jdmarks64

I've been using Photoshop CC for a number of years together with Adobe Bridge, and have been very satisfied with the pair. I also have Lightroom (it came with PS CC), but have never even tried it. Are there features in Lightroom that would enhance my post processing work? Thanks in advance. jdm

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

JDMarks, like yourself I have both PS and LR. I hardly use LR. PS offers layers which are unavailable in LR. I, personally, think LR is a bit limited and PS will offer you quite a bit more. If you've been using it for some time, stay with it.
--Bob

rwilson1942 Loc: Houston, TX

LR uses the same Adobe Camera Raw as PS. The real advantage of LR is the ability to organize your images using keywords and collections.
LR is 100% non-destructive. I do 95% of my post processing in LR and only use PS on the rare occasion that I need to modify pixels or need to do something that can only be done with layers.

PhotoKurtz Loc: Carterville, IL

99% of lightroom functions are build into the PS CameraRaw function.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

I'll offer some thoughts off the top of my head, but there's a lot to say about the topic, and others will helpfully chip in. First of all, I'm referring to Lightroom CC Classic, not the product Adobe confusingly renamed Lightroom CC.
1. LR is a non-destructive editor, so your edits, whether to JPG's or RAW files, never change the original.
2. LR offers extensive photo management capabilities, far beyond those of Bridge, such as keywording, color coding, rating, flagging picks and rejects, caption, headlines, labels, etc.
3. LR offers a variety of features which lends itself to a fast workflow and batch processing of photos.
4. LR integrates seamlessly with PS, so you can start in LR, make a jump to PS and edit there, and return to LR with you database kept updated.
5. LR can use your geotagging to literally map your photos onto a zoomible world map.
6. LR also offers book, slideshow, and web development modules, although these are clearly not its strength.

I, for one, use LR for 95%+ of my edits, and only jump to PS occasionally when I need some specialty tool it offers. I have no use whatsoever for Bridge, since LR is a superior photo management tool, but some people find it useful for quickly culling photos.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

I don't use Lightroom as I started using PS back when our Navy was operating with sails so I never felt a need to learn it (LR) when it became part of the package. But, I use photoshop as a hobby, if I were churning out hundreds or thousands of raw files as a professional then for the file handling capabilities I would have to learn LR.
Note: Photoshop is also non-destructive when used correctly.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

The U.S. Navy still has a sail powered ship.

And, yes, PS is non-destructive editing.
--Bob

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

Ah! I forgot about that one! I sit corrected.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

If you already know Ps then Lr has little to offer but some added convenience and simplicity to some tools. What it does well is cataloging, where it shines. The non-destructive point is probably also pointless to an experienced Ps user, you already know how to manage your files and use SAVE and SAVE AS appropriately and not destroy (PSD, TIF, JPG) files. You can only change preset, xmp, or sidecar files associated with a RAW file, not the raw file itself anyway.

Many people who like Lr have just not taken the time and effort to learn Photoshop!

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

BebuLamar

I tried LR a long time ago and found the only thing it does more than PS is to organize your files and in fact I hate this feature so I don't use it any more.

rwilson1942 Loc: Houston, TX

ope, only the post processing side of LR.
The image organization side of LR does not exist in PS.

anotherview Loc: California

Concur.

Mundj Loc: Richmond TX

I don't propose to be an expert here. But if you are using PS and edit a jpg file in any way and then save it, have you not just performed a destructive edit? You can not reopen the file and remove the edit. With LR you can always go back in history and start over again even with jpg files.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I am not referring to the lossy character of jpg files. I'm referring to the fact that, within the actual process of working on an image in PS, it can be non-destructively edited.
--Bob