Google| Subject | Re: post processing |
| From | Savageduck |
| Date | 03/14/2014 06:54 (03/13/2014 22:54) |
| Message-ID | <2014031322540915123-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Tony Cooper |
| Followups | Tony Cooper (8h & 18m) YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle (1d, 2h & 19m) > Savageduck |
On 2014-03-14 04:55:58 +0000, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>said:
Tony CooperNot at all. However, I can do much of what I would do in ACR and PS, in LR5, and that includes spot healing, fixing CA, applying lens & camera profiles, making good use of the "Upright" filter, applying basic adjustments (including setting black & white points), applying gradients when needed, selective use of the adjustment brush, variable aspect ratio cropping, adjusting tone curve, color correction, B&W conversion, and more. Then there are the vast numbers of presets, included and freely available from many sources, and last but not least the aforementioned third party plugins.
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:29:04 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:SavageduckTony Cooper
On 2014-03-14 03:17:06 +0000, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>said:nospamSavageduck
In article <2014031319381598839-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:nospamDamn! Did I type that last sentence? It should read: "The competent LR5 user is going to be able to survive quite well without invoking PS."SavageduckSavageduckTony Cooper
LR can handle all else and more, including access to the NIK Collection, and OnOne (Which gives you Perfect Layers to use with LR).
Well, if you go out of LR to use a plug-in, that's about the same as going out of LR to use PS.
However, if all you have on your computer is LR5 and the NIK Collection, or the OnOne Suite, you still have a very powerful editing/adjustment tool without the intervention of PS. The competent LR% users is going to be able to survive quite well without invoking PS.
even for not so competent users.
the number of tasks for which photoshop (any version) is needed that can't be done in lightroom grows smaller all the time.
Tony, I am about to agree with nospam!
I would agree with it, too. The statement, however, doesn't imply that PS will no longer be needed by all.
It's also getting to thepoint where for which the full version of Photoshop is not needed because so much can be done in Elements.Not exactly, in my case the full version is preferred over PSE, when I go to CS6 or CC from LR I want access to the full tool box without the limitations of PSE.
Personally I find PSE lacking in many ways, even though the PR says it can do almost all PS can. That is not exactly true. I also have PSE9, and while I can use it, it just doesn't cut the mustard for me. That is one of my reasons for making other recommendations for those who can't afford full versions of PS
Yet, you and I just signed up for CC just for those extra features that are not included in LR or Elements.Well I signed up for CC because I was about to buy LR5 and stick with CS6, with no intention to upgrade CS further or buy into the CC. Then they announced the "Photographer's" promotion for CS3 and later users, and I was hooked. The annual subscription for LR5 + PS/CC was less than I would have paid for the LR4 to LR5 upgrade. It was a no brainer. Now I am completely sold on the CC
Frankly, I am somewhat puzzled about why people like nospam, and even you, try so hard to convince everyone that Lightroom is the panacea of photo editing.Getting a bit hyperbolic with the use of "panacea" aren't we? It is certainly not something I have implied. I push LR because it is a great tool with a purpose which has been under stated and misunderstood. It is more than the sum of its parts, and it is very much more than a catalog/library/asset management tool.
I get why you like it, but I don't get why you continually imply - if not aver - that those of us who are aren't on the bandwagon are doing something wrong.I am not implying that you are doing anything wrong. It is a tool you own, but until only recently have only used in a limited manner. Using the two together just makes a truly symbiotic relationship where the two together are more than the sum of their parts.
I like to see such things used to their potential to meet the individual photographer's post processing needs with a smooth and logical workflow.
We are doing what we feel comfortable in doing, whether it's continuing to use a CS version or Gimp, and most of us are turning out some pretty decent stuff in doing so. Any failings in output are more failings in input from when we push the shutter button.Agreed, from what I see here we are for the most part hobbyist photographers and costs are an important factor in selecting any hardware or software. That was one of the reasons I suggested Pixelmator or Acorn as reasonably priced alternatives for our Mac using OP. Both of those are not as expensive as PSE and actually do a better job than PSE for those Mac users on a budget. They are both surprisingly full featured and powerful image editors.
Nospam's positions about effort and productivity are patently bullshit. The issue isn't about a production shop where there are deadlines and cost issues. It's about individuals pursuing a hobby.
It seems to be something related to some deep-seated need to be right and a need to feel like the bell sheep. Part of the push-back you get is because some of us really don't like being told what do.Let's just say, I suggest heavily.
-- Regards,
Savageduck
03/13/2014-
-
-
