Why LightRoom?

Sam

We all get this question over and over. Check out this site!!!!!! I am learning a ton and it answers the why question better than anything I have seen. Go now or be doomed..........................

http://www.photoshopuser.com/lightroom

Sam

pathfinder

Sam, I have just finished day 3, out of a 4 day weekend, at Seth Resnick's "Workflow, Not Workslow" workshop, which is devoted to Lightroom3 and LR4.

Photoshop wil be relegated to only those times that I need a selection tool to finish an image, or to composite a Pano.

Bridge I never use any more.

Nikolai

While I'm not saying that LR4 didn't make a definite improvement over its earlier, sloth-like, versions, as any sales pitch this one is biased as hell and is full of semi-true facts. I guess I spent too much time in a company of used cars salespeople to immediatly recognize when I'm told "fried facts".

Yes LR4 is very capable of RAW files processing. Basically, if you never use anything but Bridge + ACR, LR4 can be a logical step.

However, the whole discussion about LR vs (Bridge + ACR + PS) is akin Windows vs Mac, Canon vs Nikon, Allah vs Jesus and pretty much any other holy war.

The truth is: you should use the tool that does the best best under particualr circumstances. Don't use a sledgehammer with a screw or a screwdriver with a nail - that is, if you have that luxury. However, you should also know that in some cases hammering a screw down quickly can be a better solution than waiting for a day until your power screwdriver arrives.

All in all: know thy tools and don't think a hammer is better than a screwdriver or vice versa, cause you may have a need for either. And be ready to use whatever you have at your disposal even if it's not the best possible solution but gets the job done here and now.

pathfinder

Nikolai, I think everyone should indeed use what they are most comfortable and productive in. For people who have used PS for years, I can understand why they are reluctant to switch. I did not like LR1 or LR2 at all. LR 3 was much better and I finally began to use it routinely. LR4 looks like it will continue to make photographer's workflow faster and easier. I will still use PS for some of my images, but he percentage needing it will continue to fall.

Using the most appropriate, easiest to use, and effective, is what I would encourage for everyone.

For a great number of folks, I think Lightroom will be easier to learn than Photoshop, and quite capable. For Printing, LR surpasses Photoshop for ease and speed of use.

Nikolai

pathfinder wrote: »

Nikolai, I think everyone should indeed use what they are most comfortable and productive in. For people who have used PS for years, I can understand why they are reluctant to switch. I did not like LR1 or LR2 at all. LR 3 was much better and I finally began to use it routinely. LR4 looks like it will continue to make photographer's workflow faster and easier. I will still use PS for some of my images, but he percentage needing it will continue to fall.

Using the most appropriate, easiest to use, and effective, is what I would encourage for everyone.

For a great number of folks, I think Lightroom will be easier to learn than Photoshop, and quite capable. For Printing, LR surpasses Photoshop for ease and speed of use.

It is definitely getting better and better, no argument there. And the print module is, even in my uneducated look (I don't print much), far superior.

Sam

WOW! Sorry guys, I didn't mean to start a holy war. I just thought this was a site that that quickly demonstrated many LR features.

I didn't get through many of the tips but did pick up a few things. Also I didn't pick up on LR3 vs LR4.

Use it or don't. I personally find LR to be indispensable.

Sam