TheDman Loc: USA

Lightroom is a RAW converter, so edits the 16-bit file.

Algernon Loc: Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Excellent!
Looks like I stumbled into a good decision for a change (using LR as my primary editor).
Thanks!

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Photoshop Elements may have 2% of the capabilities of Photoshop, if that. That list would fill pages!

photeach Loc: beautiful Kansas

I didn't mention that I am also a digital scrapbooker who puts my pictures on a 12 by 12 inch format so that I can print out scrapbook pages but also end up with jpgs that I share with my siblings. We are hoping to pool our family history knowledge, so when I have posted a scrapbook page with pictures of our grandmother and her siblings, my brother and sisters can send me little tidbits they know about the people in the picture and I can add this info to my scrapbook page. It would have been better to ask my grandmother for HER information, but she died in 1971, and we are doing the best we can.
I agree with you that Lightroom has some beautiful editing tools, but I need the layers.

Algernon Loc: Milwaukee, Wisconsin

I know what you mean about getting genealogy information from elderly relatives. When I was younger I didn't have the interest. Now that I'm older I don't have the resource because they've passed.

I have over 3000 names in my family tree, but haven't yet tackled adding photographs for the more immediate relatives. I think I'll have to wait until I retire.

And yes, Layers is critical for what you're doing. I applaud your effort in doing this. Someday someone is going to be very grateful to you.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

But, do people use that 98% additional? I do not mean focus on PS professionals, I mean the majority of people.

Now that you have quoted the 2% value, I will ask as a scientific person should where did you get that value and what references do you back it up with. Or is that 2% a casual prejudiced statement?

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Back in 2012 when I signed up for Fine Art America, I had been using Corel Draw, Corel PaintShop Pro, Corel Photo-Paint, Lightroom, Elements, Photoshop, and several other free ones (such as GIMP) to do the things that I do for my Photographic Art.

All of them came out with upgrades virtually at the same time, resulting in hundreds of dollars of upgrade fees. That was when I decided to end that practice. I knew that Photoshop could do absolutely everything that I had been doing in all the other programs but I would have to make a concerted effort to learn how to do it, especially the stuff that I was doing in Corel Draw.

Fast forward to today and Photoshop is the only program on my computer that is current. All the others still reside here because none of them were Cloud or subscription programs, but I haven't used any of the others in over two years now.

Add in Actions, Filters, and Plug-ins, and the billions and billions and billions of tutorials for Photoshop, and I cannot see ever using the others again.

Because I am a "Gotta have the latest version" person, it was an easy decision to go with Photoshop CC. A simple Excel spreadsheet indicated that I would save hundreds of dollars a year just in Photoshop upgrades. Then add in all the other software I had been upgrading, and the savings was up in the thousands of dollars range.

That meant that I had more money to buy more gas to put in the car so I could traipse around Southern California's ten counties and thousands of square miles taking pictures!

forjava Loc: Half Moon Bay, CA

[quote=Algernon]I am a CC subscriber, using Lightroom. My question has to do with the feature set of Photoshop vs Elements. Is it worth my while to go ahead and enable PS on CC?

--
To your first question, is almost no trouble to "go ahead and enable PS on CC". However, on Mac, for best results be sure your OS X is up-to-date or no more than two .n revs back -- I'd expect CC/Ps will tell you while installing which OS X version is needed, even as, over time, Adobe requires still later versions.

Ps is aligned with Bridge, not Elements' Organizer. I learned the hard way to leave Bridge to one side, treat Lr and its catalog as home base, and visit Ps as needed, for example, for selections. Of course, this is just one of the ways to go.

Building on your second post in this topic, an advantage of Ps in CC over all earlier Ps versions is alignment with current on-line discussions, which may be more plentiful than for Elements 12.

Kingmapix Loc: Mesa, Arizona

I have found that Elements does the trick with me.
Best to master fewer techniques well, than to dabble in multiple techniques.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Agreed...Kingmapix, what do we need really? Basic adjustments and more complex one like curves and layers. For that PSE-13 is fine. Then if you add The Topaz modifications (Plug in? no much more) then you can do some fantastic work.

Analogy: It gets to the point where that old drill press in the garage may require you to change the belt to change speed, where as the new model is electronically controlled... but the old one serves the purpose quite well... especially considering you do not use it that often or make your living with it and have to have the prestige factor.

Yooper 2 Loc: Ironwood, MI

Just dive in and start using Photoshop. I've been using it for about a year and I love it.
My initial processing is done in Lightroom, then to Elements 13 if needed for layering. For more advanced work I use Photoshop. You can't beat Lightroom or Photoshop for dodging and burning. I just wish I had more time to devote to photography right now. It's my passion.

MtnMan Loc: ID

I am surprised no one noted what I consider the biggest difference: you can CREATE Actions in Photoshop. Although you can play compatible ones in Elements you cannot create Actions in Elements.

Actions are the Photoshop equivalent of presets in Lightroom. They are much more flexible as you can record anything you can do in Photoshop in the action.

As noted there are many other differences...but many of them hide below the surface so a novice user will never know. I continue to be amazed by some of the things I find on Youtube etc. that you can do in Photoshop but not in Elements. One of my favorites is creating very sophisticated sharpening tools.

Algernon Loc: Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Interesting. Thanks.

Regarding "sophisticated sharpening tools": if only PS had the capability to correct an out-of-focus subject. Sigh. Think of the possibilities! :)

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Try Smart Sharpen in Photoshop. There are many other ways, too, but Smart Sharpen is fast and quite good.

Algernon Loc: Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Hmmmm. Assuming your attribution is correct, this alone might be a sufficient reason to use PS as my adjunct software to LR (rather than PSE).