Workflow question. A little rightroom a little photoshop

Helvegr

So, I keep trying to tune my workflow a bit and one thing that is causing me some problems is the handoff between lightroom and photoshop and back again.

This is especially apparent when I start a photo in lightroom and make some adjustments, but then take it over to photoshop for some additional touch ups. If I do this through lightroom of course I end up with 2 photos back in lightroom. The photo partially tweaked in lightroom, and the PSD from photoshop. Over time, I have found myself getting a little confused as to which is the "final" image, when I'm seeing multiples in my collections.

Some reading I've done suggests that some just choose to not bring the PSD file back into lightroom. I'm just wondering what other people do?

Part of me wants to limit the work I do in Lightroom to just the basics, then do anything else in Photoshop, even if it could have been done in lightroom. Just to avoid having a partially processed photo sitting in lightroom.

Its also worth noting that most of my images are landscape type of stuff. I'm not having to process thousands of photos at a time, so my work flow wouldn't be as hampered by photoshop, as maybe somebody doing weddings or sports.

Thanks!

arodney

Keep in mind that Lightroom is really a raw converter, it uses parametric instructions to render RGB pixels. Photoshop edits RGB pixels. So its useful to keep in mind when and where to use each. Also keep in mind that LR is a DAM so its used to keep track of your assets. Just because you have a rendered TIFF or PSD in LR’s catalog, doesn’t mean its a good idea to further edit that data there.

For example, suppose you have a raw file. You build parametric edits (instructions, metadata) for creating an RGB pixel file. You use the Edit in Photoshop command. What happens is the raw data and the instructions are used to render a new document (you may save it as a JPEG, a PSD, a TIFF, at this point, doesn’t matter). The idea is, you have rendered the raw data into an RGB document that Photoshop can handle. This is NO different than if you used Adobe Camera Raw which is necessary for Photoshop to edit a pixel based image. ACR renders instructions and raw data, you end up in Photoshop. You edit the pixels in Photoshop. Without ACR, Photoshop simply can’t do anything with the raw data.

OK, so you render, you are in Photoshop, you do your pixel editing. Now when you close and save, that NEW PSD or TIFF (pixel based file) is now seen in LR as a new asset. There is still the original raw+instructions you see in LR and this new rendered image you see next to it in Photoshop. LR can’t edit data with layers. So if you select this PSD or TIFF, then decide you want to use the Develop tools (which isn’t necessarily a good idea), you can build new instructions, but when LR renders, it has to use a flattened version of this data (that’s why if you bring layered documents into Photoshop, you have to have the backwards compatibility on, that is a flattened ‘version’ of all the layers). This is one reason why when you ask to re-edit this rendered image, you are asked “Edit a copy with LR edits” or “Edit original”. The original just opens in Photoshop (its just a TIFF or PSD etc, its the same as simply opening any such file). But if you have LR edits, LR has to build a new iteration, run all the data through its raw processing engine and apply these new parametric edits. Bottom line, once you render data, you should consider you are now down using a parametric, raw processing engine.

Handing off between LR and PS isn’t at all a big deal if you simply stop using Develop on rendered images. When you ask to edit, LR is simply telling PS “open me, edit me” and when done, “save this in my database”. But if you move from LR to Photoshop and then ask LR to use its processing engine in Develop, things get far more complex and there are reasons why you don’t want to do this. PS is a pixel editor. LR is an instruction based editor that creates pixels (for Photoshop or similar apps).

BradfordBenn

What I have done to know which one is the "final" image is stack the images and put a color on the finished image. So I know that the purple colored one in a stack is the final image. I chose that as it is not readily accessible from the keyboard.

Art Scott

I do everything I am going to do in LR first...when i export a file I am done in LR and if it needs pixel work in PS then I do it and save a #12 jpg...done not going back to LR.....if down the road I want to retweak...I re-opn the dng and go from there...once again when it leaves LR I am done in LR........I also export from LR as a JPG 99.999% of the time.

Helvegr

Art Scott wrote: »

I do everything I am going to do in LR first...when i export a file I am done in LR and if it needs pixel work in PS then I do it and save a #12 jpg...done not going back to LR.....if down the road I want to retweak...I re-opn the dng and go from there...once again when it leaves LR I am done in LR........I also export from LR as a JPG 99.999% of the time.

So do you not use LR as your repository for your images? I've seen a few others with a similar workflow, however I've fallen in love with Lightroom's print module and I do all my printing from it. So at the end of the day I need my "final" pixel tweaked image back in LR so I can print it.

But I did consider a workflow which used lightroom only to sort through RAW files, then manage the final images in something else like iPhoto or even smugmg.

basflt

Helvegr
i do exactly the same as you
sometimes i take the original to PS some more times , to get a different result
once back in LR , i select the two pics [ ctrl+click] , then hit "c" key , so to compare them

because it make no different , i always export from LR


if you confused witch one is what , use the "filter" option
i give them color , but you can also use stars or flags , or a combination

MileHighAko

All of my workflow and publishing is driven by LR3. I do attempt to utilize LR3 for all PP work when possible, but I'll admit to quite often exporting out to CS5 since one of my favorite PP tools (OnOne Software's Perfect Photo Suite) exists in CS5 (I know it has some hooks in LR3, but not everything is there, and quite honestly I prefer the CS5 integration).

You're right that when I round trip back to LR3 I have a new photo in my database - and that's okay. For me it's not difficult to track. My new photo has a new file name extension so that's generally the quickest way to identify it. I also use the stacking technique to keep my library visually easy to manipulate. I'm not worried about how many copies of a single photo I end up with since disk space is cheap and I like having a trail of processing that's been done.

One thing that I've recently changed in my workflow - I try to do all cropping inside of LR3 AFTER I've done any outside PP in CS5. I used to go by the rule that once I export from LR3, I stop doing any more PP in LR3 on that image, even though I bring it back into LR3 and manage it as one of my catalog assets. Now I've changed my workflow to reserve cropping until nearly last. Sounds strange, I know, but it's really working out for me. If I end up pre-cropping something in LR3 and I decide to edit outside of lightroom, I'll reset the crop first, so that the full size original image is getting edited outside of lightroom, then I re-crop the image when I get it back inside of LR3. Hope that all makes sense.

Good luck.

dbveto

MileHighAko wrote: »

All of my workflow and publishing is driven by LR3. I do attempt to utilize LR3 for all PP work when possible, but I'll admit to quite often exporting out to CS5 since one of my favorite PP tools (OnOne Software's Perfect Photo Suite) exists in CS5 (I know it has some hooks in LR3, but not everything is there, and quite honestly I prefer the CS5 integration).

You're right that when I round trip back to LR3 I have a new photo in my database - and that's okay. For me it's not difficult to track. My new photo has a new file name extension so that's generally the quickest way to identify it. I also use the stacking technique to keep my library visually easy to manipulate. I'm not worried about how many copies of a single photo I end up with since disk space is cheap and I like having a trail of processing that's been done.

One thing that I've recently changed in my workflow - I try to do all cropping inside of LR3 AFTER I've done any outside PP in CS5. I used to go by the rule that once I export from LR3, I stop doing any more PP in LR3 on that image, even though I bring it back into LR3 and manage it as one of my catalog assets. Now I've changed my workflow to reserve cropping until nearly last. Sounds strange, I know, but it's really working out for me. If I end up pre-cropping something in LR3 and I decide to edit outside of lightroom, I'll reset the crop first, so that the full size original image is getting edited outside of lightroom, then I re-crop the image when I get it back inside of LR3. Hope that all makes sense.

Good luck.

Your is pretty much the same as my workflow. I like the idea that LR is non destructive as there has been a couple of time where I made several variations of a photo. I do use LR to track all of my photos.