Workflow Question

austinstrobist

For the pro photogs out there that use LR, do you also use PS consistently as well or do you find that you can do the majority of your PP in LR?

I am asking this because I have started using LR and while there are several changes you can make within the program am I missing a world of possibilities by not having PS?

Thunder Rabbit

Howdy.

Lr2 is a thoroughly capable standalone system.

But, it is a different animal than Ps. Lr2 is a Ferrari. Fast and streamlined. Built for a specific purpose. Ps is a Snap On tool truck. There are more tools in it than even most experienced photographers need. But they're there if you need them. Quite a few of them are more for graphic designers. 3D tools and such. Of course, you can blur the line between graphic design and photography as much as you want. And it never hurts to have a Snap On tool truck handy, just in case.

Depending on the type of photography you do, exactly how much use you get out of Ps will vary. Right now, less than 10% of my photos need something I can't do in Lr2. But I use Ps every day as a graphic designer.

I would say Ps offers a universe of possiblities not available in Lr2. But the interface is not particularly beginner friendly. You will have to invest a lot of time to learn how to open up that universe of possiblities.

Ps is a little spendy, but if you can afford it, by all means, get it. Lr and Ps integrate flawlessly, providing a one two punch that can't be beat.

austinstrobist

Thanks! that was a great answer and I think I understand how the 2 programs integrate within one another.

I have heard the learning curve is very steep but I am going to find some classes to see if I can get some hands on instruction to learn the foundation before I start going and exploring on my own.

Thanks!

Thunder Rabbit wrote:

Howdy.

Lr2 is a thoroughly capable standalone system.

But, it is a different animal than Ps. Lr2 is a Ferrari. Fast and streamlined. Built for a specific purpose. Ps is a Snap On tool truck. There are more tools in it than even most experienced photographers need. But they're there if you need them. Quite a few of them are more for graphic designers. 3D tools and such. Of course, you can blur the line between graphic design and photography as much as you want. And it never hurts to have a Snap On tool truck handy, just in case.

Depending on the type of photography you do, exactly how much use you get out of Ps will vary. Right now, less than 10% of my photos need something I can't do in Lr2. But I use Ps every day as a graphic designer.

I would say Ps offers a universe of possiblities not available in Lr2. But the interface is not particularly beginner friendly. You will have to invest a lot of time to learn how to open up that universe of possiblities.

Ps is a little spendy, but if you can afford it, by all means, get it. Lr and Ps integrate flawlessly, providing a one two punch that can't be beat.

pathfinder

I tend to agree with ThunderRabbit.

I suspect a majority of portrait, and people photographers can find all the tools they need in Lightroom2 ( or Aperture which some do use ) over 90+% of the time.

Photoshop will be used in addition to Lightroom by a different subset of photographers and/or artists or graphic designers who desire a more exploratory interaction with their images than an industrial output capability.

I would think sports shooters strongly prefer LR to Photoshop as well, where time is at a premium.

anonymouscuban

I am not a pro but I use both LR2 and CS3. I use LR2 95% and CS3 as a plugin for only those photos that I need to do a lot of messing around. I am amazed of what all can be done in LR2, especially since reading Scott Kelby's book.

The local adjustment brush and gradient tool is awesome. So is the fact that I can make all my adjustments directly in the RAW editor and my originals are not touched. And don't get me started on it's database features.