Thinking about asking for PS for x-mas. Which one?

[MOmilkman]

I'm sure this question has been asked before so I will apologize in advance.

I would still consider myself a beginner to intermediate photographer and I have been using GIMP for about a year now and have been thinking about making the switch to PS.
I noticed there are about 3-4 versions of it on Adobe's website and I'm wondering if you all can help me decide which one is best for me. Elements or Lightroom? What would you say is the biggest difference between the 2?

Like I said I'm not a profession by any means but I would like something that I can learn and grow into.
I use a lot of the basic functions of GIMP, such as clone, rotate, heal, curves, contrast and balance adjustments, etc...
I would be interested in using more that Adobe might offer, just not sure what the programs entail since I have never even seen the program.

Thanks in advance

[jdepould]

Lightroom isn't photoshop. It has photoshop in the name, but it's really its own separate thing. LR can do a lot of normal toning stuff, but not pixel editing. LR's main purpose is quick and efficient organization. I use LR almost exclusively. It's great when I need to sort through 1000 images on deadline.

[acedrew]

Lightroom does have clone stamping and red-eye type stuff, so saying it doesn't do pixel editing isn't correct, it will do 90% of your workflow. But there are times when you need photoshop. Lightroom is capable of ALL of these "clone, rotate, heal, curves, contrast and balance adjustments"
I would get lightroom, and use GIMP when needed and add photoshop later. Lightroom will completely enlighten your workflow process!

Andrew Rodgers
Perfected Perspectives -- Photography by Andrew Rodgers | Andrew Rodgers (acedrew) on Twitter | Login | Facebook

[zona5101]

Originally Posted by acedrew

Lightroom does have clone stamping and red-eye type stuff, so saying it doesn't do pixel editing isn't correct, it will do 90% of your workflow. But there are times when you need photoshop. Lightroom is capable of ALL of these "clone, rotate, heal, curves, contrast and balance adjustments"
I would get lightroom, and use GIMP when needed and add photoshop later. Lightroom will completely enlighten your workflow process!

Andrew Rodgers
Perfected Perspectives -- Photography by Andrew Rodgers | Andrew Rodgers (acedrew) on Twitter | Login | Facebook

Jd is correct. LR is non-destructive, it does not actually alter the image, it creates a sidecar that applies all the toning, cropping, cloning, etc. It isn't until you export the file that any of the changes are actually made to a file. And if you save as a different name/format than the original, you can go back to the original settings anytime, remove the crop, alter the color temp etc...

[naeno]

You can download trial versions of each of those programs to use for 30 days free. Download them and start playing. That would be your best option. See which one works for you.

Adobe - Products

[acedrew]

But the exported picture does have "pixel editing" non-destructive editing is not what he was referring to. I don't think. The clone brush def counts as "pixel editing", and it's stored in the database, not sidecars like ACR, although, you can save sidecars if you choose.

Andrew Rodgers
Perfected Perspectives -- Photography by Andrew Rodgers | Andrew Rodgers (acedrew) on Twitter | Login | Facebook

[MOmilkman]

Thanks for the replies everyone. And I will check out both versions, thanks naeno

[sickBoy]

I've been using PS CS3 for a couple of years and although I have CS4 too I stick to the former. If you work with RAW files, the I strongly suggest you to buy PS. My guess is that CS3 would be cheaper, so I'd suggest you go for it. You can find countless tutorials and ebooks about PS that will help you at the beginning.