Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: chasgroh on March 02, 2014, 06:11:25 pm
-
...I have an old-school friend photog who's brilliant and studied...he says it's better overall to print out of photoshop. However, being the comparative newbie I'm much more Lightroom-oriented, catching-up on the PS side of things as I move along. I find the Lightroom ap much more elegant and easier to use. Are the engines between the two that different? Is there any loss of quality printing from Lightroom?
__________________
-
I never print with either. I've used nothing but Qimage for years.
However, why not print tests with both systems and judge for yourself?
-
...hahaha...OK, I've done that but would like a LR/PS expert user to answer this. Thanks!
-
...I have an old-school friend photog who's brilliant and studied...he says it's better overall to print out of photoshop. However, being the comparative newbie I'm much more Lightroom-oriented, catching-up on the PS side of things as I move along. I find the Lightroom ap much more elegant and easier to use. Are the engines between the two that different? Is there any loss of quality printing from Lightroom?
__________________
I won't question your friend's "brilliance" or "studied-ness," but I will question his actual experience with the LR print module. PS is just plain crude compared to LR in this respect. And speaking of respect, I have huge respect for the things PS does better than LR - but printing ain't one of them.
It is too easy to get frozen in time in the fast paced digital world and I suspect that your friend may be, at least in part, a victim of this.
Rand
-
Yes, printing is one thing where Lightroom leaves Photoshop for dead.
Printing in Photoshop is finicky and confusing whereas in Lightroom one is able to concentrate on those issues pertinent to printing photographic images.
This is definitely an area where Lightroom wins in a no-contest.
Disclaimer: I use Photoshop fairly frequently but have not bothered to print out of it for some years.
Tony Jay
-
I agree with Rand and Tony.
I printed out of Photoshop for several years before Lightroom ever came along, and if I had a penny for every time it wasted a sheet of paper for me when I forgot to set one tiny item in the print menu for a print of a second image that was intended to be printed exactly like the first one, I'd be a rich man now.
Printing in Lightroom does everything that you can do in Photoshop, and does it easier, largely because of the ability to save print templates which specify all the important details on the make, type, and size of paper you want to use.
Like Rand and Tony, I use Photoshop fairly often for the things that it does better than Lightroom, but I, too, haven't printed out of it since I got reasonably familiar with Lightroom.
-
I also print out of Lightroom much more frequently than from Photoshop.
But, I would like to hear the reasoning that you friend uses to conclude that Photoshop is a better choice for printing over Lightroom. You never know, we may learn something.
-
But, I would like to hear the reasoning that you friend uses to conclude that Photoshop is a better choice for printing over Lightroom. You never know, we may learn something.
No you won't, because printing from Photoshop is primitive and crude and makes for a inefficient workflow.
-
I haven't printed a single photographic image from PS since I started using Lightroom.
-
I have never tried printing from Photoshop because Lightroom does it so well.
-
The advantage in Lightroom of being able to set up templates can’t be emphasized enough. They’re not only a substantial time-saver, they help us avoid making costly mistakes. There are also so many ‘little’ things - like LR’s option for limiting the list of profiles to just those we use the most - which, all added together, make printing in Lightroom a much more fluid and intuitive process.
Larry
-
printing from Photoshop is primitive and crude and makes for a inefficient workflow
...c'est correct. The advantage in Lightroom of being able to set up templates can’t be emphasized enough
encore
-
No you won't, because printing from Photoshop is primitive and crude and makes for a inefficient workflow.
I already learned that. I was actually hoping to be enlightened on what possibly could be a new misconception about working with Lightroom. I want to believe that I supported all of the best misconceptions before learning to use Lightroom at version 4. Yes, I wasted a bunch of years thinking that I could work just as fast and efficient with Bridge/ACR.
-
I use both for different reasons. I use PS when I want to use the Canon 16-bit plugin (so technically, I guess it's not really PS). I also prefer the way I can add a signature and use different fonts for a caption on a print in Photoshop. To me Lightroom is limited and kludgy in it's execution of those. I use Lightroom for it's versatility in layouts and the ability to create custom saved layouts.
In the end, it's really about the right tool for the job.
Nemo
-
...I have an old-school friend photog who's brilliant and studied...he says it's better overall to print out of photoshop.
Last time I tested by printing patches out of each, measuring and comparing the dE values, they were identical. So your friend is wrong unless he's referring to workflow, ease of use etc. In that case LR is a vastly superior experience. Especially if you soft proof in LR and then print. You might want to ask him exactly what he means by 'better' because in one case he's completely wrong and in the other, it is subjective and IMHO, he's wrong too.
-
I generally print only one image at a time. I scale in Perfect Resize, ie; 10 x 15, launch Photoshop's print dialog, select a paper size, ie; 12 x 17, double check print settings and print. This process has never failed me, where Lightroom has a couple of strikes against it. I know, I'm anal.
My question is, how does OnOne's Perfect Resize (formerly Genuine Fractals) compare to Lightroom's resizing algorithm?