Photoshop Vrs. Elements Vrs. LightZone

[Goodlistener]

Help!!  I want to get image processing software and am totally flumoxed by the alternatives between Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Elements and LightZone.  Capture NK is made for Nikon RAW files buut works on any TIFF File as well, I saw a demo of it and it seems very promising as well.  Kind of like LightZone in some ways.

I know that photoshop has several varieties of perspective correction which would be useful for architectural photos.  Do the other packages have that?  Anyway, architecture shots are one of many interests of mine and so perspective correction is not going to drive the whole decision.  

It does seem clear that Elements is more simple and less expensive than Photoshop.  Money is an issue.  I have looked for articles that compare and contrast the 2 or the 3 but have not found anything.  Must be something out there, and the wisdom of the forum members here as well.

Thanks if anybody can steer me in the right direction.  See www.pbase.com/goodlistener for some of my published work.  (It won't hurt your eyes too badly....)  ((I hope)).

[digitaldog]

Based on your described needs and budget, Elements sounds like the ticket.

[Peter McLennan]

I agree.  Elements has many of Photoshop's photography-centered features and can be coaxed into performing nearly all of the normal tasks an amateur photographer needs.  

PSE lacks features pertinent to the graphics and web-creation arts, but this many not affect your photo work.  It's an excellent value, especially at the discounted prices available on the web.

[DarkPenguin]

If you are working with another raw converter (or in jpeg) you could always try Paint Shop Pro.  Or Picture Window Pro.

[alain]

Based on your described needs and budget, Elements sounds like the ticket.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135654\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi

Does Elements have softproofing, even a very limited one?

For me it's also unclear how much elements can do in 16 bit.


kind regards,

Alain

[rgs]

I used Elements for several years as well PS Limited Edition before that. For me, also, money was one of the main considerations and all of the reports I read said that PS's advanced tools would not benefit most photographers nearly as much as graphic artists.

But last year I bought PS (I qualify for an educator discount) and I will never turn back!

Those that say photographers don't need PS are wrong. While Elements has many of the same tools, many of the PS versions are more sophisticated, offer improved controls, additional features, and more flexibility than in Elements. Elements (at least v.2 which is my last one) will not allow you to automate many procedures or save time saving shortcuts.

Elements allows very limited editing of 16 bit files while PS permits most important functions to be used on 16 bit files.

I don't think Elements includes a RAW processor.

PS is just more comprehensive in many ways and, if you can swing it, you should get it. If not, Elements is a fine, affordable, alternative (it beats most anything else out) and much of what you learn will later apply to PS.

Hope that helps.

RGS
www.myrsphoto.com

[Bill in WV]

RGS wrote: "I don't think Elements includes a RAW processor."

PSE 4 and 5 for Windows use the ACR 4.1.

I have been debating this very same dilemma. With Scott Kelby's books and others, Elements can be a quite sophisiticated processor, and the Organizer is very easy to work with. At the end of the Lightroom 1.1 Tutorial even Jeff Schewe admits it is 70 to 73% of Photoshop and quite usable with Lightroom. I can't believe I just saw a similar remark above from the Digial Dog. It is very unusual for these Adobe Hall of Famers say anyhting nice about Elements, yet here are two willing to do so.

Even at that, it seems all the Lightroom tutorials still lean heavily on CS2 or CS3 so that is what I wanted to move to. And last week I got lucky  . . .

There was an annoiuncement last week of some pretty good upgrade pricing for current owners of Elements to get into CS3, and I have to admit I jumped all over it. Finally, I am a Photoshop User if only a novice. Now, to learn how to use it and Lighttroom together.

Bill in WV
PSE 5; Lightroom 1.1, and finally - CS3; NAPP Member

[sojournerphoto]

I used Elements 3 for a while and it was very useful. However, I upgraded to CS2 because I wanted to be able to work with 16 bit layers and to be able to use curves on a layer (you can add a curves function - see www.earthboundlight for one place) but you can't go back and adjust the toning curve which got really frustrating.

Having made the move I'm pleased I did, but I still have very pleasing prints made through elements...

As an aside, I recently decided to upgrade to CS3 because it's stiching function is so much improved over CS2 that it works.

If budget is an issue then I'd have no hesitation in using elements with ACR.

Mike.

[digitaldog]

The last time I played with Elements, it was like version 4 (Mac). It seemed fast and had the necessary tools most need for a good deal of work. IF I had to pick Elements+LR or just Photoshop, as much as I love Photoshop I'd go door number 1.

[Philmar]

The last time I played with Elements, it was like version 4 (Mac). It seemed fast and had the necessary tools most need for a good deal of work. IF I had to pick Elements+LR or just Photoshop, as much as I love Photoshop I'd go door number 1.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137200\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree...Elements + LightRoom is the best bet. Photoshop is much more powerful but it is rather daunting as an entry-level image processor. I don't recommend it to ANY first timers. Photoshop is overkill, more expensive and may be too much for someone's initiation in to image processing.
PhotoShop may be the tool for me and for many of you, but I don't think it is the tool for a new comer to the world of digital imaging when cheaper, smaller, easier to learn alternatives exist.

[stever]

i've been using Elements from v3 and occasionally used Photoshop along the way, in my opinion, Elements 5 got to the point of doing most of what most photographers need to do

i've resisted Photoshop because of the complication and learning curve and preference to take photos rather than sit in front of the computer

i've also never been a big fan of Bridge or Organizer (although never invested a lot of time in either)

1.1 triggered me to get Lightroom and my time in front of the computer is down and my profanity reduced - Lightroom + Elements works well for me, particularly as plugins for noise reduction, PTLens, etc. can be added for your needs

if you don't have a professional need for Photoshop, i really think LR+Elements with plugins for your needs is a very efficient combination with an acceptable learning curve -- but you need references -- i like Kelby's LR book and the Elements 5 "Missing Manual".  i haven't been terribly impressed with Adobe's "help" (or just about anyone else's either)

[Iwill]

Goodlistener asked about comparisons between Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Elements and LightZone, but the comments so far have been about Lightroom, not LightZone, which is an editing program not made by Adobe.

If anyone has comments about LightZone and how it compares with Photoshop and Elements, I'd like to hear them.

Irv

[JLK]

Goodlistener asked about comparisons between Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Elements and LightZone, but the comments so far have been about Lightroom, not LightZone, which is an editing program not made by Adobe.

If anyone has comments about LightZone and how it compares with Photoshop and Elements, I'd like to hear them.

Irv
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137556\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Irv,

Goodlistener said: "Anyway, architecture shots are one of many interests of mine and so perspective correction is not going to drive the whole decision. "

Based on this, out of the list Elements is the only package of the three that offers it.

I love Lightzone---and now use it for 95% of the work that I do. It's not a pixel-based image manipulation tool, you can't merge photos together, you can't paste a pumpkin on your mother-in-law's body. But for bringing out the best of your photographs, I find it much easier and more intuitive than the Adobe products.

The new version 3.1 (out as of yesterday) adds a very powerful feature---masking by color and/or luminosity. Combined with the vector-based masking, it makes selective editing even easier. Photoshop has all this stuff as well, but Lightzone's non-destructive, non-modal paradigm makes it much easier. Every tool in Lightzone creates a new layer in the image automatically (hence the 'non-destructive nature). The Zonemapper (and Zonefinder display) makes curves much more intuitive. The Relight tool (formerly the Tonemapper) redistributes the tonal range of the photograph, and is extremely valuable for bringing up shadow detail. The software has a nice sharpening tool, gaussian blur tool, color balance, white balance, hue/saturation, and a great channel mixer. All these tools have the ability to have any 'lighting effect' placed on the (color dodge, soft light, etc). As well as the opacity. And if you want to restrict the tool to a particular region, just grab a simple drawing tool (bezier, spine, or polygon) and draw around it. The feathering region is adjustable for these regions as well. And now this can also be done in a color range or a tonal range.

For me, the ability to get to the desired effect (the finished, printed photo) is much faster in this software. I love to work in it---never something that I though when I used Photoshop or PSE. You can download a trial and give it a try. Outback photo also has several 'lessons' on the use. It is 'different' than the other pixel editors out there, but once you get it you may love it. Only thing I'm really missing is a great healing brush, although I think the new color selection implementation is going to help out with this.

[Iwill]

Irv,

I love Lightzone---and now use it for 95% of the work that I do. It's not a pixel-based image manipulation tool, you can't merge photos together, you can't paste a pumpkin on your mother-in-law's body. But for bringing out the best of your photographs, I find it much easier and more intuitive than the Adobe products.

The new version 3.1 (out as of yesterday) adds a very powerful feature---masking by color and/or luminosity. Combined with the vector-based masking, it makes selective editing even easier. Photoshop has all this stuff as well, but Lightzone's non-destructive, non-modal paradigm makes it much easier. Every tool in Lightzone creates a new layer in the image automatically (hence the 'non-destructive nature). The Zonemapper (and Zonefinder display) makes curves much more intuitive. The Relight tool (formerly the Tonemapper) redistributes the tonal range of the photograph, and is extremely valuable for bringing up shadow detail. The software has a nice sharpening tool, gaussian blur tool, color balance, white balance, hue/saturation, and a great channel mixer. All these tools have the ability to have any 'lighting effect' placed on the (color dodge, soft light, etc). As well as the opacity. And if you want to restrict the tool to a particular region, just grab a simple drawing tool (bezier, spine, or polygon) and draw around it. The feathering region is adjustable for these regions as well. And now this can also be done in a color range or a tonal range.

For me, the ability to get to the desired effect (the finished, printed photo) is much faster in this software. I love to work in it---never something that I though when I used Photoshop or PSE. You can download a trial and give it a try. Outback photo also has several 'lessons' on the use. It is 'different' than the other pixel editors out there, but once you get it you may love it. Only thing I'm really missing is a great healing brush, although I think the new color selection implementation is going to help out with this.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137872\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

JLK, thanks very much for your excellent description of the pros and cons of the LightZone approach to photo editing.  Your comments were exactly what I was looking for, and I really appreciate your sharing them.  LightZone sounds like just the photo editing program I've been looking for.  I'll download a trial version and give it a go!

Irv