LR or CS3 - New member

[GaryB]

I just registered to this site, so I apoligize in advance if this is not the proper forum.
I currently use PS 7 on a limited feature basis, mainly levels, brightness and contrast and sharpening.  I want to be able to do more batch processing using presets. I have just downloaded LR and am playing with it. I have read that sharpening is still much better in PS.

So my questions is  would I be better off with the CS3 upgrade and the included plugins or with LR and my PS7 version?

I do not enjoy spending hours in front of my monitor and I feel the learning curve to better understand CS3 and LR would be about the same.

Sorry for the length and generalness of the question, but would appreciate your opinions.

Thanks...GaryB

[Tim Gray]

It doesn't sound like you need the bells and whistles that come with CS3 - my view is that it's basically a volume question - If you shoot more than 10k or 15k frames per year, LR starts to make sense from a workflow perspective, otherwise ACR and Bridge likely serve the purpose.

[michael]

They're quite different animals, but highly complimentary.

If you want an easy way to organize and catalog your images, then LR is hard to beat. Similarly if you want to prepare slide shows and web pages LR has some convenient and simple to use tools. It also has an excellent printing module.

For raw processing LR and Camera Raw 4 are comparable, but with LR you can use similar controls on TIFs, PSDs and JPGs.

Bridge is great for bwosing, and now with Bridge 3 you have almost full metadata integration with Lightroom.

Finally, Photoshop is Photoshop. It does things that other programs can't do. For most photographers beyond the beginning stages it's a must-have tool, though Elemnets is an inexpensive way to start off.

Michael

[jschone]

The best thing about Lightroom for me is that you can have several virtual copies of your original (raw) file:

You can have a (raw) file processed in different ways(color, BW, a different crop, more exposure etc.). These setting are saved as metadata.

To do the same thing in Photoshop cs2 +bridge, you need to make a hard copy of your original.

Also PSCS3 still uses a file based system, Lightroom is database(d) (please correct me if I am wrong..)

Jochem

[GaryB]

Thanks to all for your replies.  After shooting mainly jpeg for years, I have finally convinced myself to shoot raw only and try to establish a better workflow.  I don't even have the ACR plugin for my ps7 version, I have been using the canon software for conversion.
I like the idea of being able to run most if not all of the flow from a single package (LR). But don't know if I would still have to reply on ps for sharpening, resizing, etc. I would be spending about the same for the cs3 upgrade as I would for lr.
Thanks again for the responses and any additional suggestions are welcome.
I am going to get some extremely valuable info from this forum and Michael, I have been accessing your site for years, one of the best sources around.

GaryB

[damonff]

I only shoot jpeg. I use Aperture, Lightroom, and/or CS3 depending on the situation. For large shoots I process mainly in LR, then tweak the ones that need it in CS3. As was said above, Bridge is the ultimate browser. Howeverm for speedy workflow on a shoot that is going to have many images processed similarly, LR all the way. For personal work, only PS3 (or PS2, or PS7 depending on the date...I've been a Photoshop guy since '03 and have upgraded each time). Aperture has a great interface and I hope it becomes more powerful. Why don't I shoot RAW? Not to offend, but it seems idiot-proof. I shoot only in manual with or without flash, with flash manual flash..manual all the way. Some swear by RAW and that's cool...I prefer jpeg. Anyway, some thoughts for you...