Re: Beyond blue to dull white/gray skies

"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:3trc86l147gk5a6bdlo52q159mn7blp2ro@xxxxxxxxxx


That's not a particularly valid assessment, Charles. First of all,
many of us remain with Photoshop for editing because we've been using
Photoshop for so long that the steps we do are instinctive. We can
edit in PS just as fast, and just as well, as someone else can in
Lightroom.

We don't have to use a mask to sharpen. We can sharpen the entire
image using a number of techniques (compared to the one technique in
LR) , or we can draw out a quick selection with the Lasso tool and
sharpen just one aspect. Just as quick and effective as using the
Adjustment Brush/Sharpness in LR.

I think it's a bit silly to try to use a percentage, but your "90%" is
way off the mark. You can't use Layers or Layer Masks in LR, and that
alone should be valued at much more than 10%. You can't combine
images in LR.

I have LR, but use it primarily for the library and keyword features.
I seldom go to Develop. I don't have anything against editing in LR,
but I can't see spending the time to learn the techniques when I can
already do the same thing in PS.


The people that I've talked to that are strong advocates of LR are the
professional photographers who take hundreds of images to my one
image, use pre-sets and mass process large numbers of images, and
create the stacks, collections, and catalogs that they need for their
volume. None of that interests me.

I understand LR to have been originally designed is for the shooter who has a bunch of images taken under similar conditions. The people you describe in the above paragraph.



That's my feeling about learning to edit in LR. Why should I spend
the time learning LR editing, or money on books, when there would be
little return for the effort compared to what I can do now with what I
have now.

No image is going to be *better* because it was processed in LR or PS.
The program doesn't make the difference. The skills of person using
the program does.


Almost true. The program has to have the features available to assist the artist in achieving the desired goal.



--
Peter

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Superior Microsoft Security
    ... Photoshop at the things people use Photoshop for. ... The images the vast majority of Photoshop users work with are not ... editing the smart layer, it produces a rendered bitmap of it which is ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: need help with proper workflow
    ... My second is to bring the images to 10 inches on long side, ... proposed Crops are likely to reduce the PPI too much for printing. ... My first Editing is to bring the colour and density to what I want. ... I always save work in progress and finished Prints as PSD, ...
    (alt.graphics.photoshop)
  • The logistics of film scanning
    ... and have some really nice quality digital images to work with. ... If I plan to do post-scan editing in Photoshop, ... prescans, warm ups, copies to hard disk, etc. ... time taking pictures than feeding negatives into a machine. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Memory for XPS 600
    ... I am editing some very large ... >>> scans in Photoshop, and want to add more memory. ... Tom> Just curious, ... Tom> 12mp digital images, usually editing more than one at a time and it ...
    (alt.sys.pc-clone.dell)
  • Re: Songbird...
    ... can then be sported into other albums based on the keywords used. ... I use iPhoto to do all my editing, ... In the past, I had started editing images, and then making a mess, but ... format, it soon became obvious that a much better structure to image ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)