Lightroom2 vs Photoshop

Paul11 · 15 Dec 2008 at 11:45

after having a play around with lightroom 2 (which i love)

i was just wondering which bits of your post porcessing you would do in lightroom and which in photoshop ? ie sharpening, contrast, levels etc ?

workflow wise, do you do the lightroom work first, then export to photoshop or the other way around ?...

Johnny|lucidcomposure · 15 Dec 2008 at 11:48

lightroom first. its mainly a program for catagorising your RAW image files. You can do pretty much anything now in lightroom to make the image as fine tuned as you want. Photoshop is the tool with powerful clone/heal,dodge and burning tools. Photoshop allow you to break down the image and make layers and feather away at elements in your photographs and of course gives maximum control over color.

I use both programs as each image file of mine goes into photoshop for watermarking and saving low res versions.

Paul11 · 15 Dec 2008 at 11:56

which would you use to do things like sharpen, contrast, levels, etc as they both do it?

uv · 15 Dec 2008 at 11:57

Lightroom does pretty much everything I need.

Only time I've needed to chuck stuff into PS was when I had sand on my lens at the beach and didn't notice, but I could have cleaned that up in Lightroom too.. it's just faster in PS.

I'll also chuck stuff into PS if, for example, I need to make an exposure mask by hand.

Inquisitor · 15 Dec 2008 at 12:17

Fstop11 said:
I use both programs as each image file of mine goes into photoshop for watermarking and saving low res versions.

Lightroom can do watermarking, downsampling, and colour space conversion (among other things) automatically with the LR2/Mogrify plug-in

uv · 15 Dec 2008 at 13:23

Inquisitor said:
with the LR2/Mogrify plug-in

Awesome find, cheers for the link

rpstewart · 15 Dec 2008 at 13:57

uvmain said:
Only time I've needed to chuck stuff into PS was when I had sand on my lens at the beach and didn't notice, but I could have cleaned that up in Lightroom too.. it's just faster in PS.

I'd disagree that PS is faster for that. I've had times when I've shot for a whole day with a dust bunny in the frame; with Lightroom you can copy and paste a clone adjustment across all the images. Sure you need to check that in doing so you don't clone part of the subject but I find it easier to check and repair the minority than have to do a separate clone operation on every file.

uv · 15 Dec 2008 at 14:13

rpstewart said:
I'd disagree that PS is faster for that

I wasn't implying that photoshop is faster than lightroom, just that I can work faster in photoshop, as I've been using it for decades

rpstewart · 15 Dec 2008 at 14:30

Ah, ok. I can relate to that, once you get used to something it's sometimes easier to stick with it.

martinturner · 15 Dec 2008 at 14:35

rpstewart said:
Ah, ok. I can relate to that, once you get used to something it's sometimes easier to stick with it.

I totally agree ... for me is CS3.

RoleyBirkin · 15 Dec 2008 at 14:35

uvmain said:
I've been using it for decades

Is that the same photoshop that's only been around for a decade & a halfish!

peterattheboro · 15 Dec 2008 at 14:42

I've tried to use lightroom to amend some pictures but it's learning a whole knew program.

I can do the exact same stuff in Photoshop a lot faster than I can in Lightroom. So I stick with Photoshop.

Thankfully, i'm such a brilliant photographer that most of my pictures come straight from the camera, a quick resize, auto level and watermark (macro'd) in PS and i'm all done.

khushy · 15 Dec 2008 at 14:43

I use (and am used to) LR - dont like PS (as I dont like altering as-shot images - its either right or its not IMHO) will be upgrading to LR2 next week - works for me.

khushy

uv · 15 Dec 2008 at 14:50

RoleyBirkin said:
Is that the same photoshop that's only been around for a decade & a halfish!

you calling me a liar?

RoleyBirkin · 15 Dec 2008 at 14:58

Moi!?

Anyway, back on topic, I've only recently acquired LR, so still digging around. Not that I've fully got my head around PS either!

Johnny|lucidcomposure · 15 Dec 2008 at 16:34

Good plug in but photoshop is never going to be put on the side. Its powerful in so many ways. It just isn't always needed to adjust photographs. I always sharpen my images in photoshop though.

Inquisitor · 15 Dec 2008 at 16:37

Fstop11 said:
Good plug in but photoshop is never going to be put on the side. Its powerful in so many ways. It just isn't always needed to adjust photographs. I always sharpen my images in photoshop though.

Of course; I wasn't suggesting that Lightroom is a substitute for Photoshop, but with plug-ins it can take up some slack from Photoshop

Mark A · 15 Dec 2008 at 23:15

Fstop11 said:
Good plug in but photoshop is never going to be put on the side. Its powerful in so many ways. It just isn't always needed to adjust photographs. I always sharpen my images in photoshop though.

Do you just use the sharpen and sharpen more etc from the filters menu? or is there a more complex tool i haven't found yet?

Johnny|lucidcomposure · 15 Dec 2008 at 23:29

Mark A said:
Do you just use the sharpen and sharpen more etc from the filters menu? or is there a more complex tool i haven't found yet?

Unsharp Mask

robmiller · 16 Dec 2008 at 00:33

I find Lightroom superior for sharpening, since it's Photoshop's USM but with the added bonus of doing output sharpening too.