Differences between LR,CS, and PSE

I'm new at RAW and post processing. I've had my DLSR for only a few months and so far I'm enjoying it as it's so much better than the point and shoot I had. I bought my camera used and it did not come with the software CD. No biggie as I knew I could download the software from Canon. However, what I did was I bought PSE8 because I "thought" that is what was needed to PP. After the purchase, I found the POTN forums and I see most use CS or LR.

Could someone explain in noobie terms what the differences are between LR, CS, and PSE?

I get the impression I may have bought the wrong software.

You didn't do wrong in getting Elements -- it is actually a very good tool that you can do a whole lot with, including Raw processing -- it has a "stripped-down" version of Camera Raw that is included in CS4 (and shares the processing "engine" with Lightroom).

So, the differences: CS4 is the "Big Daddy" -- it has the top-of-the-line Raw processor, organizing tools, the top-of-the-line image editor, and great tools for automation and working with large numbers of files in batches and what-not.

Elements has many of the tools that CS has, but, like I said, the Raw processor is stripped down and it's not so good at things like automation and batches (I'd say no good, but I haven't used Elements since version 4 and I've heard that the newer versions have more capabilities. Many people happily use it, though, some because their volume doesn't require the advanced capabilities of CS, others because they have a good Raw processor that handles many if not most of their needs, including batch processing. Which brings us to...

Lightroom shares the state-of-the-art Raw processor that CS uses, but that's where the similarity stops. Lightroom was designed to be a workflow manager for photographers -- initially for Raw photographers especially, but it quickly embraced processing jpegs, psds and tiffs so that it can do a lot for any image. It has an integrated interface, rather than the typical image editor (such as Photoshop/Elements) where you have to hop from an organizer to a Raw editor to an image editor to endless dialogs to get work done. And, Lightroom has enough tools spanning so many basic needs that many of us do the majority of our work in Lightroom (and when I say the majority, I mean that opening Photoshop/Elements/wha​tever is a bit of a rarity). However, Lightroom does not have the special tools that Photoshop/Elements has for advanced image editing. So most of us have both.

Of course there are a variety of great tools out there -- in fact Canon's DPP has a lot going for it as far as learning Raw processing and doing most of what you need in that regard. But of the three you mentioned, for a Raw shooter I'd get a trial version of Lightroom and work with it with Elements as your "if needed" image editor and see how things fly.

Think of three generic tasks: 1) RAW processing, 2) pixel editing, 3) digital data management

The quality and extensiveness of RAW processing varies among programs...for example, Paint Shop Pro or Elements RAW processing is nowhere as robust as the ones in CS or LR.
The robustness of pixel editing varies...for example while LR can modify zones with its brush tools, CS can alter individual pixels. And CS is more robust than PSP or Elements for graphics editing capability.
The 'digital asset management' is something that LR brought to an otherwise graphics-oriented set of programs. You can assign keywords and search by keyword. You can 'collect' photos from different places into 'slide shows' for a single presentation (such as to a client who wants to see all portrait shots with blonde brides), without moving them out of their original folders.

RiverRunner wrote in post #9245177
I'm new at RAW and post processing. However, what I did was I bought PSE8 because I "thought" that is what was needed to PP. After the purchase, I found the POTN forums and I see most use CS or LR.

I get the impression I may have bought the wrong software.

No, IMO you did perfectly fine. DO NOT BUY CS until you are sure you are ready for it. Seriously, why spend the money? I would never suggest someone new to PP to outlay that kind of dough.

I used the free Gimp for years (and still do!) then I got Photoshop Elements. These are much more powerful than most people give it credit for. It could last you years before you feel need move beyond. (For RAW, its kind of a toss up between DPP and Elements stripped down ACR - except if you're running mac - then you get full ACR.)

Currently, I use LR... but that was years down the line (and I got in at their introductory discount.) If you can get the student price (you or child in school a student?) you can get it for $99. A great deal IMO.

But my first suggestion would be to learn what you have already. Get books (library) and follow some tutorials even if they don't seem to apply to you. This can help you learn the power and the interface of PSE. There are video tutorials for DPP on Canon's website if you are interested in RAW.

To reiterate, even if you do get LR at some point, you will still want/need Photoshop CS or Elements for some tasks.
So elements can and will work with Lightroom should you go that route in the future.

Elements and PSCS4 do the same tasks,. in the case of these too it really is an either or.
Lightroom on the other hand is a different tool, with overlap to be sure, but still a different tool that is best used with one of the other two.

As proffered, I'd work with Elements for some time before making any moves to the pricier aps.

Thank you. That helped. It sounds like LR may be in my future. My PP is painfully slow or maybe I'm just too trigger happy and take too many photos. Sounds like the workflow and management is better. PSE seems cumbersome to me based on what others are doing with LR.

I'm still learning and trying to figure out how to handle the multiple file types though. It was a lot easier to just shoot jpg's with the p and s but the quality is not the same.

RiverRunner wrote in post #9246853
Thank you. That helped. It sounds like LR may be in my future. My PP is painfully slow or maybe I'm just too trigger happy and take too many photos. Sounds like the workflow and management is better. PSE seems cumbersome to me based on what others are doing with LR.

I you do find yourself taking a significant volume of shots in a given setting, then Lightroom gives a nice handle on processing them, all integrated into a unified interface.

I only suggest shooting Raw+jpeg at the very beginning of your Raw shooting, unless you have a good business use to shoot both, such as a sport or wedding venue where a basically quick turnaround and delivery is necessary. Otherwise, I find working with the two formats cumbersome. Initially, though, shooting Raw+jpeg will help you to establish your own approach and standards for Raw processing, especially as you work with DPP and use Raw with the various Picture Style presets and compare your improvements with the jpeg version.

Just know, though, that Lightroom (as well as CS4) will handle jpegs and tiffs as well as Raw files. You can do the same basic processing tasks with them, although with narrower limits for jpegs. In fact, together with the thousands of jpegs I have from several years of shooting compact digicams, I still process jpegs from times when I team up with my son and/or daughter to shoot -- they at this time prefer shooting jpegs. They are all in my library and I can work with them in pretty much the same ways I work with my Raw files.

RiverRunner wrote in post #9246853
My PP is painfully slow or maybe I'm just too trigger happy and take too many photos. Sounds like the workflow and management is better. PSE seems cumbersome to me based on what others are doing with LR.

Don't get too discouraged, but remember that we all started out where you are. Photoshop takes time to learn. Some think that LR is too much! Others can do wonders in Photoshop Elements in mere seconds... it all comes down to experience and practice.

If considering LR, make good use of the trials (and beta) of it before you buy. Honestly, since as you said you are new to PP, WAIT! LR3 will likely be coming out next year sometime. Use the time now getting to know what you already have and what it can do... that way you can make a better evaluation if LR is right for you.

My last piece of advice is similar to my first... Don't feel the need to buy every piece of software out there just because the guy next to you has it. DPP and PSE is a very solid start.

tonylong wrote in post #9245327
it has a "stripped-down" version of Camera Raw

PSE8 for OSX has the full ACR if used from the Organiser apparently

René Damkot wrote in post #9250707
PSE8 for OSX has the full ACR if used from the Organiser apparently

Well dang it, that's it -- I'm going Mac!

tonylong wrote in post #9247699
I you do find yourself taking a significant volume of shots in a given setting, then Lightroom gives a nice handle on processing them, all integrated into a unified interface.



I only suggest shooting Raw+jpeg at the very beginning of your Raw shooting, unless you have a good business use to shoot both, such as a sport or wedding venue where a basically quick turnaround and delivery is necessary. Otherwise, I find working with the two formats cumbersome. Initially, though, shooting Raw+jpeg will help you to establish your own approach and standards for Raw processing, especially as you work with DPP and use Raw with the various Picture Style presets and compare your improvements with the jpeg version.

Just know, though, that Lightroom (as well as CS4) will handle jpegs and tiffs as well as Raw files. You can do the same basic processing tasks with them, although with narrower limits for jpegs. In fact, together with the thousands of jpegs I have from several years of shooting compact digicams, I still process jpegs from times when I team up with my son and/or daughter to shoot -- they at this time prefer shooting jpegs. They are all in my library and I can work with them in pretty much the same ways I work with my Raw files.

Thanks Tony. I have been shooting RAW+JPG my last couple of outings. I took around 100 photos and quickly realized this was going to be a problem dealing with this much "data". Next time I'm going to shoot RAW only and see how that works. Most of my photos are outdoor stuff while hiking, boating, and fishing. I post photos on a couple other forums related to the mentioned activites and with RAW there are a few extra steps vs just resizing and uploading to photobucket. Most of my stuff comes out fine for web purposes and memories but if there is a "wall hanger" in there somewhere, I want to make sure it's in a format that will do it justice.

davidcrebelxt wrote in post #9248290
Don't get too discouraged, but remember that we all started out where you are. Photoshop takes time to learn. Some think that LR is too much! Others can do wonders in Photoshop Elements in mere seconds... it all comes down to experience and practice.

If considering LR, make good use of the trials (and beta) of it before you buy. Honestly, since as you said you are new to PP, WAIT! LR3 will likely be coming out next year sometime. Use the time now getting to know what you already have and what it can do... that way you can make a better evaluation if LR is right for you.

My last piece of advice is similar to my first... Don't feel the need to buy every piece of software out there just because the guy next to you has it. DPP and PSE is a very solid start.

With the helpful advice I've received from you folks, that is exactly my plan. Thanks again!

Rich

RAW vs. RAW+JPG might be about 20-25% difference in total data storage needs, using a 10Mpixel camera and a highly textured scene (with not much opportunity of gain via JPG compression) as an example. I shot a highly textured subject for two shots to compare. So on a 4Gbyte CF card, that is about 260 vs. 210 shots or 298 vs 224 shots.

Well I think I may have a handle on this RAW stuff now. Getting DPP installed seems to be what I was missing in all of this. It took me a bit to get DPP loaded since my camera did not come with a disk (used camera). Turns out you need to have had DPP installed already to be able to use the DPP updater from the Canon site. Found a work around for that and with DPP now installed, the work flow makes a lot more sense and is much faster. The RAW Codec is a big help as well.

I'm going to assume that LR is a more powerful tool than DPP but it works in sort of the same way. Being able to batch photos into JPEGs for the web is a big time saver for me. Maybe ACR can do all of this as well but DPP seems really easy to use and was easy to figure out without a manual. I'm feeling much better about RAW now. It's all good.

Very cool you're getting on track there! Raw is really quite rewarding to work with for those who have the time and inclination.

Didn't see it mentioned in a quick scan of the thread...

Don't forget to check out the brief online video tutorials for DPP from the Canon website.