Been using Lightroom forever, but now thinking about Photoshop..

I have been using Lightroom 2 and 3 for over two years now, to process and fine tune all my raw photos. I am happy with the program and the results it gives me, but now I am thinking about getting Photoshop!

I have heard things about something in Photoshop called "actions", and I guess it is something like the presets in Lightroom, am I right? ..Load a photo and click a button to add a bunch of changes to the photo?

My two questions are:

• Why should I use actions in Photoshop instead of presets in Lightroom?
  
  
• What can Photoshop do for my photos that Lightroom can not do?
  

Well, those are indeed big and involved questions!

Photoshop CSx contains the Raw processor that is built into Lightroom, so in that sense you can do exactly the same Raw processing in either.

Photoshop starts with having a totally different interface, though, with Bridge as a "front end" that operates as a browser, has some organizational tools to set keywords and IPTC metatdata and such, and then as a "front end" for opening raw files in Camera Raw and then in the main editor.

It's in that main editor that all resemblence ends -- Photoshop is chalk full of tools for all types of image processing that go way beyond what Lightroom does, all the way to creating complex graphical images out of thin air. So, you really can't compare Lightroom with Photoshop. What you will want to do is take some time to do some reading, and at some point get the Photoshop free 30 day trial and embark on some tutorials, like through Lynda.com, to learn as much of the program as you can during those 30 days.

And then books and more tutorials. Learning Photoshop is a long-term prospect.

You asked about actions, and that is definitely a bright shining capability that has helped to set Photoshop apart as a top-level "professional" app -- you can create actions containing all sorts of complex things that will enable you to automatically do things that otherwise would require multiple operations done manually. Yes, you can automate Lightroom operations using presets, Syncing and such, but with Photoshop you automate things that Lightroom can't do...and, you can then access those operations through Bridge (or Lightroom) so that you don't have to open and work in the main editor to do common tasks.

So, that's a run-down. I'd advise you to read up before jumping in, and plan for a month of intense learning with the free trial. That will help you to make a well-informed decision as to whether the software is worth the expense.

tonylong wrote in post #11606982
Well, those are indeed big and involved questions!

Photoshop CSx contains the Raw processor that is built into Lightroom, so in that sense you can do exactly the same Raw processing in either.

Photoshop starts with having a totally different interface, though, with Bridge as a "front end" that operates as a browser, has some organizational tools to set keywords and IPTC metatdata and such, and then as a "front end" for opening raw files in Camera Raw and then in the main editor.

It's in that main editor that all resemblence ends -- Photoshop is chalk full of tools for all types of image processing that go way beyond what Lightroom does, all the way to creating complex graphical images out of thin air. So, you really can't compare Lightroom with Photoshop. What you will want to do is take some time to do some reading, and at some point get the Photoshop free 30 day trial and embark on some tutorials, like through Lynda.com, to learn as much of the program as you can during those 30 days.

And then books and more tutorials. Learning Photoshop is a long-term prospect.

You asked about actions, and that is definitely a bright shining capability that has helped to set Photoshop apart as a top-level "professional" app -- you can create actions containing all sorts of complex things that will enable you to automatically do things that otherwise would require multiple operations done manually. Yes, you can automate Lightroom operations using presets, Syncing and such, but with Photoshop you automate things that Lightroom can't do...and, you can then access those operations through Bridge (or Lightroom) so that you don't have to open and work in the main editor to do common tasks.

So, that's a run-down. I'd advise you to read up before jumping in, and plan for a month of intense learning with the free trial. That will help you to make a well-informed decision as to whether the software is worth the expense.

Thanks for the great reply! This is what I needed to know.

I have actually scratched the surface of the trial already, and I have found photoshop very usefull for HDR and panorama work. I will absolutely look into the tutorials and learn more before I make a decision.

I use both programs - Lightroom 3 and Photoshop CS5. What Tony has said is all correct and wouldn't argue with any of it, but you should know that the one area that I think Lightroom excels is in the Library module. Its keywording and "library" functionality is much better than that of Bridge (IMHO) which is the reason I use Lightroom (LR) primarily for most of my image processing. Its "library" functionality is also one of the reasons I upgraded from Photoshop Elements, after a while, the Organizer just didn't cut it - for me, at least.

One main area where they differ is in the ability to process an image at the pixel level, for example, the content-aware feature in CS5 is not even close to being available in LR, so if I need to do some editing at this level, then I move the image from LR into CS5 and edit it there. I find that, in a way, they complement each other, that is not to say that most if not all of the editing you do in Lightroom cannot be done in CS5, however there is a lot of editing in CS5 that cannot be done in LR. LR does not do things, to my knowledge, like overlays, it does not do masking and layering, things that CS5 does very well. I have no experience with the ability of Bridge to "keyword and index" images, as I do not use it, maybe someone who does will comment on this capability. As Tony has indicated, particularly with regard to learning curve, it is long and steep - I have an advantage because I used its less expensive cousin - Photoshop Elements for many years and its interface is very similar to that of Photoshop, although, as Tony says, Photoshop has very significant functionality, and, as I found out...much more capability than Elements - heck there are over 500 menu commands in Photoshop CS5 alone...

You have to remember that, in a way, they are two completely different pieces of software and that Photoshop, in all its versions, was originally intended for web developers and graphic artists and not for photographers, who grabbed onto it because, at the time, there was no other "software" like it that could do all the things it did for photographers. The other thing that LR has going for it, again, my opinion, is the very easy-to-use interface between LR and CS5/Photoshop, so it easy to index your images in LR and even do a bit of editing in LR, but if you need the pixel-level editing in CS5, for whatever reason, then you can "Edit in Photoshop" very easily.

The other thing that I like about the interface is that you can take panoramas, import the original photos into LR, do all your keywording, etc. in LR and then export them to CS5 to make the panoramas. You can do a similar thing with HDR images - export them from LR to HDR Pro in CS5 and have it construct the HDR image. Once you have the HDR image the way you like it in CS5, you can then send it back to LR and do some additional editing, if you require it, in LR itself.

As far as "Actions" go, I do not use them, because they have to be built in Photoshop and this, in my opinion, requires a very significant knowledge of Photoshop. (You would need to ask yourself whether you would use them or not and how and when and why, etc...) Even in Lightroom, I do not use presets that much, beause they are always someone else's idea of what an image should look like and very often not mine. I do use presets for importing and have found this to be a successful way of using them, but I am a hobbyist and am not in the business of selling my images, so I don't really care for all the special effects that one gets from presets, although I do understand why people would use them, so don't take this comment as knocking presets, there is a time and a place for everything, including presets and maybe I just need to explore them a bit more - don't know. I shoot mostly landscapes, nature, wildlife, macros and most presets do not lend themselves to my kind of photography - but enough about presets...

I would agree with Tony - read-up, ask around (maybe others will post thoughts here as well), download the trial, in fact you might want to look at one book, that I have - Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom 3, A Photographer's Handbook, by Stephen Laskevitch and published by Rockynook. It covers both LR and CS5, as well as Bridge and will give you some insight into the three products and how they can and cannot work together. HTH and good luck.

Cheers,

WesternGuy

P.S. I see you got your post about HDRs and panos up before my response...so you know...

Photoshop Actions are an amazing feature and are hugely time saving - one you go about making them and tweaking them to your liking. Fortunately, both making them and adjusting them later are easy to do. I have several multi-step tasks that I use all the time setup as actions that only require me to hit an F# key to run. For example, when I'm done editing a photo in PS, I can press F2 to have the layers all flattened, the image saved as a TIFF with LZW compression, and the saved file sent to my "Edited" folder, all at the touch of a key.

As for Bridge, I see a lot of comments about it being "What you get for free" as compared to Lightroom. I'm not entirely sure what people mean by that... But I can say that I've used Bridge for several years now and really like it - I import my images in through Bridge, apply basic metadata to them, perform my initial edit (reject/delete the bad shots), then open all my RAW files in Adobe Camera RAW right in Bridge, where I do all my RAW edits before finally sending the images to Photoshop for further work (Curves, layers, blending, etc.). Later, after saving my edited files as TIFFs, I go back into Bridge to rename the files, add descriptions, keywords, and ratings, then move them into their library folders. It's very quick and easy, and also easy to customize.

I'm in the opposite position right now, having Photoshop and looking into Lightroom. I keep hearing about how wonderful and efficient Lightroom is, but have yet to actually try it - although I did download the free trial today. But really, I'm not sure that I'll end up buying it, since I feel that Bridge allows me to do all my basic work really easily already, and Photoshop offers such a powerful range of options beyond that.

Another Photoshop feature worth being excited about is layers - I do all my adjustments in layers, so I can easily remove them or adjust their strength and blending mode. I'm only at an intermediate level when it comes to blending modes, but they are very cool, very powerful ways of adjusting the impact that different adjustments have on the base photo. I do my dodging/burning via a non-destructive layer, for instance - which is also launched to a ready-to-work point via an action. (I don't think Lightroom has layers, but maybe I'm wrong about that...)

And as others have mentioned, panos/image stitching work very well, and the vast array of filter options are is really wonderful to have at your fingertips.

Hope this helps!

Heh! Pennington and Rick shall meet in the middle!

Rick, you don't say how in-depth you've gotten with LR -- for example, people often don't get the power of the LR adjstment brushes -- in action, they "act like" Photoshop adjustment layers in that each brush is independently applied and has multiple effects it can apply and it can be revisited and adjusted at any time. If you are used to using those brushes it will be interesting for you to really learn the Photoshop adjustment layers and especially the use of layer masks -- they have a nice straightforward interface that makes individual adjustments easy. I will say, though, that the LR brushes have an advantage in that they can combine more complex operations in one brush -- something that is very cool if you develop the expertise in using them.

Thanks for all the information and encouraging words everyone. This is all very helpfull. I have decided to give Photoshop a try and see if it is my cup of tea. It probably is since I am already finding it very usefull!

Tony. I use the LR adjustment brushes alot. It is one of my favorites in LR, so I am looking forward to learn more about the adjustment layers in PS.

Cheers!

Um, just a side note... two years is not "forever"

Photoshop is the "big daddy" of imaging softwares. I've been using it since version 4 (which was intro'd in 1996, tho I don't recall when I first started using it... I'm guessing '98 or so). The current CS5 is version 12.

I also have been using Lightroom since the first version, i.e. mid-2007.

The two compliment each other nicely, for my purposes.

I have to edit large numbers of images quickly and get thumbnails out to clients for proofing and selections. Some shoots I have 1000 images, others 2500. The largest shoot I've worked was last Spring, two days, four photographers and 12,000 images.

Lightroom 3 makes it possible for me to quickly evaluate and organize RAW files, sort, rename, delete bad shots, and do some light adjustment of exposure and color balance if needed, a little straightening and cropping if needed, touch up dust spots, improve balance of sky and foreground if needed, then export watermarked thumbnails in batches. I can do about 1200 images in a day. Bridge never gave me that speed of processing. LR also is useful creating slideshows and printing thumbnail catalogs. I don't use the web publishing module (I have a vendor supplied software for that), but I'm sure others find it useful.

I then use Photoshop to finish images once final orders are placed. Usually I go back to the original RAW file and work from that, working a lot more carefully, taking into account the size and other factors regarding the final product that the image will be used for. There are a number of ways to use Photoshop, with a great deal more precision than is possible or practical in Lightroom. I also use Photoshop to prepare my own fine art prints.

I have to admit, though, I'm sure that I've barely scratched the surface of what's possible within Photoshop. I don't think anyone uses all that it offers... they select and use the features they need to, toward their own end. Even though I've been using Photoshop for well over a decade, sometimes working images in it every day for weeks on end, I know there are a great many features I've never touched. I'm always learning new things. I think it would probably be equal to a four year college degree to learn to use most of the program.

Layers are a powerful tool in PS. They allow me to do selective sharpening or localized color corrections. Learn to work with a mask on a layer, too, so you can subtract the layers effect by painting in black, or bring it back by painting in white, or vary the strength of the effect by doing something in between on particular areas.

The most recent version of Lightroom has greatly improved high ISO noise handling. I upgraded immediately for that feature alone. I used to use Canon DPP for high ISO images, since neither LR or PS handled it as well as I'd like. Since getting the latest version of LR, I think I've only turned to using DPP two or three times. So, my work flow is even more streamlined now.

If working with really large numbers of images, you need a reasonably powerful computer, but Lightroom will likely still get a little slow and balky with more than about 100,000 images in a catalog. I now set up a LR catalog for each year, to try to keep it manageable. I'll also delete duplicates from the catalog (such as JPEGs, thumbnails and TIFFs made from a RAW file... I don't need to see all four copies of the image). It also helps to backup and optimize the catalog fairly often, to keep it running efficiently.

Does the latest Lightroom do Layers? I dont think the previous ones did.

It does in the sense that edits are "non destructive" (as they've always been) but it does not do layers in the same way Photoshop does layers.

kjonnnn wrote in post #11620439
Does the latest Lightroom do Layers? I dont think the previous ones did.

The Lightroom brushes and gradients give you capabilities similar to layers in Photoshop in that you can apply various effects that you can revisit and re-adjust. In fact, the brushes are pretty powerful in that you can do multiple adjustments with one brush.

Where Photoshop layers excel are, of course, the graphical capabilities and also the interface which makes it easier to hop from one thing to another -- in Lightroom you have to go on either guesswork or turning on overlays and such!