Is Lightroom worth it?

I mean worth as use, not price paid for.

Let me say that I don't want to buy it for the sake of buying it, but, I'm graduating next month and can get a real good deal on it.

I have CS4MC (not sure why LR isn't included) and I like the idea of having a "better" workflow than PS, along with a lot of other functions making the job quicker. But I'm asking is it really nice to have for its functionality, or just something to add? Thanks.

Only you can answer that.

But, for me, it's better than ACR. Has all the functions of ACR, plus many of the functions you'd normally have to go into PS to accomplish. Plus, from what I've heard, the previews of the pictures in Lightroom is tons faster than that of ACR/Bridge. That alone makes it worth it to me.

If you can get the discount for being a student, I'd get it. But, like I said, only you can answer that question.

Hope that helps.

I rarely use Photoshop anymore since switching to Aperture (analogous to LR). Only if I need layers or some of the Photoshop creative filters do I fire it up.

The functionality is nice. The brush tool is pretty flexible and something that isn't available in ACR. The other big benefit of LR is it's Library function. It really shines at organizing,tagging, managing thousands of photos. It does this better than Bridge.

I like the interface better than ACR and the added tools is a big plus in speeding up workflow. That said...unless you are taking/editing tons of pictures a day as a pro might, I'm not sure the added expense would be worth it (I'm no pro by the way). I'd stick with ACR or DPP with your CS4 Extended for your workflow IMO.

Thanks guys, it sounds like something I think I'll be getting then.

I use PS often, excepting most of the time it's stuff I can do in LR. However, I'll still use PS quite a lot with LR; especially when I start to build my website (whenever I get a new machine - there's no way this baby will handle more than one Adobe product at the rate I want to work).

I agree with all the above comments. I find myself using PS less and less.

I'm under the impression that ACR and LR have the exact same adjustment capabilities with a different user interface.
Where LR excels is it's organization capabilities for volume shooters.

I use LR, even though I'm not a volume shooter, because I like the UI and there's a ton of tutorials out there.

Actually, I think the short answer to the thread's title is 'yes'.

LR is great for organization too and if you use its DAM system with your workflow and not just for converting RAW files, you will find yourself using CS4 much less; perhaps not at all.

I use DPP, LR, and PS, but I only use each as needed. DPP and LR is enough for about 95-97% of my images. The only reason I use DPP is because I feel it converts my particular model's RAW files much cleaner than LR or ACR. If not for that, I would use LR for everything and PS for the 5% that need it. I could probably get away with using PSE7, instead of CS4, with LR to be honest.

If you do decide to get LR, try using it without falling back on CS4 as a crutch for a few weeks to explore all of LR's potential. I think you will be happy with the results and the time saved.

I'm at a disadvantage because I haven't been able to upgrade to LR2 and CS4, but I hear that LR2 actually has some tools that CS4 lacks, such as adjustment brushes.

Can someone please verify this and maybe give a short list of these tools that CS4 lacks? To me, that would provide a big consideration to the question of the OP. Previously, ACR and Lightroom shared the same toolset.

Actually, I just poked around in my CS3 ACR (v. 4.6) and made a discovery!

With Lightroom, you have "Targeted Adjustment" tools that work with the Tone/Curve panel and the HSL panel. You select the tool and then drag across the portion of interest in your image, and LR applies an adjustment to either the targeted tone or color(s). It's not a "local" tool, still makes a global adjustment, but it comes in handy on occasion.

I discovered that CS3 ACR does not have those tools. You can, of course work the curve/HSL sliders to get the same result, but this is an illustration of the fact that LR has implemented some tools along the way that ACR has not.

Lightroom feels and acts like a photographic tool. PS often feels like a graphics editor.

Yes, it's worth it.

Get the trial and see if you like it compared with bridge.

Roy Mathers wrote in post #7980760
Actually, I think the short answer to the thread's title is 'yes'.

That's my answer.

YES.

Here's a quick clip by Scott Kelby and Matt Kloskowski, explaining (among other things) the differences between LR2 and CS4 with how and why they are integrated. I found the first half particularly usefu, and it is only ~7-8 minutes in total. Hope this sheds some light on the subject. -->http://www.scottkelby.​com/blog/matt-scott-on-lightroom2