My son has just purchased the new Canon 7D and I want to buy software so that he can import CR2 files and edit his photos. I am familiar with Adobe Photoshop (I am web designer) but know nothing about Lightroom. I have read that the upgrade to Lightroom 2 will allow you to import CR2 files? Should I get both programs or will Lightroom allow him to edit his photos (size color light) ? Would love to hear anyone's opinions that have used both programs. This is a Christmas gift - HELP!

Lightroom only allows limited editing, nothing like photoshop. Lighroom is for doing simple editing quickly...

photoshop is much better, there are a lot of usable features that your son can experiment on. CR2 files can be imported using the Canon software that comes with the camera but with only limited editing. i'd say go for the latest photoshop edition and you'll never regret it.

These are two completely different types of software. Lightroom is specifically designed for managing and processing raw digital photos and in my mind an absolute necessity for a camera like the 7D. Photoshop is graphic and image editing software and, although it can process raw images, I dont believe it is as good as Lightroom. It is best for post editing.
Sometimes you can get a good deal on them bundled together if you shop around.
I would opt for Lightroom. An absolute must, to compliment that camera, unless he uses an Apple Mac and then I believe the software of choice is Apple Aperture I think.
Regards
Don

For bulk professional photo retouch I use Photoshop CS5 with self made actions. For my opinion Lightroom are toy for new photographers.

Best to learn a program like Photoshop that is also used within the majority of work places therefore improving on your skill set. Photoshop skills are much more useful in general that Lightroom

Completely agree with you man,,, there's nothing better than photoshop

I'm afraid I'm going to be controversial and say I much prefer Lightroom. If you shoot in RAW (no real point in getting it if you don't) the level of control you can have over the finished 'exposure' is phenomenal and the batch processing makes converting a days worth of RAW images into very acceptable JPEG's a breeze. I rarely need to dip into a photo editor after processing the images with Lightroom. Its also affordable.

Also, assuming you're going to use legal software (some of us still do!) then Photoshop is excrutiatingly expensive, although you could plump for Elements instead. However, if your son is in school you may well qualify for an academic license which brings Photoshop CS5 into the reach of mortals.

Having said that I prefer Paint Shop Pro, cheaper, quicker and in many ways easier to use. Sometimes I do need to dip into a photo editor to crop images, do some work in layers etc.

The only caveat is if your sone is thinking of pursuing a career in photography / graphic design then get him started on Photoshop straight away.

Cheers

Danny B

LR is designed primarily for photographers, Photoshop for graphics. It is an obvious difference between the two products.

Stan

Absolutely agree with you, donmac. Both must offer products for professional use. Comparing the two products is nonsense

Regards
Stan

Lightroom and Photoshop are very different but can certainly be compared - a car and motorboke are very different but each is best for certain applications. Same goes for soup and fish and chips! It make perfect sense to compare apples and oranges if you're deciding which is most suitable.

The biggest difference is that Photoshop (the full version, not elements) is able to split the images up into parts and manipulate them seperately - you can mask off the sky for example and process it in a totally different way to the rest of the picture or do detailed work on the eyes in a portrait. It's far more flexible when it comes to image manipluation. And every professional print/design/publication studio everywhere uses Photoshop. It's raw conversion is very powerful and it's easy to synchronise adjustments across any number of RAW files. It can batch convert to Jpeg, and alomost anything it does and almost any combination of anything it does can be scripted and automated - it's very programmable. There are lots of sites where people share scripts they have written for other to use.

Yes Photoshop does graphics etc but not in the same way as Illustrator for example, it absolutely isn't a primarily graphics application.

Lightroom does a lot and is probably quite a bit more efficient if you don't do a lot of selective retouching (cloning, local adjustments on faces or subjects etc as opposed to overal brightness, sharpness, colour etc).

Most pro photographers will probably use Lightroom or similar and they may not use Photoshop but you can be sure that any photo published anywhere will have been through Photoshop.

personally, if you have a bit of patience I would always recommend Photoshop.

Hope this helps.

Interesting thread - from the sublime to the ridiculous. Some people get the differences and how they can help in certain situations and others see only limitations. so here's my two-penn'orth. They are both essential to pros ( you could use aperture or whatever but you need something like lightroom and something like photoshop ). If you think LR is useless then you just don't know how to use it.

When I shoot a wedding, for example, I chop my files down to a selection of around 200-300 from a shoot of 1000+. Lightroom is the only plausible option for this.

Then with the selected files I correct/improve. Not just raw corrections like WB but spot removal, lighting adjustments using gradients and the adjustment tools and also crops. I can get all 200-300 customer-ready in a couple of hours using only LR. Many will make it to the album with only these adjustments.

Photoshop is a beautiful thing and I use it all the time but if I had to choose only one it would be lightroom and certainly if the person in the original question is an amateur then I think they should buy lightroom: How much removal of wall-sockets, straightening of noses or superimposing are they going to be doing? If they just want to make their photos look as good as they can then LR is more than enough (assuming they learn how to use it to its full potential)

I have both CS5 and Lightroom and I’m now trying to decide whether to buy some plug ins for either one or both. Because of the price difference (half to buy the plug ins for Lightroom than it is to buy it for CS5) I’m leaning towards this version but I have a quick question….
I believe Lightroom does not work with layers therefore, when I apply a specific correction / enhancement, etc. can I change its “opacity or strength” (this is possible in photoshop ..) or do I have to apply it fully ?

Thanks for your help

There is no need to get both program. Photoshop is always better than Lightroom. Lightroom only allow limited editing. This is only for simple editing. But Photoshop has much better quality than Lightroom. Photoshop is use for graphics.




______________________________
canon pgi 5bk ink cartridge

If anyone is interested in getting both programs - Adobe does have a 30% off discount when both Photoshop & Lightroom are bought together. Offer should be valid until the end of this year.

I use the RAW editor that came with my Canon to optimise my CR2 files, which works just fine, and Photoshop Elements for post processing.

Honestly if your son's just starting out, he SO won't need full Photoshop - even with Elements, which i think cost me under £100, I'm constantly amazed by what it can do; I'm a heavy user of the software, and I bet i'm using less than 50% of what it's capable of. Plus, it's not the easiest thing to learn if you're not used to professional graphics packages. I think i'd have had a nervous breakdown if i'd had any more options to deal with than Elements offered.

Japanese shop center
メールフォーム CGI
誕生日プレゼント
永代供養
業務用洗剤
Welcome to

I use both Lightroom and Photoshop during my photography workflow.

I use LR to categorise and sort my images, apply RAW adjustments and basic adjustments and effects (all no destructive). I probably do 70% of my initial corrections and edits within Lightroom itself, as the 2 packages are integrated so that I can export images directly into Photoshop (you can even set it up to run droplets direct from within lightroom to process images in bulk in PS) after my initial corrections in LR I then make more detailed editing (there are no layers in Lightroom) and then save back into the Lightroom library; from there I can add further effects (all non destructive), print, export directly to my website, create contact sheets etc etc...

They are both very different and both have some similarities, but for me it's about speeding up my workflow and keeping track of the images and reducing my editing time.

If I had to choose.. I guess PS CS5 would be over lightroom as you can do do a lot within bridge and ACR to manage the workflow.

For me though both are fully integrated into my workflow

Regards
Graham