peterm1
Veteran
I think it depends on your philosophy of photography and how this relates to post processing. Some people just do "the basics" - tone, color, noise reduction and sharpening and thats about it! Some even regard any more extensive editing as a kind of "cheating." I do not. I more extensively post process most photos to get them just how I want them and this can require the full gamut of PS tools. But thats my choice and for it I need PS or a equivalent software.
If you pretty much only do the basics - then Lightroom is probably OK for you. It does these basic photo editing things very well I can say having tried it. For example the 'healing" tool is great - better than any I have tried. (Just one that comes to mind as I write.)
But you are right in the sense that PS is kinda "bloated" if you want to call it that. Its very powerful but with power comes complexity and that means its not right for a lot of people - especially if you are of the sort who just does the basic post processing.
In fact I generally prefer to use Paint Shop Pro Photo X2 which is the Corel equivalent of Adobe PS. Its about as cheap as Photoshop Elements (the cut down version of PS) but with most of the power of the full PS. AND - it is somewhat easier to use as it has an easy to use interface with lots of built in wizrds etc. If having tried it you find Lightroom is not for you then you may wish to try PSPPx2. The only disadvantage I have found is that most of the resources (tutorials and downloads) on the internet are for PS not this product so that can be a bit frustrating at times.
What are you missing? The big "two" in PS and equivalent software are layers and selections. Layers allow you to make edits each on a separate "copy/layer " created from the original and this creates wonderful flexibility in how you work. Too complex to explain now, but trust me. Its good when you get the hang of it. Its a bit tough to get the hang of though. The other big loss relates to the powerful selection tools that allow you to apply edits selectively to different parts of the image or to cut bits out and drop new bits in. Whether this matters to you or not depends on the type of post processing you do.
Finally perhaps I should also mention that there are scores if not hundreds of free and payware plugins for PS (most of which work with PSPPx2 as well) but not for Lightroom. There are how ever quite a few Ligthroom "presets" which are saved settings of all of the LR tools so that they produce various special effects with the click of a button. In this repsect they are a little like PS "actions."
On the whole if you feel PS is too much for you and especially if its not your ambition to get into heavy editing of photos then I would say stick with LR.
My idea of heaven though would be to use LR for the basic photo fixes (color tone etc) and for conversion from RAW format, then change to PS of PSPPx2 for any fancy stuff afterwards.
If you pretty much only do the basics - then Lightroom is probably OK for you. It does these basic photo editing things very well I can say having tried it. For example the 'healing" tool is great - better than any I have tried. (Just one that comes to mind as I write.)
But you are right in the sense that PS is kinda "bloated" if you want to call it that. Its very powerful but with power comes complexity and that means its not right for a lot of people - especially if you are of the sort who just does the basic post processing.
In fact I generally prefer to use Paint Shop Pro Photo X2 which is the Corel equivalent of Adobe PS. Its about as cheap as Photoshop Elements (the cut down version of PS) but with most of the power of the full PS. AND - it is somewhat easier to use as it has an easy to use interface with lots of built in wizrds etc. If having tried it you find Lightroom is not for you then you may wish to try PSPPx2. The only disadvantage I have found is that most of the resources (tutorials and downloads) on the internet are for PS not this product so that can be a bit frustrating at times.
What are you missing? The big "two" in PS and equivalent software are layers and selections. Layers allow you to make edits each on a separate "copy/layer " created from the original and this creates wonderful flexibility in how you work. Too complex to explain now, but trust me. Its good when you get the hang of it. Its a bit tough to get the hang of though. The other big loss relates to the powerful selection tools that allow you to apply edits selectively to different parts of the image or to cut bits out and drop new bits in. Whether this matters to you or not depends on the type of post processing you do.
Finally perhaps I should also mention that there are scores if not hundreds of free and payware plugins for PS (most of which work with PSPPx2 as well) but not for Lightroom. There are how ever quite a few Ligthroom "presets" which are saved settings of all of the LR tools so that they produce various special effects with the click of a button. In this repsect they are a little like PS "actions."
On the whole if you feel PS is too much for you and especially if its not your ambition to get into heavy editing of photos then I would say stick with LR.
My idea of heaven though would be to use LR for the basic photo fixes (color tone etc) and for conversion from RAW format, then change to PS of PSPPx2 for any fancy stuff afterwards.
Last edited:
