PP: Lightroom V's Photoshop

[compleks]

Hello everyone! Hope you're all well.

I haven't visited recently, but I've been busy working away in LightRoom organising and editing a bunch of old photos.
I'm really loving how easy LightRoom makes everything. Saved me alot of trouble.

I've just got my hands on a copy of Photoshop CS4 too.

Now I'm aware that many more of the pros are using Photoshop for their post processing, however I'm curious to know why?
In LightRoom I usually just make some adjustments to the brightness, contrast, tone curves, and some colour adjustments. Maybe a cropping if needed. Granted my photos are nothing special though.

I'm curious to know under what circumstances Photoshop would be necessary?
What PP are you doing that you feel you need to use Photoshop?

I would like to familiarise myself with Photoshop, but it seems like a fairly steep learning curve.

Thanks for any input

[ChrisPhilip]

I think a lot of pros use a combo of something like lightroom and photoshop (or bridge/acr/photoshop, among many others). You use lightroom for general processing and then everynow and then you need to do something that lightroom just cant do and thats when you use photoshop. I have used it lately to remove tricky things from a photo, for example in a photo of my gf a part of her arm was sticking out in a weird way so I used photoshop to remove it. I dont know why anyone would use photoshop alone when Bridge/ACR or Lightroom make the workflow smoother and faster.

[karen_s]

I use Lightroom for about 95% of my PP work and when I can't get it done there, I take the image into Photoshop Elements. Some things that Photoshop has and Lightroom doesn't are the ability to add textures on layers, merge multiple images into a panoramic, create HDR from multiple images, or add text (though Lightroom can add a simple copyright). There are more differences I am sure, these are just a few of the big ones.

I do prefer to edit in Lightroom though because of it's speed and how all the tools are right at my fingertips. I am constantly amazed at the effects I can get from it too. It's a more creative tool than some people think.

[kirbinster]

Lightroom is designed for photographers, and will do the majority of what you want. Photoshop is only needed when you must do bit level edits. It may be even less needed when Lightroom Ver 3 comes out.

[Samanax]

Originally Posted by compleks

I haven't visited recently, but I've been busy working away in LightRoom organising and editing a bunch of old photos.
I'm really loving how easy LightRoom makes everything. Saved me alot of trouble.

I've just got my hands on a copy of Photoshop CS4 too.

Now I'm aware that many more of the pros are using Photoshop for their post processing, however I'm curious to know why?
In LightRoom I usually just make some adjustments to the brightness, contrast, tone curves, and some colour adjustments. Maybe a cropping if needed. Granted my photos are nothing special though.

I'm curious to know under what circumstances Photoshop would be necessary?
What PP are you doing that you feel you need to use Photoshop?

Lightroom is fine for normal adjustments and some simple localized adjustments, but if you have a picture that really requires a lot of work done to it to get it right, you'll need the power of Photoshop.

I think the biggest advantages to using Photoshop is the ability to use layers and to use masks and selections to do localized edits. Sure, you don't have to do really serious editing on every single picture you take, but with Photoshop you can really work the image to get it right if it needs a lot of help.

Most of my friends use Lightroom for the majority of their editing and will use Photoshop once in a while. I tend to split my time between Lightroom 2 and Photoshop CS3 about 40/60. I'll do my initial adjustments in LR2 but will always take the images into CS3 for final adjustments. I just prefer how the images come out when I work them this way. This is my workflow but I'm not saying it should be your workflow...you need to find out what works best for you.

[compleks]

Thanks for the replies.

I've had a bit of a play around with photoshop, and it's not quite as intimidating as I first thought.
I still have alot to learn obviously but I can see how it would be useful for its different layers and localised adjustment.

I still don't understand the 'use mask' feature though. I'll have to look into that one.

Thanks everyone.

[GadgetRick]

Also, keep in mind, LR isn't just a photo editing tool, more importantly, it's a photo management tool. LR manages your photos in a database so you can easily find them. You can rank them in various ways, create folders, collections, etc. to manage them. Export them to various outlets (online/offline/etc.). It's a great way to keep track of photos. Oh, it also does a bang up job for editing. However, PS is still needed for some things. For instance, I really don't like the auto tone in LR, always goes too bright or too dark for my taste. Auto levels in PS is usually spot on. The auto color in PS is also (usually) useful.

Both are useful tools. Most pros seem to use both.

[zona5101]

Originally Posted by compleks

Thanks for the replies.

I've had a bit of a play around with photoshop, and it's not quite as intimidating as I first thought.
I still have alot to learn obviously but I can see how it would be useful for its different layers and localised adjustment.

I still don't understand the 'use mask' feature though. I'll have to look into that one.

Thanks everyone.

a mask is ...like masking tape! Use a mask to cover something from changes or alteratively, mask everything and remove the mask to uncover whats below (like pinstriping!).
You can also use a mask to create a selection!
When using a layer mask you will paint in black to cover or white or uncover.
PS is pretty powerful stuff - with great power comes great responsibility! Use it wisely