raw processing
May 24, 2014 09:29:34 #
I use psp 6 and am starting to shoot in raw. Would there be an advantage using a raw only program like light room or I am thinking photo ninja?
May 24, 2014 09:34:04 #
bwilliams wrote:
I use psp 6 and am starting to shoot in raw. Would there be an advantage using a raw only program like light room or I am thinking photo ninja?
I also use PSP X6 Ultimate. I think PSP's raw module is a little weak so, I use a free program called Raw Therapee to initially process raw photos and then save out as tif files. Try it out for yourself. It is free and pretty comprehensive.
May 24, 2014 09:38:19 #
bwilliams wrote:
I use psp 6 and am starting to shoot in raw. Would there be an advantage using a raw only program like light room or I am thinking photo ninja?
Lightroom is not a Raw Only program. You can edid jpg and others as well
May 24, 2014 09:38:50 #
bwilliams wrote:
I use psp 6 and am starting to shoot in raw. Would there be an advantage using a raw only program like light room or I am thinking photo ninja?
Not sure what you mean, but LR is NOT a RAW only program. Yes it can read RAW files as JEG as it can PSD, TIFF and more.
May 24, 2014 09:42:39 #
twillsol wrote:
Lightroom is not a Raw Only program. You can edid jpg and others as well
That's right, foremost it's a organizing program that does come with raw processing capabilities.
May 24, 2014 09:46:11 #
speters wrote:
That's right, foremost it's a organizing program that does come with raw processing capabilities.
So much misinformation about LR. LR is NOT Formost a organizing program. Cataloging is one of the many benefits of LR. Yes it does cataloging, but it also does a fine job of non-destructive editing, printing, slideshows, softproofing etc.
May 24, 2014 10:07:39 #
Capture48 wrote:
So much misinformation about LR. LR is NOT Formost a organizing program. Cataloging is one of the many benefits of LR. Yes it does cataloging, but it also does a fine job of non-destructive editing, printing, slideshows, softproofing etc.
You nailed it Capture. I can't imagine life w/o Lightroom. Probably do 98% of my editing there. ;)
May 24, 2014 12:12:32 #
twillsol wrote:
Lightroom is not a Raw Only program. You can edid jpg and others as well
I understand that lightroom is not only a RAW program. The OP indicates he already has PSP and I was merely suggesting RAW Therapee for free instead of paying more for lightroom.
May 24, 2014 12:12:49 #
Capture48 wrote:
So much misinformation about LR. LR is NOT Formost a organizing program. Cataloging is one of the many benefits of LR. Yes it does cataloging, but it also does a fine job of non-destructive editing, printing, slideshows, softproofing etc.
And my statement did not deny any of that. At the time of its first introduction it was advertised as "the" organizing program ( but from version to version it has progressed into much more than that)!
May 24, 2014 12:17:32 #
maybe I misstated the question. I was wondering if it would be worth it to buy and learn another to correct lighting ect and save to jpeg.
May 24, 2014 12:21:58 #
bwilliams wrote:
maybe I misstated the question. I was wondering if it would be worth it to buy and learn another to correct lighting ect and save to jpeg.
If you shoot RAW, every image will need some degree of processing. LR is a fine program and should be able to handle most of that work for you. Does that answer your question?
May 24, 2014 12:24:20 #
May 24, 2014 12:54:21 #
bwilliams wrote:
My question is does it have an advantage over psp6.
PSP 6 is an outstanding program that a lot of Hoggers don't have much of an idea of the power it has. If you are proficient with PSP 6, I am not sure how much better lightroom is as I am not that familiar with lightroom. It would have to be significantly better than PSP 6 for me to spend all the time to learn a new program. I did a trial of lightroom 4 when it came out and I was too confused with it to go for very long. Deleted it and went back to my PSP. PSP does not force you into a specific cataloging program like lightroom does with importing, exporting, and cataloging. Extremely confusing to me. But, that may be only for me because I am simple minded to start with and I understand hard drive structure. I want to know exactly where I put my images. The organizer in PSP suits me just fine. And, post processing capabilities are very good. PSP 6 uses the same plugins from Topaz, Redfield, NIK, etc as Photoshop and probably lightroom does. I apologize for the rant, but I get a little disturbed that so many people believe that lightroom is the one and only decent program for photo post processing.
May 24, 2014 13:13:58 #
If you do try a trial of Lightroom, check out the many good video tutorials at youtube and by Adobe, B&H, Adorama and others. Like any tool worth it's salt, there is a learning curve. I spend 95% of my time in LR5 and it does a great job of all the things Capture described above.
May 24, 2014 14:07:57 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
Lightroom and Photoshop serve different purposes and complement each other.
LR is a high volume, batch processing, keywording/organizing/search, and light editing tool. It's useful for making proofs (print or digital), maintaining catalogs and websites, and making slide shows, among other things. The image editing/optimization in LR is mostly limited to global adjustments. I usually spend less than a minute on an image in LR. For more finely finished work, pass off images from LR to PS.
PS is the mac daddy of image processing and optimization softwares. You can work right down to the pixel level if needed and can use multiple layers, masks and other tools for extremely precise work. Way, way beyond what can be done in LR. But PS's weakness is it's rather slow and cannot efficiently handle large volumes of images, and doesn't have much in the way of cataloging/keywording/search tools built in. For those functions, you need LR.
Hence, the two complement each other nicely.
Some folks who don't do a high volume of images get by fine with PS alone. Other folks who don't make finished prints of high quality and don't have any other high use for their images... maybe only display and share stuff online, make small prints occasionally for scrapbooks, for example... might find LR alone is adequate for their purposes.
Adobe Elements is a bit of each... It has "lite" versions of some of the major features of PS, along with some other features drawn from LR... Some even find Elements adequate for all their purposes.
LR is a high volume, batch processing, keywording/organizing/search, and light editing tool. It's useful for making proofs (print or digital), maintaining catalogs and websites, and making slide shows, among other things. The image editing/optimization in LR is mostly limited to global adjustments. I usually spend less than a minute on an image in LR. For more finely finished work, pass off images from LR to PS.
PS is the mac daddy of image processing and optimization softwares. You can work right down to the pixel level if needed and can use multiple layers, masks and other tools for extremely precise work. Way, way beyond what can be done in LR. But PS's weakness is it's rather slow and cannot efficiently handle large volumes of images, and doesn't have much in the way of cataloging/keywording/search tools built in. For those functions, you need LR.
Hence, the two complement each other nicely.
Some folks who don't do a high volume of images get by fine with PS alone. Other folks who don't make finished prints of high quality and don't have any other high use for their images... maybe only display and share stuff online, make small prints occasionally for scrapbooks, for example... might find LR alone is adequate for their purposes.
Adobe Elements is a bit of each... It has "lite" versions of some of the major features of PS, along with some other features drawn from LR... Some even find Elements adequate for all their purposes.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.