Lightroom V Photoshop

[Mike Sellers]

I currently use PS CS3 and I am wondering if Lightroom somehow produces superior results to PS? I am trying to make the case to get Lightroom but I don`t know if there is a good reason to switch.
Mike

[francois]

I currently use PS CS3 and I am wondering if Lightroom somehow produces superior results to PS? I am trying to make the case to get Lightroom but I don`t know if there is a good reason to switch.
Mike

Mike,
If you use RAW files then I'd say yes. Lightroom uses th latest ACR engine which, in my opinion, is ahead the one in CS3.

The best thing to do would be to download Lightroom 3. The trial is valid for 30 days which is sufficient to test and see if it produces improved reasults with your photos and your workflow.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Mike,
If you use RAW files then I'd say yes. Lightroom uses th latest ACR engine which, in my opinion, is ahead the one in CS3.

The best thing to do would be to download Lightroom 3. The trial is valid for 30 days which is sufficient to test and see if it produces improved reasults with your photos and your workflow.

I agree. And while you are trying LR3, be sure to notice whether there are features that you need in CS3 that may not exist in Lightroom (layers, masks, etc.)

I got hooked on Photoshop long before Lightroom came along, and my addiction to certain bit-editing features of Photoshop means that I can't be satisfied with LR alone. But on the other hand, LR is so much more elegant in the things that it does do (once you get used to the user interface, which is very different from PS), that I do as much as I can in LR and then sometimes do some additional tweaking in PS.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... I don`t know if there is a good reason to switch...

There are probably many good reasons, but there is also one major reason NOT to: you are going to hurt your PS' feelings. It would at first feel neglected, then abandoned.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Very good advise, I'd jsut add that LR is really a workflow solution, so if you don't need the workflow stuff you may as well use PS. ACR in CS5 has essentially the same capability as the raw converter in Lightroom 3.

Best regards
Erik

I agree. And while you are trying LR3, be sure to notice whether there are features that you need in CS3 that may not exist in Lightroom (layers, masks, etc.)

I got hooked on Photoshop long before Lightroom came along, and my addiction to certain bit-editing features of Photoshop means that I can't be satisfied with LR alone. But on the other hand, LR is so much more elegant in the things that it does do (once you get used to the user interface, which is very different from PS), that I do as much as I can in LR and then sometimes do some additional tweaking in PS.

[stamper]

There are probably many good reasons, but there is also one major reason NOT to: you are going to hurt your PS' feelings. It would at first feel neglected, then abandoned.

Unfortunately I hurt my PS' feelings by adding Viveza 2 into the plug in folder. Every time I start up PS it moans about the additional burden it attaches to it. I tell it Viveza makes things simpler to do. Yes it makes me feel guilty so I switch between Viveza and PS masking and there is less moaning. I couldn't do without PS

[danvsjr]

Hi,

Very good advise, I'd jsut add that LR is really a workflow solution, so if you don't need the workflow stuff you may as well use PS. ACR in CS5 has essentially the same capability as the raw converter in Lightroom 3.

Best regards
Erik

Two key statements being made in the previous few responses. 1) the new ACR engine is supposedly the same in LR3 and PS CS5, so 2) If you need to do Photoshop "stuff", upgrade your CS3 to CS5, if you want very good image management and easy initial development, go with LR3.. Do you have thousands of images and add hundreds or thousands more in a short time, buy LR3. If not, many use the Bridge in CS to the same end.