Lightroom vs. Elements 5

This may be a stupid question, but I'm wondering if anyone has any experience comparing these two products. What is the difference, benefits, etc. of each over the other. I have Elements 5 and it seems to meet all my needs, but with all the talk about Lightroom I'm wondering if it is really that much better than Elements 5.

So here is my question, do you think it is worth upgrading from Elements 5 to Lightroom and if so, why?

They are two different products - LR is really first and foremost a raw converter and database, but yes you can do a fair bit of PP work on your images and print them etc. - However, I for one would not want to get rid of my copy of CS2 (or in your case E5).

I mainly got LR for it's database. I do my raw conversions and mainly just basic levels adjustments and/or highlight/shadows etc, but most other PP work and printing is done through CS2.

Do you use the editor or the ORganizer of PSE5 more? Do you shoot RAW? Answering this will help advise you.

EOSAddict....

I do shoot in RAW and my first step is to convert all images to DNG and I thought that might keep the images more portable in the future. I do keep the original CR2s just in case I ever need them though.

Where do I spend more time. Its 50/50. I organize my photos heavily but also do PP work on them as well to get them sharpened and saturated the way I like. I find myself in the editor every day creating layers, doing high pass sharpening, playing with saturation, converting to B&W, etc.

Thanks again for everyone's advice in advance.

LR is the way forward but if you like the tagging in PSE you will be disappointed by the cataloguing in LR... but it's early days.

pgiancola wrote in post #3443617
... I find myself in the editor every day creating layers, doing high pass sharpening...

Well, Lightroom won't do that currently so you will still need PSE5.

I used to use CS2 exclusively but when I got LR I only use CS2 when I need to work on "project photo". A "project photo" is one that requires layers, masks, and more editing than LR can do. LR does about 95% of my work right now though and that number will likely increase when the 1.1 update is released.

Thanks for the info everyone. Looks like I'll just sit by and watch how Lightroom develops. I would definitely like to stay with one application if possible. I'm lazy that way.

Yeah, its not an either/or, you'd still need both.

I bought it because:

1) I thought the library would be Elements organizer on steroids, which it IS, I guess... but just like a steroid user, it has its... shortcomings... in the form of being forced into clunky keywords search, which is hard for me to get past.

2) For its RAW processing, since Elements ACR is limited. For this it's EXCELLENT. (Except for ACR's tendency to make my reds look orange, and blah, without using a calibration preset)

3) Price. I bought when it was $100 off + discount code.

I have both and use both. Since I got LR I use it almost exclusively. Maybe it's just in my mind but I feel that my photos look better, pop more, and just generally look better to me when I PP them in LR vs. PSE5.

My two cents,

Eric

I used 5.0 for a month or two until I found the beta of LR, then when LR 1.0 was offered online, I took it. I don't think I've opened 5.0 since. Compared to LR, the colour adjustment tools in Elements 5.0 are Mickey Mouse.

Yes, 5.0 can do layers, something I never really took a shine to. I kept 5.0 around because of the sharpening, but now with LR 1.1, it's probably goodbye 5.0 except for some of the "artsy" filters which I've used occasionally.

The drawback to anything but LR, is I don't like having to convert files from RAW (CR2); LR has spoiled me in this regard.