miked46 Loc: Winter Springs, Florida

I currently have Luminar, Aurora, and I also use Lightroom and Photomatix. All of them have their unique usefulness. Right now I am using just Luminar for non-HDR photo processing. I guess it is up to all of us to decide what really works best for our needs.

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

While the workshop leader is describing the editing process, you will get more out of it if you understand what they are saying. You might benefit from taking a free trial of LR and PS ahead of time. Put some effort into learning how they work and what they offer. There IS a learning curve, so you cannot expect to gain proficiency during that short trial period. Even if you don't decide to get the subscription, at least you will get more out of that portion of the workshops.

There are many discussions of the pros and cons of LR and PS versus other programs. The important thing, IMHO, is to use whatever satisfies you. It all depends on how you want to edit, and whether the programs you use satisfy your editing needs. I used PS Elements but never got along with the program, and during a workshop was introduced to LR. Hearing how good it was, I decided to buy it, and never regretted the decision. Eventually I decided I wanted to take my editing capabilities further, and when the Adobe CC subscription came out, I decided to give it a try. [First getting the free trials to see how the new LR was different from the version I had, and whether or not I could tackle PS.] Never regretted that decision either! I guess what I am trying to say, is that as you grow in your photographic skills, you may also want to increase the range of editing you can perform.

Just as some are happy with a point-and-shoot camera and a very basic editing program, others enjoy using the functions of a more complex DSLR and the advanced capabilities of LR and PS. A personal choice!

mizzee Loc: Boston,Ma

Best, most robust. The learning curve is less steep for LR. When I decided I was ready to move to a more powerful editing program (I’d been using Picasa) I asked photographer friends what they recommended. To a person they said Lightroom. Hope this helps!

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

It is Affinity Photo and Photoshop for me.
I guess each one of us has a preference.

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

That"s sort if like growing up driving driving standard shift cars and lamenting the fact that they are hard if not impossible to buy. :) You played with PS when it was REALLY expensive and understandable that you are thoroughly knowledgeable. That said, the average person today can learn LR many time faster and do 90-100% of their editing. How much depends on one's desire for perfection/correction/primping. I think the combo is simply a outstanding package for $10 a month. Without a doubt, one can do everything in PS that LR can do sans the organization and database function and being leery not to screw the master file. Without care it can be destructive, no way in LR.

Clapperboard

jtlareau I had/have the same dislike for Lightroom. It forces me to a filing system I have no use for. I don't use it as a general thing. Printing direct from Lightroom has a better 'module' than printing from Photoshop. It just might be worth checking out and using.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

That's about as insulting and dismissive a comment as you could have possibly made, so I'm not "misunderstanding" it. I think perhaps it's you who totally misunderstands these tools, or perhaps you just have a "snapshot aesthetic" toward pure photography?

It is PRECISELY in translating the photographer's vision into prints or pixels that these tools, and the many other alternatives, show their mettle. Overcooked images and digital "manipulation" by taking your ex out of the photo or replacing a background are not the norm; adjusting color balance, exposure, contrast curves, grain, and many other things are. They're not "new" or particular to these tools - they've been around much longer than you or I have, I'd say.

In film days, did you just send your film off to the processor without exercising any creativity in the processing of the images? Probably not; I certainly didn't. I spent many hours in the darkroom, adjusting images through contrast control, dodging, burning in, and choice of film, chemistry, and paper. I've printed collodion and albumen prints - things that are now easy to do digitally, although very difficult to do well. LightRoom and the others are just the digital version of darkroom work. The greatest photographic artists of the twentieth century spent many hours in the darkroom, today's tools just make it faster, more convenient, and a lot less smelly.

If Ansel Adams were alive today, he'd be spending more time in the LightRoom than the darkroom. Unquestionably. During his lifetime he made no bones about adopting, and mastering, the latest technologies.

Like any other tool, these digital manipulators can be misused or overused. See guns, cars, and hot sauce for examples.


Andy

anotherview Loc: California

Ditto.

anotherview Loc: California

Yes.

anotherview Loc: California

Yes: "LightRoom and the others are just the digital version of darkroom work. The greatest photographic artists of the twentieth century spent many hours in the darkroom, today's tools just make it faster, more convenient, and lot less smelly.
"

al13

PTSD Group; If you are military, thank you for your service. Semper Fi from a former Marine. This is a great site to gain photography knowledge.

anotherview Loc: California

Let me add Photoshop Elements. One could say it offers Photoshop Creative Cloud light -- easier to get started with to develop one's photographs. I started with PE, and gradually turned to the full Photoshop. This approach worked for me at the time.

Now, I advise attending a workshop or two in photo-editing using PE or PCC. Then you will have a foundation and confidence to build on. And the learning curve should become less daunting.

Note that numerous tutorials exist on the Internet to teach specific techniques and tools using PE and PCC.

Good luck.

HardwareGuy

The "rebel" in me (haha) wants to buck the system and not use what everyone else uses, and I bristle at Adobe's endless revenue stream with the monthly charges.
That being said, these two programs have become the "standard" of industry. Just like any endeavor, there is always one brand that stands out.
However, you can achieve the same results by going down a different road due the competition of other products. But in the end, if you want the common understanding and terminologies of most other pro or enthusiasts, then those are the two to use.

Toby

I agree with you almost completely. I wish LR were a stand along program w/o the file management part. I am, I guess, abit paranoid or OS about managing my own files so I use LR only to edit the files and then save them with my own system. I replace the original Jpegs with the edited ones and if I need to go back to the originals I go to the RAW files. The LR editing part for use on files is unmatched.

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

Good question! You will hear a zillion perspectives on this one. It's a bit like Chevy or Ford? What to do, what to do? The big gun LR/PS are by far and away the oldest and likely the best in-depth processing packages. You rent the service. Upside is you always have the latest version, a in-depth reservoir of options and things you can manipulate photos with, good output, and won't waste your time at school... Down-side is, you pay forever for a program that generally far outweighs many user's abilities or desire to manipulate/process photos, steep learning curve and frankly, from my experience, although a solid product, not much "fun" to use.

It is notable that there are now a few more options on the market, you know, the Toyotas and Teslas so to speak. Perhaps one of the relative upstarts might meet your needs better? Maybe not. If you enjoy your classroom experience with PS & LR, go for it, rent the software and enjoy. If you prefer an easier more intuitive interface, generally a much faster experience and still want to have top-flight product there are a few options on the market such as Capture One and Luminar (which should soon have a built-in data management module) as well as others. For instance, Luminar users enjoy regular webinars focused on improving the user experience. I received two webinar announcements and six videos in my in-box just this week. I kind of enjoy the learning at home with a java in hand at 0 dark hundred hours vs the classroom experience. LR/PS may do the same thing, I've stopped paying attention. In the end, all will do the job, just differently.

So this should be relatively easy for you. You have had some experience with PS/LR and Luminar. Which do you prefer? In the end, it really is all about what you prefer. For me, I still have Elements, PS, LR, Capture One, however, 95% of the time my "go-to" is Luminar. I found that Luminar is quick and fun to use. It has improved my processing, especially in the enjoyment and speed factors. When I compare my finished product using all five programs, I cannot determine any significant difference. I actually enjoy the Luminar experience vs the layer after layer experience of some others. For me, it is not about the subscription fees aligned with PS/LR, but with Luminar, results are equal to my PS/LR or Capture One and is done in an impressively quick time frame. I hope this helps?

Cheers!