price when Apple started giving away Aperture for free or really cheap.

You are kidding, right?

rfe777 wrote in post #16975067
I don't understand this, as Elements is essentially a "thinner" version of the full Photoshop program, but has everything than the majority of photographers need IMHO: layers, curves, adjustments layers, blending modes, filters, healing brush, clone stamp tool and a lot more. The only things that make Lightroom better is its sorting & cataloging options, and its post-processing tools are not the most capable(comparing to those in Elements).
So, why does it cost more than Elements?

TIA

All those editing tools you mentioned are great, Adobe definitely has given us a gift when they put out Elements as a "little sister" to the "standard" Photoshop that has inherited so much from the full package!

You should understand, though, that Lightroom came out as a package that integrates many things, including a "full" version of the Adobe Camera Raw processor, one that in Elements is quite trimmed down, and also Lightroom enables many workflow functionalities that are either more "clunky" in Elements or in some cases just not doable. For example, taking a batch of Raw images and running them through the Raw processor with some common edits and then being "done" so that the images can all then be quickly put out for a final use is something that with Lightroom is quick/simple, not so much with Elements. In essence, Lightroom was developed to be a comprehensive and integrated "Workflow Management" app.

However, the reason many/most of us do keep an "image editor" on hand is that, as you have noted, Lightroom itself does not have an image editor. If/when you do need one, then Lightroom is set up with an "Edit In" function so that you can open Elements or another external editor and go to work (although it means creating a separate tiff or psd "project file" that becomes part of the Lightroom Library). Anyway, that capability is there, and Elements actually can be a very nice "partner" to a Lightroom workflow!

I use both Lightroom and Elements, if I had to chose which one I would keep, it would easily be Lightroom.

To me the difference is quite simple. Elements does a fine job for processing 10-20 photos from a shoot. But, if you do like I did this weekend and have 1,500 images from shooting two races, Elements would be a nightmare. Just the opening and closing each photo adds hours to the work flow. For example, with Lightroom, I can correct the white balance of 1,000 photos when they are very similar in ten minutes or less. Just doing that one step with Elements would take hours just because of the time it takes to open and close that many photos.

tonylong wrote in post #16975382
All those editing tools you mentioned are great, Adobe definitely has given us a gift when they put out Elements as a "little sister" to the "standard" Photoshop that has inherited so much from the full package!

You should understand, though, that Lightroom came out as a package that integrates many things, including a "full" version of the Adobe Camera Raw processor, one that in Elements is quite trimmed down, and also Lightroom enables many workflow functionalities that are either more "clunky" in Elements or in some cases just not doable. For example, taking a batch of Raw images and running them through the Raw processor with some common edits and then being "done" so that the images can all then be quickly put out for a final use is something that with Lightroom is quick/simple, not so much with Elements. In essence, Lightroom was developed to be a comprehensive and integrated "Workflow Management" app.

However, the reason many/most of us do keep an "image editor" on hand is that, as you have noted, Lightroom itself does not have an image editor. If/when you do need one, then Lightroom is set up with an "Edit In" function so that you can open Elements or another external editor and go to work (although it means creating a separate tiff or psd "project file" that becomes part of the Lightroom Library). Anyway, that capability is there, and Elements actually can be a very nice "partner" to a Lightroom workflow!

I know from reading on the web that you can edit the colors, white balance and "clean" your photos with Lightroom, but not with the same efficiency like Photoshop does, especially the healing tool in Lightroom(forgot how it's called...), which is one of the tools I use in every photo I work on(healing brush and clone stamp tool). And changing colors in Lightroom is on the whole photo, not on selective areas.
But maybe I'm wrong?

tzalman wrote in post #16975364
You are kidding, right?

How am I wrong here?

rfe777 wrote in post #16975067
the majority of photographers need IMHO: layers, curves, adjustments layers, blending modes, filters, healing brush, clone stamp tool and a lot more.

What specific kind of photography are you talking about? Try telling a photojournalist that they NEED a healing brush or ability to clone...

rfe777 wrote in post #16975581
How am I wrong here?

LR covers 90% of what a photographer needs with a more straightforward and easier to learn interface. People who don't think LR can do much haven't really explored it.

I'm especially concerned about the healing brush/clone stamp tool alternative in lightroom. I've read on more than one reviews that it doesn't do a good job, and sampling with it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't.

Also, how is the white balance tool in Lightroom? I use a threshold adjustment layer in Photoshop for making a precise white balance, but I don't know if it can be achieved in Lightroom.

joeblack2022 wrote in post #16975587
What specific kind of photography are you talking about? Try telling a photojournalist that they NEED a healing brush or ability to clone...

Spot-on, I think it depends a lot on the type of photos one is taking.

I love Lightroom, have never been able to truly relate to / use Elements with any kind of efficiency or sense that I am really doing it right. Probably just a matter of degree of self-education and experience, but I've tried (watched online videos and help doc's etc) and Elements just doesn't feel as useful or relevant to me.

rfe777 wrote in post #16975616
I'm especially concerned about the healing brush/clone stamp tool alternative in lightroom. I've read on more than one reviews that it doesn't do a good job, and sampling with it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't.

As has been said, there are things that Elements can do as an image/pixel editor that Lightroom is not designed to do (because it doesn't have a built-in pixel editor).

One example is the cloning capabilities that Elements inherited from Photoshop. Lightroom has a "basic" cloning tool and "healing" tool, they work well for what they are made to do, and in fact Lightroom 5 has made advancements there, but still they are not made to replace the tools that are found in Elements and other decent image editors.

The White Balance tool in Lightroom is excellent, in fact, the Elements Camera Raw "plug-in" has the same White Balance tool. If you work with that, and still prefer to bring images into the Elements editor for fine-tuning those things, fine, although then you are stuck with a "copy", a tiff, psd, or jpeg, but it's up to you.

As to Lightroom, though, there are tools that go beyond the basic/global White Balance tool as found in Elements. Lightroom has a host of "Selective" tools that it shares with the big Photoshop Camera Raw processor. These include some "global" adjustments to colors as well as luminance adjustments and saturation and such, and these tools can be "targeted" to certain colors as well as tones and such. Then, Lightroom also has "local adjustment" tools, brushes as well as gradients, that can apply certain adjustments to selected objects. A lot of portrait shooters, for example, get good use of working with those brushes.

rfe777 wrote in post #16975067
I don't understand this, as Elements is essentially a "thinner" version of the full Photoshop program, but has everything than the majority of photographers need IMHO: layers, curves, adjustments layers, blending modes, filters, healing brush, clone stamp tool and a lot more. The only things that make Lightroom better is its sorting & cataloging options, and its post-processing tools are not the most capable(comparing to those in Elements).
So, why does it cost more than Elements?

TIA

It's photo developing tools are well ahead of Elements. Lightroom is a program for photographers, while Elements is aimed more at the type of person who makes scrapbooks of their images. Lightroom works 100% in 16 bit depth, has the full version of Adobe Camera Raw, does all editing in a totally nondestructive manner. Lightroom works best as a primary raw photo developing tool, with Elements as one of several available secondary plug-ins when you need to add special effects that LR isn't designed to do.

Last I looked Elements didn't have Curves unless you bought an aftermarket add on like Elements+, while LR has it as part of the ACR module. LR has a healing brush, and the adjustment brushes and graduated and radial filters do a lot of the adjustments that Elements needs layers and pixel editing for. LR does those things without ever harming a single pixel of the original image file.

I can do 95% of my editing in LR, then only send to Elements (I have Elements 11 and I started with Elements 9) or the Nik Collection if I need further special effects.

Elements is designed to get you started and hopefully to make the plunge to the more advanced products in the catalog; CS, LR, etc.