Beginner Photoshop v Lightroom

Denny61

Denny61

Messages
18
Name
Denis
Edit My Images
Yes
Any advice from someone who has used both and possibly give a beginner there preference for ease of use.

Thanks
 
Personally I would download the free trials of each and see which works for you - they both do pretty much the same thing but in very different ways. I use PSE - I tried LR but really didn't get on with, whereas lots on here say the opposite, so it really is worth trying both and seeing which works best with your brain.
 
Lightroom is predominantly a cataloguing program with some image editing tools and Photoshop is where you can do some serious image editing but they both need to be learned.

Adobe videos are a good place to start or Scott Kelby's books.

Go for the £8.47 a month photographer's package from Adobe.

A great way to have both products without breaking the bank.
 
I've got both and use Lightroom almost all the time, and Photoshop just on the occasions where I need to do something that Lightroom can't handle. Photoshop will do pretty much everything that Lightroom can and much more (although it lacks some features such as the photo cataloguing that LR offers), but Lightroom is probably much more intuitive and easier to use for general photo processing work IMO. As Sue suggests, give them both a try with the free trials. The Adobe CC subscription for both can be had for around £7 per month, so it's not a massive outlay to have both (assuming you don't mind the subscription model). Otherwise, you can get a standalone version of both (it's around £100 for the latest version of Lightroom and quite a bit more for Photoshop).
 
As above; Photoshop vs Lightroom is like TV vs Cinema

They're completely different tools for doing different things (though there's some overlap)
 
I wouldn't say Lightroom and photoshop are similar, yes they both can process RAW files but that is where the similiarities of their function stop. Lightroom is more a catalogue and simple processing program. Photoshop is a bit more involved with layers and is a more powerful editor.

I first started using photoshop elements and at the time had quite a weird processing workflow (raw converter to
TIFs, edit TIFs in PSE then export as hi res jpeg). It was 18 months before I moved to Lightroom on a friends recommendation and I honestly haven't looked back. 5 years later Lightroom does all of the processing I want to do. I like the library catalogue function as every RAW over the last 5 years are nicely stored away and I no longer need a final jpeg version and the RAW file. I export in the file type/size as I need it and later delete the exported file to save hard drive space. I also have direct export folders where I can publish hi res jpegs to my website hidden folders as a way of cloud storage. I don't go into PSE that often now Lightroom can stitch panoramas.

If you want to learn more about Lightroom their 17.5hrs of videos helped me. They are broken down into small chucks so you can quickly pick and choose what you want to learn. It's worth noting they were done using Lightroom 4 but most of the videos are relevant to how Lightroom 6/CC works today. There will be some sliders that are different and LR6/CC functions that are missing but as a free source of 17.5hrs of tutorial it's still pretty good.

http://en.elephorm.com/tuto-lightroom-4-complete-training/lightroom-4-introduction.html?html5
 
lots of what you can do in Lightroom you can also do in Photoshop. I found Lightroom easier to get to grips with, Photoshop is a lot more complex but a lot more powerful for editing shots ie removing things, but I very rarely use Lightroom now (Im still very much a beginner)
 
If only one, Photoshop. Photoshop can do nearly everything lightroom can do.

however they work hand in hand, you should get both.
 
You can down trials of both. If you are beginning then maybe elements is for you. Again do a trial
 
Thanks Everyone...Think I will try both & certainly look at the video tutorials first. Will let you know in the near future of my choice. Thanks Again.
 
99% of the time I use Lightroom, as it does pretty much everything I need it to do. I bought it mainly to organise my photos into catalogs, but it's editing abilities are good enough for what I need. The only time I use PS is when I want to remove something distracting from the image, or to stitch two halves of a photo together.
 
Lightroom is a basic catalogue filing system, and easy way to process large numbers of photographs.. Photoshop carries on from where light room ends and does all the advanced pixel level changes.
What you do in light room remains reversible. changes you make in photoshop are mostly not, the exception is that layers can be saved in tiffs.

I use light room only for the catalogue function and output... all my processing is done in photoshop. I have done it that way since long before lightroom was available. though I used a different catalogue program.
 
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic said:
Lightroom is a basic catalogue filing system, and easy way to process large numbers of photographs.. Photoshop carries on from where light room ends and does all the advanced pixel level changes.
What you do in light room remains reversible. changes you make in photoshop are mostly not, the exception is that layers can be saved in tiffs.

I use light room only for the catalogue function and output... all my processing is done in photoshop. I have done it that way since long before lightroom was available. though I used a different catalogue program.
Click to expand...

If that works for you all good. But don't make the mistake of dismissing LR as a basic catalogue filing system. Its a more then capable editing suite too
 
I have the Creative Cloud subscription.

Basically Lightroom is cataloging software that has some editing capabilities. You add your raw photo to the library, add some keywords, and do some editing. Those keywords and editing steps are held in the database, and are applied to the raw photo when you require a jpeg version. No need to keep the jpeg because you can recreate it when you need it again.

Photoshop is an editing program. No cataloging. You open your image in Photoshop, do some editing and then export to jpeg. If you want to keep what you have done (maybe for later re-edit), you need to save the file as a PSD (or tiff). So you effectively double the amount of files you have.

Photoshop can do a lot more editing than Lightroom (although more features appear in Lightroom with every new release). So I do most of my work in Lightroom, with only a few images going into Photoshop.

Bear in mind that the monthly subscription is actually an annual subscription but paid over the 12 months. So if you cancel you are liable for at least part of the remaining months of the year.

Stephen
 
Don't forget that PSE at least comes with a comprehensive catalogue - Organiser. I have catalogued all my photos in this for years.
 
All my editing starts in Lightroom. Most of it ends there as well - I reserve Photoshop for more serious edits that require layers and more local adjustments than the global adjustments Lightroom does (although it does allow you to do some local adjustments).
The image editing tools in Lightroom are more than good enough for general tweaks and finishing of images - contrast, saturation, black and white conversion, sharpening, etc.
 
Lr if you want to actually get to grips with standard processing and create a photograph

Ps if you want an unintuitive and hard to understand (unsharp mask?) program that will make loads of works of art possible.

YMMV.....
 
I use LR for 90% of my individual photo-editing then switch across to PS where I do my sharpening and noise reduction.

Just can't get it to look as good as it does with the help of PS, when I try sharpening and NR in LR! (Would be nice if I could though)
 
wezza13 said:
I use LR for 90% of my individual photo-editing then switch across to PS where I do my sharpening and noise reduction.

Just can't get it to look as good as it does with the help of PS, when I try sharpening and NR in LR! (Would be nice if I could though)
Click to expand...

agreed - you need both even if your version is an old PS version
 
wezza13 said:
Sell one of your big boy lenses then! :D
Click to expand...

I tend to use the 300mm f4 PF with the TC's most of the time now - at my old age anything bigger is a struggle, (as the actress said to the Bishop) ... but the way prices are going my 600mm f4 is a far better investment than money in the bank, so I'm keeping it
 
BillN_33 said:
I tend to use the 300mm f4 PF with the TC's most of the time now - at my old age anything bigger is a struggle, (as the actress said to the Bishop) ... but the way prices are going my 600mm f4 is a far better investment than money in the bank, so I'm keeping it
Click to expand...

I'm currently saving for a 500mm F4 but would you recommend getting a 300mm F4 PF with TC's instead?
 
wezza13 said:
I'm currently saving for a 500mm F4 but would you recommend getting a 300mm F4 PF with TC's instead?
Click to expand...

The 300mm f4 PF VR is just a lightweight, small, good IQ lens ........... if you are in hide on a bean bag or tripod I would think the longer, 400mm, 500mm and 600mm primes are unbeatable ....... but most of the time I am not in a hide so the 300mm f4 PF plus the 1,7TC gets me the shot and sitting in the garden near the "feeders" that I use, seed or whatever on the ground or in a tree, I find the 300mm set up very flexible

Also the cost Wez

I am a big fan of 300mm lens ..... not only for birds but also for wildlife etc.,

But of course the answer is that you need both
 
BillN_33 said:
The 300mm f4 PF VR is just a lightweight, small, good IQ lens ........... if you are in hide on a bean bag or tripod I would think the longer, 400mm, 500mm and 600mm primes are unbeatable ....... but most of the time I am not in a hide so the 300mm f4 PF plus the 1,7TC gets me the shot and sitting in the garden near the "feeders" that I use, seed or whatever on the ground or in a tree, I find the 300mm set up very flexible

Also the cost Wez

I am a big fan of 300mm lens ..... not only for birds but also for wildlife etc.,

But of course the answer is that you need both
Click to expand...

Just pulled the trigger on the PF version. Will be putting my 300mm up for sale soon. Seems that the PF takes tc's really well. I have the 1.4 and 2 tc's. Both version II
 
Lightroom is a lot more than a basic editing programme! There isn't much you can't do in Lightroom. It's also non destructive and much faster to edit in than Photoshop. A great DAM as well.
 
Just to be different, I hated lightroom when I tried it. (Version 3 back in 2010) I've stuck with my tried and tested Bridge and Photoshop combo which does virtually everything that lightroom can do. Probably harder for me to move from photoshop as I've been using it since 2000.
 
Kei said:
Just to be different, I hated lightroom when I tried it. (Version 3 back in 2010) I've stuck with my tried and tested Bridge and Photoshop combo which does virtually everything that lightroom can do. Probably harder for me to move from photoshop as I've been using it since 2000.
Click to expand...

LR has improved considerably and moved nearer to PS in the facilities that photographer want (need)

For most people, particularly "beginners" in processing, it is far easier to understand and learn than PS
 
I was "fortunate" enough to learn photoshop when studying graphic design at Uni, so whilst not having used it since v10 (I've put my degree to good use!) it still feels pretty familiar and i'm having to orientate myself with the new tools and features. LR I picked up the basics of in no time when I got into photography "seriously".

They are different tools for different jobs in the main (although as others have said there is increasing overlap), but to answer the OP's question, I would say LR is the quicker to get to grips with for the newbie (assuming that the stuff that LR can do is the stuff you want to be doing!)
 
snap-happy said:
Lightroom is a lot more than a basic editing programme! There isn't much you can't do in Lightroom. It's also non destructive and much faster to edit in than Photoshop. A great DAM as well.
Click to expand...

Agree. I don't know why the OP, who's a beginner, is being advised to get Photoshop that is a huge, complex, and very expensive package with a steep learning curve. It's aimed at graphic arts professionals, and that includes photographers of course but Lightroom (full title Adobe Photoshop Lightroom) takes all the stuff relevant to photographers and repackages it specifically for our needs. Then Adobe made it non-destructive, added the library/indexing and print output etc modules, and gave it a much more intuitive and relevant user-interface.

There is very little that even advanced photographers can't do within Lightroom 6, and with every new release Adobe adds extra features that increasingly makes Photoshop unnecessary for us. IMHO, it's just a shame that they've chosen to make Lightroom CC only available as a subscription that includes non-optional Photoshop, so I'm sticking with the standalone Lightroom 6 for now.
 
I don't think anyone has said this yet: It might help think of Lightroom as being equivalent to developing a film, i.e. working on a negative, while Photoshop is more akin to working on a print. But as @HoppyUK says it does an awful lot more.

Lightroom is sufficient for most people's needs.

If you don't want to subscribe then a stand-alone copy of Lightroom in conjunction with Photoshop Elements - a severely cut down version of Photoshop which is often available cheaply - is sufficient for most people. In fact Elements has its own cataloguing module but it didn't cope well with raw files the last time I looked.

There are lots of free & open source alternatives - I've used a fair few and find them all way less usable than LR.
Affinity Photo is gaining ground as a serious non-free alternative; never used it.
 
Phil V said:
As above; Photoshop vs Lightroom is like TV vs Cinema

They're completely different tools for doing different things (though there's some overlap)
Click to expand...

what Phil said
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top