Ditch CS6?

supermarvin76

Short story long....

This past summer i tried the free trial of Lightroom 4, and I didn't care for it because I am familiar with the interface of Photoshop. I tried GIMP, and really didn't have an opinion. Buying CS6 is cost prohibitive for me, but once I learned I could subscribe, I was in!

I really, really like Camera RAW 7.0.

However, I am getting tired of seeing the reoccurring bill every month on my CC. What am I going to loose if I buy Lightroom 4 and Elements, and maybe keep GIMP around?

Here is what I do:

Basic adjustments
Minor Layers work
logo work- sometimes
and I LOVE RAW 7.0.

I just really don't have the time or patients right now to learn Lightroom. For example, I had a gard time understanding how to get a photo "out" of Lightroom when I was done with it?

Anyhow, any tips or suggestions would be great! Thanks!

pathfinder

Lightroom 4.1 ( current version) has Camera Raw engine 7.1

Lightroom controls, and techniques, are a bit different to learn than those we learned with Photoshop, but many of us who have learned Lightroom no longer use Photoshop routinely. I strongly prefer to render images in LR, over Bridge, UNLESS I need to use Smart Objects from the get go.

Minor Layers work can be done in Gimp or Elements. I have not upgraded to CS6 yet either, as CS5 more than fulfills my needs for selections and editing in Layers.

Sam

LR can be a little difficult to learn if your expecting it to work like PS, but if you go in with an open mind and understand LR does have some differences you will see why so many photographers sing the LR praise song.

I use LR4 and can normally process 90% to 99% of event images without going to PS. I find that LR can do many tasks as well if not better than PS even though the processing engines are the same.

Some tasks are better done in PS, that's why I have both.

Get LR and take a class or watch a tutorial. Clear your mind and put out the effort..............it is worth it!

Sam

MomaZunk

If you are doing logos, you need the vectors from the full version of photoshop. Otherwise you are creating jpegs of you art, and cannot create the .pdfs that include the line "paths" to keep things crisp at any size. When you use the text tool in PSE, you do get the vector path, but you cannot "vectorize" anything else from within PSE. You need PS for that.

The other couple of things I noticed with elements: you loose the 16-bit color depth, and the ability to create your own actions.
More plugins also work with PS version PSE.

To most people these things are not a big deal, but with your logo work, I think you need the full blown PS.

jww

I agree with Sam. LR can be quite confusing at first, especially if you are used to using other workflows. I know I was totally lost when I first tried the demo on LR 1.0.

Watch a few tutorials or get The Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Book for Digital Photographers (though there are probably newer versions now). It will finally all make sense! ..and there is a ton more under the hood. To be honest, I find it much easier and more "photographic" to work in LR over PS. I still have PS to pull over an image as a smart object to pull out a background etc, but 99.9% of my images are all with LR.

LR is much better at dealing with the 1000's of images that I usually end up with after an event.

BinaryFx

If one is doing logos professionally, then a true vector program such as Adobe Illustrator or Corel Draw is greatly preferred over Photoshop vectors (I would prefer to use Adobe InDesign over Photoshop only for logo work).

For the OP, I would suggest looking into a 30 day demo of Photoshop Elements if LR is not an option. For vector work on a budget, you could look into the opensource Inkscape. There are so many free and low cost raw processors/converters on the market that one could even decide to avoid expensive commercial tools. Where expensive commercial tools often have the edge is speed, work flow and being a "standard" for exchange of work (even if other programs can save to a standard format, their output may not always be as clean).


Regards,

Stephen Marsh

Ed911

LR is available as a demo...check it out. I have CS5 and LR 3.6. I rarely use CS5 for anything...processing way over 95% of my images in LR. The only time I use CS is if I need some sort of special processing, such as a little nip and tuck...or whatever.

I agree...the interface is different...but like everything else...once you use it for a while...it's a snap. I actually like it now...but when I first picked up LR 1...I was wondering what the heck they were thinking.

Just FYI...