sammie15 Loc: Michigan

I'm curious of those of you have used Light room to edit your photos especially for Landscape, what do you think of it?

Just Fred Loc: Darwin's Waiting Room

I probably have a dozen or more photo editing apps on my computer. Lightroom is still my go-to editing program!

big-guy Loc: Peterborough Ontario Canada

If you're thinking of getting it for your own PP then it will work great as will so many other programs. What is it you're really wanting to know? The question as asked will garner responses from group A really like it, group B really hate it. Where does that leave you?

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

What's not to like?

lesdmd Loc: Middleton Wi via N.Y.C. & Cleveland

What do you want to be able to accomplish in post processing? How comfortable are you with learning how to use new software? For some Light Room is not quite enough, for others it is overkill. Personally I think it is a terrific piece of software that is adequate for most of what I do and is indispensable for organizing my photo library. I also use Photoshop, and would not give up either it or Lightroom.
There are many products available, some that offer free trials, some that are totally free to use. Lightroom is available for annual subscription. If you are going to buy, I suggest purchasing something that does more than you currently think you want. You may never use the additional features, but then again you might.

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

I do 90-100% of my editing in LR. I drift into PS for functions, like photostacking, etc. which are not included in LR.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

Sammie - I have a free-standing version of Lightroom v5.7 on my computer. I use it very often, although I have tried versions of other editing apps. A free-standing (non-subscription) version of Lightroom v6 is available from B&H Photo. I find LR to be very comprehensive in terms of editing all manner of images including landscapes. /Ralph

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

Adobe is the author of the world's premier graphic editing software. Lightroom is part of that. Early in my digital photography foray, I knew I would need some way to organize the images that I captured. I had spent my life digging in shoe boxes looking for that one picture I knew existed and I wanted to do better than that with my digital efforts.

After much research, I decided that Lightroom, with it's strong cataloging features, was what I wanted. So, I bought LR 3.0, and the book titled Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classroom in a Book. I read the book page by page, learning all that LR would do for me. There isn't much it won't do.

I have subscribed to the Creative Cloud Photographer's Subscription since it was first available, which also gives me Photoshop. In my mind, there is no better combination for the serious photographer. Other products have come and gone through the years, and likely many of them were quite good. But, I do anything I need done with the PSCC/LRCC combination.

If you will invest in some type of 'structured' learning of LR, I don't think you can do any better.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Ignore the naysayers. Adobe Lightroom is the be all and end all of photo editing. The De Haze filter alone is worth the $9.99 a month. See examples in previous post:

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-466200-1.html

sammie15 Loc: Michigan

Should leave me with their opinions with if they do usually why they do. Just curious because I see a lot of discussion on it. Right now I have the Canon DPP. Is Light room faster and easier than other apps? Any info shared will help.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Sammie, I start all of my images in Lr. But quite often I need to do something local on the image, with greater precision and range than is possible in Lr. That's when I go to Photoshop. I use PS for 98% of my images since I don't believe that Lr can produce a truly finished image on it's own. Lr is more of a shotgun, PS is more of a tactical sniper rifle. If you are not that fussy, then Lr could be your last stop in you workflow.

sammie15 Loc: Michigan

I'm ok with learning new software if it's user friendly. I have not used LR so that's why I'm asking. Always good to have options. Thanks for your input.

sammie15 Loc: Michigan

Thank you. This was really helpful.

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

I started with photoshop years ago, when it was just called photoshop, and there were no numbers behind it.

I was a latecomer to lightroom. I don't do landscapes, but I do a lot of outdoor shoots, families, weddings, senior photos, etc. I can tell you that it didn't take too long, and now I can get most of my edits done in a fraction of the time, and use LR 90% of the time, and only import to photoshop when I'm doing something that requires layers masks, etc, that you can't do in lightroom.

I would have to disagree with Gene about "not being fussy." I'm shooting for money, and sometimes for $thousands.... Still 90% of my photos never leave lightroom.

I also think that while LR has a smaller learning curve than photoshop, unless you put some serious time into it, you'll never really appreciate how powerful it is.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I have yet to see an image that could not be improved upon by some finishing work in a pixel editor. That's what I mean by fussy. For the most part, I am far fussier than most of my present and former clients. But to each his/her own. . . . Right?