Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Lightroom vs ACR  (Read 19005 times)

texshooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 575
Lightroom vs ACR
« on: March 01, 2015, 11:57:18 am »

I just watched a video by Scott Kelby showcasing "100 reasons  why Lightroom kicks ACR's @$$". But not one reason had to do with actual image editing. The advantages were all about organizing and handling files, which I don't care about.   My style is picking the best shot from a session and throwing the rest away, so Adobe Camera Raw and Bridge fit my needs. But I want to know if Lightroom has any editing advantages over ACR, other than printing, filing, viewing, and organizing. I hear both applications use the same "engine", so I assume neither Lightroom nor ACR have a leg up.
Logged

elliot_n

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1219
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #1 on: March 01, 2015, 12:02:36 pm »

I think Lightroom integrates better with a Wacom pen/tablet, potentially making the use of adjustment brushes more satisfying (pressure sensitivity). That's why I bought LR a year ago, but I could never get my head round it (the catalog concept), so I went back to using Photo Mechanic + ACR.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2015, 12:04:31 pm by elliot_n »
Logged

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #2 on: March 01, 2015, 12:13:51 pm »

I just watched a video by Scott Kelby showcasing "100 reasons  why Lightroom kicks ACR's @$$". But not one reason had to do with actual image editing. The advantages were all about organizing and handling files, which I don't care about.   My style is picking the best shot from a session and throwing the rest away, so Adobe Camera Raw and Bridge fit my needs. But I want to know if Lightroom has any editing advantages over ACR, other than printing, filing, viewing, and organizing. I hear both applications use the same "engine", so I assume neither Lightroom nor ACR have a leg up.

Not to my knowledge as I never use ACR. Softproofing is build into the edit module in Lightroom which is a difference as ACR does not have this. You need to go to Photoshop to do softproofing if you don't use Lightroom. The user interface is so much better in Lightroom than ACR which is really old school and not changed for more than 10 years.

There is another aspect of editing which you may overlook and that is virtual copies which you don't have with ACR. With virtual copies you can make as many versions of editing from a single file as you like. There is also the editing history for each edit in Lightroom which you don't have in ACR.

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #3 on: March 01, 2015, 12:30:00 pm »

My advise is if you must watch Kelby, be sure to strain whatever he writes through the Marketing BS and technical correctness filters because he tends to write things that don't pass either.
IF ACR and LR are on version parity, the processing is identical and in fact, you can pass the same image and metadata through either and both, back and forth. Are there functions like unlimited history or Virtual Copies available in LR but not ACR? Yes. But the processing engine is the same. Kelby probably has some new LR video or coffee mug to sell, so he came up with 100 reasons why LR 'kicks ACR's butt' whatever that nonsensical title is supposed to mean.

It's a bit like making a video "100 reasons why InDesign kicks TextEdit @$$". Different tool for different needs. Both do have the ability to type and edit text.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #4 on: March 01, 2015, 12:36:56 pm »

I think it is about time that Adobe does something about the arcane thing called ACR which UI wise is not compatible with LR even though the underlying engine is the same. If you e.g. edit a file from LR and open it as a smart object in Photoshop then you will need to edit it further in ACR and not in LR. This is not well thought out in my opinion. Any history is gone as well from the point where the smart object is created. The edits done int the smart object cannot be seen in LR.

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #5 on: March 01, 2015, 12:52:26 pm »

I think it is about time that Adobe does something about the arcane thing called ACR which UI wise is not compatible with LR even though the underlying engine is the same. If you e.g. edit a file from LR and open it as a smart object in Photoshop then you will need to edit it further in ACR and not in LR. This is not well thought out in my opinion. Any history is gone as well from the point where the smart object is created. The edits done int the smart object cannot be seen in LR.
I think that might be more due to the SO workflow along with restrictions with a plug-in architecture but someone like Schewe might have more info. If you embed the raw into a SO, how would that migrate to LR? I could see it with a SO that's got a DNG since the instructions could in theory move back and forth since it's embedded. Otherwise, with a proprietary raw, would the SO 'sidecar' somehow get transferred back and forth between the two applications?

Don't know, I've never fully understood the big deal about SO's anyway. I mean, all you're doing is embedding another iteration into the main PS doc.

I think if you're working with raw data,  pick ACR or LR and stick to it, until you render the image and it is time for PS pixel editing.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #6 on: March 01, 2015, 01:13:10 pm »

I'm sure you are right that there are restrictions in the architecture used right now, but it sure is inelegant. If SO's were integrated with LR I would use them more as it is now I'm cutting when leaving LR and go into pixel editing. If I later realize that I wished I had edited the RAW a bit different in LR I will have to go back and redo this and the redo the Photoshop work. Of course you could argue that if I do everything in PS non destructively I could again just copy and paste the image into the PS doc where I did the editing. But these things are workarounds and I like elegance in design of software And this case is not one of them. I consider this a cludge that has developed over time.

texshooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 575
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #7 on: March 01, 2015, 01:31:06 pm »

If you e.g. edit a file from LR and open it as a smart object in Photoshop then you will need to edit it further in ACR and not in LR.

Deal breaker.
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #8 on: March 01, 2015, 01:38:37 pm »

Softproofing is build into the edit module in Lightroom which is a difference as ACR does not have this.
To be clear, ACR does have soft proofing. That is, you can pick an output profile (even CMYK which LR can't) and you do get an on-screen simulation with or without paper/ink simulation.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4755
    • My photography site
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #9 on: March 01, 2015, 02:23:15 pm »

Hans, look at linked smart objects.
Logged

fdisilvestro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1852
    • Frank Disilvestro
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #10 on: March 01, 2015, 06:42:13 pm »

Since the introduction of the subscription model, ACR and LR are not paired anymore. LR updates will only include support for new cameras while ACR updates may include new functionality such as the brushes for radial and graduated filters

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #11 on: March 02, 2015, 06:40:27 am »

Hans, look at linked smart objects.

Here is a proposal for what I wanted http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/linked_smart_object_support_for_lightroom_better_photoshop_integration_and_synchronisation

You can sort of manually do the linking now but only on the original version of the picture (not a virtual copy). The way to do it after having used edit in Open as Smart Object in Photoshop would be as follows. If the edit is changed in Lightroom then it is possible to move the same edits to the smart object in the Photoshop file by first save the edit in Lightroom so it goes to the xmp file. The in Photoshop double click on the smart object and from the basic panel in ACR load the settings from the xmp file.

The proposal above would solve that problem. I would like to be able to open a number of images from Lightroom as smart objects in the same Photoshop document and not as separate documents and have them as linked smart objects. So if I was blending several images together as smart objects I could go back and edit them again and not have to redo the blending. Granted as long as they are separate original files I could move the smart objects into the same document and I could use the method mentioned above to move the settings via xmp files.

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #12 on: March 02, 2015, 06:48:03 am »

To be clear, ACR does have soft proofing. That is, you can pick an output profile (even CMYK which LR can't) and you do get an on-screen simulation with or without paper/ink simulation.

Where do you find this in ACR?

BobShomler

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #13 on: March 02, 2015, 10:10:59 am »

Since the introduction of the subscription model, ACR and LR are not paired anymore. LR updates will only include support for new cameras while ACR updates may include new functionality such as the brushes for radial and graduated filters

I think this is true for ACR is CS6, but the new functionality is present in ACR with Bridge/PS CC
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #14 on: March 02, 2015, 10:13:30 am »

Where do you find this in ACR?
Workflow Option.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #15 on: March 02, 2015, 01:34:19 pm »

Workflow Option.

Ok, and how would this allow for soft proofing? I don't see this at all.

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #16 on: March 02, 2015, 01:43:18 pm »

Ok, and how would this allow for soft proofing? I don't see this at all.
Pick a profile, RI and simulation for paper/ink.

https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/using/whats-new-acr-8-x.html
Quote
Soft proofing from within the ACR dialog. You can now choose an ICC color profile and simulate additional factors like rendering intent and the paper and ink. These options can now be applied to the photograph through the ACR dialog, even before you open it in Photoshop.

ICC-based color spaces support from within the ACR dialog. The ACR dialog now allows you to preview your photographs with arbitrary ICC-based output color spaces. Available color spaces include grayscale, RGB, Lab, and CMYK color spaces.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

fdisilvestro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1852
    • Frank Disilvestro
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #17 on: March 02, 2015, 01:55:48 pm »

I think this is true for ACR is CS6, but the new functionality is present in ACR with Bridge/PS CC

The brush for radial and graduated filter is not available in LR. New functionality is added to ACR (CC version) only.

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #18 on: March 02, 2015, 02:10:13 pm »

Pick a profile, RI and simulation for paper/ink.

https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/using/whats-new-acr-8-x.html

Thanks, I had not noticed this being added to ACR. I did not see a way to compare two versions of the same picture in ACR so that one was with e.g. the ProPhoto RGB profile and the other was with a print profile. Maybe I have overlooked something.

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2106
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: Lightroom vs ACR
« Reply #19 on: March 02, 2015, 02:10:53 pm »

The brush for radial and graduated filter is not available in LR. New functionality is added to ACR (CC version) only.

That's kind of breaking the CC model for Lightroom, isn't it?
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up