| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Lightroom
Robert Beck, Photographer
 |
Carlsbad | CA | USA | Posted: 10:56 PM on 07.01.10 |
| ->> Someone talk me in or out of Adobe's Lightroom. What is the diff between Lightroom and Photoshop? |
|
Michael Ciu, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Lorain | OH | USA | Posted: 11:09 PM on 07.01.10 |
->> We use lightroom to edit down a portrait shoot. We import a folder of images, flag the ones we like/dislike and go from there with Photoshop. It just makes our portrait process a little easier. We also then use it to view the images with a customer in our sales consults. When connected to an external monitor you can set it so they only see the images and none of your working around or the interface.
We also use it for our sport images to get them rotated if necessary and to do minor tweaks as a batch then export with IPTC data and game specific file names.
Very versatile and you can compare images faster than opening them in Photoshop. You will definitely still need both. |
|
Eric Francis, Photographer
|
Omaha | NE | United States | Posted: 11:45 PM on 07.01.10 |
->> PS has been relegated to a tool that only has very specific uses such has big cloning jobs and such.
90% + of the processing you need to do to an image can be done in LR3 faster and better.
It's one of those tools that has a steep learning curve. But once you learned it, you can't imagine life without it.
just my .02 |
|
Dave Einsel, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Houston | TX | United States | Posted: 12:44 AM on 07.02.10 |
->> The best example I can give is this from the real world covering an NFL game.
Using Lightroom, I am done and packing up an hour before colleagues who are using PhotoShop. In most cases, I am also moving more pictures.
With LR, it is not necessary to open individual files to correct, crop, etc.
All of the toning/cropping are done in the browser and the pictures are then exported to your specific requirements, ie. size, resolution, color space, etc.
Just buy it and never look back.
Good luck. |
|
Butch Miller, Photographer
|
Lock Haven | PA | USA | Posted: 1:05 AM on 07.02.10 |
->> Lightroom offers a great time saving workflow for most jobs and I find I only have to take less than 10% of images to photoshop ... mostly portrait/wedding retouching or converting to CMYK for publications that request I do that before uploading ...
Even with all that can be done in LR ... it is no substitute for PS ... when you need pixel editing features that can't be done in LR ... the two apps together are unbeatable in my book ...
I agree with Dave ... download the trial ... watch the introduction videos for LR3 at the link below and kick the tires a little ... I think you will like it ...
http://www.jkost.com/lightroom.html |
|
Harrison Shull, Photographer
|
Fayetteville, WV | Asheville, NC | | Posted: 8:09 AM on 07.02.10 |
->> Ditto on what Eric said about the steep learning curve for LR - or any of the these programs these days.
I would recommend that you look into some sort of intensive hands-on workshop to get you jumpstarted through the process of getting up and running quickly and efficiently. I am sure there are others, but I cannot speak for anything but the D65 workshops offered by Seth Resnick. They are top notch!
Another option is to go with SS member Michael Clarks LR tutorial and workflow book.
http://www.michaelclarkphoto.com/#/BOOKS/DIGITAL%20WORKFLOW/ |
|
Darren Whitley, Photographer
|
Northwest Missouri | MO | USA | Posted: 10:00 AM on 07.02.10 |
->> I really like making catalogs. If you have a special project, there's no need to duplicate your original files by copying them into a folder. Create a new catalog in Lightroom and manage the development and cropping of the photos there. I have multiple projects so I create a catalog whenever I need a custom-made collection for a particular publication.
In your case Robert, I'd keep my surfing photos in a catalog and college football in another. When a client calls for surfing photos, you just open the surfing catalog. Chances are the value of surfing photos won't expire quite like collegiate sports photos tend to do. Some segregation might help with organizing your topics. You can always merge two catalogs together later.
Using catalogs allows you to leave behind your adjustments as XMP files with original files. You can do that in Photoshop as well but our old project workflow meant we worked on a duplicate copy and not the original.
And the keywording allows you to make searchable archives for any cataloging system that reads the IPTC keyword field. My student assistants are now responsible for cataloging my photos so that whenever I get a request for a specific athlete, we can access that in moments and move on with our day.
Lightroom is not a great replacement for Photo Mechanic IMHO opinion though. PM offers greater speed and has several ways to tag, color code or rank photos that LR doesn't exactly match up on. But for keywording, I really like LR. I'd like to see PM and LR have better cross-application photo tagging.
I never was all that impressed by other cataloging software such as Canto Cumulus or Extensis Portfolio. Both cost a lot to use at the enterprise level. I see Lightroom really fitting in well because it can develop images as well as help catalog them. |
|
Jack Kurtz, Photographer
|
Phoenix | AZ | United States | Posted: 10:13 AM on 07.02.10 |
->> I'm a huge fan of Lightroom. I use it for to manage my archives and for all of my editing. The only time I use Photoshop now is when I have an exceptionally noisy image that requires a trip to Noise Ninja and even that is less frequent now with LR3 which has much better noise removal than LR2 did.
LR (or Aperture) requires a completely different workflow than Photoshop does and it took me a while to figure that out. I've been using LR since vers 1, it was about six months of struggling with how to fit LR1 into my workflow, first as a replacement for iView (to maintain my archive) then I realized it wasn't about fitting LR into my workflow but easing Photoshop OUT of my workflow. At that point there was no looking back.
LR2 brought localized edits with the gradient tool and burning and dodging. At that point I pretty much retired PS, it's use dropped to fewer than 2% of my raw files. The only ones that went into PS were extremely underexposed pics from my dSLRs or pics from my G10 shot at ISO400 and up for noise removal.
With LR3 I don't even do that anymore. I'm a huge fan. LR3 is the most heavily used piece of software on my computers. |
|
Shane Bevel, Photographer
|
Tulsa | OK | USA | Posted: 2:04 AM on 07.04.10 |
->> I don't really use the cataloging/selection processes in LR. I use Photo Mechanic to ingest/make initial selections, then load those selections into LR and edit. Here's where I bypass a lot of LR's cataloging, I actually create a new catalog for each shoot. I find it easier and faster that way.
Then I make my edits, export, PM reopens automatically when the export is done and then from there use PM to deliver via FTP/Email/Zenfolio.
PM and LR3 together are sublime.
The number one advantage to using LR? It encouraged me to rid my life of the JPG format except for final delivery. It's made a world of difference in my work. Even all of my editorial (and sports) work is done in Raw/LR.
LR3 added built in tether support and super kick ass noise reduction. PS still get's used occasionally, but probably less than once a week. |
|
Lisa Hall, Photographer
|
Oklahoma City | OK | USA | Posted: 3:50 PM on 07.05.10 |
| ->> I still have LR2, and always had a problem with how long it took to import images. Does everyone agree to get around that problem is to import thumbnail size? Will I edit the original image----do it do any damage? I shoot JPG. |
|
Israel Shirk, Photographer, Assistant
|
Boise | ID | US | Posted: 5:10 PM on 07.05.10 |
->> Quick overview:
Lightroom streamlines the process of editing/color-correcting photos and includes facilities for not only the editing portion of the process, but can also (to varying degrees) organize the files themselves. It also lets you create and manipulate metadata including IPTC info.
It organizes images into catalogs (of which you can have as many as you want) - and inside of a catalog you can search, have collections (say, a collection of images from a certain shoot or a collection of images which are ranked above 4 stars). This is centered around the "Library" tab. To create a new catalog, go to "file" -> "new catalog", or to switch catalogs, you can go to "file" -> "open catalog". To import photos into a catalog, open or create a catalog and then click the "import" button. You can manually set where the files will be imported to on the right-hand side of the import dialog. You can optionally have the images' metadata saved in an XMP sidecar file - the setting for this is in Lightroom's preferences. There are options for generating preview images (which require time to render, thus slowing down an import), which are in the catalog preferences menu. You can also apply metadata presets on import.
To sort images, you select which collection you want to sort inside of (ie, "last import" or create a smart collection which selects images from a certain date). Then you can thumb through the images looking at the thumbnails or larger versions (switch back and forth by the icons underneath the large image or thumbnails, to the left side a little). Stars can be set using the 1-5 keys and colors by the 6-8 keys. You can also edit an image's metadata using the panel on the right side. To restrict which images are shown you can use a smart collection or a library filter - a library filter is a more quick and dirty approach - on the right side above the bottom thumbnail strip there's a filter dropdown which lets you sort by ratings, colors, etc.
To make adjustments to images, you can click the "Develop" tab. Select an image, then use the sliders on the right side to make changes as appropriate. You can also edit an image in photoshop from here - use option-e or control-e (or right-click the image's thumbnail at the bottom to see more options). If you do edit in photoshop, it creates a new copy of the image as a 16-bit tiff or as a PSD; you're actually editing this, not the original. Original images are always preserved intact in Lightroom and new images are not actually generated until you export.
The Slideshow, Print, and Web tabs are made for automating slideshows, print orders, and web publishing. Their templates can be customized quite a bit but may require some programming. Plugins can also add more options.
To export images, you select the images you want to export (in either Library or Develop), then go to "file" -> "export". You can select a preset and then modify it as necessary (image size, quality, etc), save a new preset (if you're going to use settings often); then click "export" and it'll pop them out. |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
|
Lake Oswego | OR | USA | Posted: 7:54 PM on 07.05.10 |
->> I import 1:1 thumbnails, it slows down the initial process, but works faster once assimilated into your catalog. Also, the thumbnails are RAW instead of jpeg like Aperture, something I find useful when doing fast proofs for clients.
Speed is the bottom line for Lightroom, and efficiency. The presets I can create save hours and days!! |
|
Jeff Jones, Photo Editor
|
Gallup | NM | USA | Posted: 11:31 PM on 07.05.10 |
->> Robert -
Adobe Products give you a trial period where you can use the full version of the software and see if it is what you want. I think it is for 30 days, but it might be 60. |
|
Lisa Hall, Photographer
|
Oklahoma City | OK | USA | Posted: 8:05 PM on 07.06.10 |
->> N. Scott-
I totally agree with you. But, one time I put a clock on it and timed how long it took to import 600-700 (even JPG),
and it was close to 1.5 hours! This was before I set it to thumbnails. But once you've got them in there---speed is the name of the game! |
|
Philip Johnson, Photographer
|
Garland | TX | USA | Posted: 10:37 PM on 07.06.10 |
| ->> For importing into lightroom I have found that it is faster to copy your CF card to the destination folder and then import them into lightroom without moving the files. |
|
Shane Bevel, Photographer
|
Tulsa | OK | USA | Posted: 8:32 PM on 07.07.10 |
->> Ingest with PM, auto apply captioning information and then import to LR without moving the files. Takes hardly anytime at all. Especially if you make a quick pass through with PM to rid yourself of all the trash files.
Shane |
|
Jeff Jones, Photo Editor
|
Gallup | NM | USA | Posted: 3:24 PM on 07.09.10 |
->> Shane -
your method is faster, and as a user of both PM and Lightroom I agree it is the best way around it, but I would chime in that the downfall of Lightroom is its lack of speed. A person using Lightroom (which has its own ingest/import tools) should not also need additional software. Lightroom is supposed to be a one-size fits all software.
For me, I am in the middle of a love/hate relationship. I love the potential, but hate the time it takes... and since I am no longer a full-time shooter I can't justify buying a super fast computer just to make Lightroom run faster. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|