Upgrade to PSE 10 or Lightroom: I have PSE 7 which I use mainly for digital scrapbooking and somewhat simple photo editing. I'd like to get into editing more to improve my pics and I...

ksgcslater

I have PSE 7 which I use mainly for digital scrapbooking and somewhat simple photo editing. I'd like to get into editing more to improve my pics and I was wondering if I should upgrade to PSE10 or get Lightroom 4. I know I'll never be professional so I don't want to delve too much into major editing like CSE4. I have been shooting jpeg but want to get into RAW more. What do you think I should do?

tkhphotography Loc: Gresham, Or, not Seattle

ksgcslater wrote:

I have PSE 7 which I use mainly for digital scrapbooking and somewhat simple photo editing. I'd like to get into editing more to improve my pics and I was wondering if I should upgrade to PSE10 or get Lightroom 4. I know I'll never be professional so I don't want to delve too much into major editing like CSE4. I have been shooting jpeg but want to get into RAW more. What do you think I should do?

What is it you think that PSE10 will enable you to do more than you can in PSE7? You can "edit" raw images in PSE7 now. I would suggest you wring everything you can out of 7 before you spend money upgrading.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

If you use a PC, PE7 will not run under the newer 64 bit OS. You will need at least PE8 to do so. Plus if you upgrade to a newer camera you have to make sure that your PP software from Adobe has the Abobe Camera Raw (ACR) that supports that camera (meaning a newer version is more likely to support a newer camera's Raw files)

markfay Loc: Reading England

I used to use Photoshop CS3 for all my tweaks including RAW. I cannot offer you any advice on PSE7 but can tell you something about lightroom as it's now my package of choice. 90% of the time a shot needs some adjustments, overall exposure, bring back the sky, colour cast, skin smoothing and blemishes etc etc.

I have found lightroom an absolute revelation in this regard, the speed of adjustments transforms your workflow and it an extensive cataloging suite.

I now only use PS for the odd complex task. I guess someone very creative would use photoshop but my photography is all about trying to get the best from what I saw in the viewfinder and lightroom excels at this task.

Nightwatch Loc: Missouri

Lightroom has a bit of a learning curve. But once you've mastered it it's great. I too use LR for the bulk of my editing/tweaking and only go to PS for the major stuff. I also use LR heavily for cataloging and organizing images.Never used PSE so can't comment about it.

markfay Loc: Reading England

yes I agree Nightwatch but I thought it was nothing compared to Photoshop which took me years.

iresq Loc: Annapolis MD

There is also a $150 difference between the two. Not sure if that makes a difference to you but worth mentioning.

hanka

Go for Lightroom. No question about. It is powerful and loaded with great features. The original files are kept in a library that allows you to edit and re-edit files many many times. You can edit JPEGs but it is far better to shoot RAW instead. Lightroom is also a plug in to PS which has its own way of handling raw files. I would go with PS or if I had one choice no question Lightroom

Nightwatch Loc: Missouri

markfay wrote:

yes I agree Nightwatch but I thought it was nothing compared to Photoshop which took me years.

lol Completely agree. PS is much more complex. I have a certificate for CS5 and I still have to scratch my head a lot.

Nightwatch Loc: Missouri

hanka wrote:

Go for Lightroom. No question about. It is powerful and loaded with great features. The original files are kept in a library that allows you to edit and re-edit files many many times. You can edit JPEGs but it is far better to shoot RAW instead. Lightroom is also a plug in to PS which has its own way of handling raw files. I would go with PS or if I had one choice no question Lightroom

One of the best things about LR & RAW is that all of your edits are non-destructive. You can always go back to the original. Also LR doesn't actually store the files itself. It simply links to the image on the hard drive and manipulates it virtually. So, no need for multiple copies of the original. Also great for printing proof sheets, etc. I use these programs pretty much daily and LR & PS are a great combination.

Adirondack Hiker Loc: Southern Adirondacks

Elements main feature is editing, while Lightrooom is mainly for organizing. Elements can save raw file nondistructively, just open "as a copy" (alt open keys). Best bet is google elements lightroom comparision, and see which is best for you. Like Canon vs Nikon, each has its own following. I prefer Elements.

bedgmon Loc: Burleson, Texas

I am by no means the expert on either, but I do use PSE 9 although Lightroom is mighty tempting to me. I will tell you there are very important differences in PSE 9 or above, especially if you are a scrapbooker. PSE 9 has the ability to use the magic extractor, the new layer masques, and the improved content aware healing brush. All are too cool and not available in earlier versions! PSE 10 has even more options.

cabbagemama Loc: AZ

Upgrading PSE is usually not that big a deal. They offer them on sale for under $50 and the last time I got trial of Light Room.

markfay Loc: Reading England

Adirondack Hiker wrote:

Elements main feature is editing, while Lightrooom is mainly for organizing. Elements can save raw file nondistructively, just open "as a copy" (alt open keys). Best bet is google elements lightroom comparision, and see which is best for you. Like Canon vs Nikon, each has its own following. I prefer Elements.

Sorry can't agree with you Hiker. Lightroom is designed for workflow, i.e catalogue, develop, upload, print etc. The develop suit will do all adjustments quickly but is not designed for creativity. Lightroom does all it's editing non destructively. You do not have to open a copy, it always leaves the original RAW file untouched.

Nightwatch Loc: Missouri

Adirondack Hiker wrote:

Elements main feature is editing, while Lightrooom is mainly for organizing. Elements can save raw file nondistructively, just open "as a copy" (alt open keys). Best bet is google elements lightroom comparision, and see which is best for you. Like Canon vs Nikon, each has its own following. I prefer Elements.

LR is used for much more than organizing.