Bunkershot Loc: Central Florida

I currently shoot in raw and use PhotoShop Elements 12. Why would I go for Adobe's $9.99 per month deal on the combination of Light Room and Photoshop? I'm particularly interested in what I can do with Light Room that I can't do with Elements, but also interested in knowing what benefits I would get with PS versus Elements.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

I purchased LR6 disk from B&H. Not interested in the cloud. For me, I am converting from windows to Apple. I have put into labeled folders through LR. It is a pleasure to find my over 14,000 images I have put into folder so far. LR is a non destructive adjustment to your image. If I were you I would buy LR6 disk and you may love the features to work on your images and you might give up Elements.

steveg48

I think of Lightroom as two programs.
The first is one that organizes your images. You import your images into Lightroom, which doesn't actually move them on your drives, - it just lets Lightoom know where they are. You can apply keywords to them. You can also apply star ratings and/or color ratings to them. You decide what these ratings mean. You can then filter your images to see only the five star ones from a particular shoot (for example).

The second part of Lightroom is a powerful image editing program that is similar or possibly identical to Adobr Camera Raw but with a more user friendly interface. Lightroom is a powerful image editor but it does not have layers. If you want layers or pixel level editing capabilities you go into Photoshop or Elements from Lightroom using 'Edit In'. Elements is a stripped down version of Photoshop. Since I don't use Elements any more I can't tell you the differences. if you know how to useElements I imagine you will be able to do the same things in Photoshop very easily. You can then explore/learn Photoshops additional capabilities as you need them. Lightroom also allows you to batch process images and to synch settings between images.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

Good reply

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I have the free-standing versions of PS6 and LR6, and I have no intention of committing myself to an annual bill of $120 + tax. Each edits an image in a different way. I think PS edits on the pixel level, if that matters to you. There are 28 million online articles discussing this topic, but it's basically a personal choice. LR uses a catalog system, and you can't avoid it. That causes a lot of people a lot of trouble, but many more people love its organizing capabilities. If you're considering the stand-alone LR, buy it soon because this will be the last such version offered by Adobe.

Bob Boner

The last time I checked, a stand-alone version of either LR or PS cost more than the yearly charge for both. Furthermore, as newer cameras come out, the stand-alone versions will have to convert raw images to DNG before they can process them. I much prefer to keep them in the camera format. When -cc versions first came out, they were overpriced, but it wasn't long before the prices dropped to where they are now, which is a bargain compared to upgrading every 18 months or so as used to be the case.

WayneT Loc: Paris, TN

I don't get you guys. That $10 a month for LR & PS is peanuts for the cost of processing compared to what I use to pay for film processing even when I was doing it myself.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

@steve48's answer is quite well said; I only want to clarify something that seems to cause confusion about the "cloud" aspect of the $10 monthly offering.

The cloud refers to the program's need to check with Adobe HQ (for lack of a better term) once a month or so to confirm that you are paid up when you start to use the program (either LR or PS). The actual programs are loaded on your computer, no differently than when you buy the DVD and load the program from that. In other words, if you don't have an internet connection for 3 weeks you can still merrily use the cloud versions of LR and PS.

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

I do not mind paying $10 monthly to stay current and not be socked with an enormous fee to buy a new version that automatically becomes inevitably and irretrievably out of date. The major updates of LR have at least one killer tool that is worth the subscription.

I am one of those who loves the catalog. If you want to avoid it, then stick with another program. I would be lost without the catalog. Until I got the hang of it, I wasted plenty of time hunting for pictures I had moved in Windows instead of LR. I just did not want to believe others and play by the rules. PSE's cataloging is so inferior that I stopped using PSE at all because of it.

The other advantage to LR is the workflow. LR is organized in such a way that I zip through my edits very, very quickly. As is the case with many others, I do about 95% of my edits in LR and the rest in PS or Nik's dFine to tame noise. Why should I give up non-destructive and 16-bit editing?

Here is the bottom line. If you want to go the Adobe route, get the LR/PS subscription so you stay current and are not always pay more to catch up. I think you enjoy your hobby a lot more.

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

It also means that the software is distributed over the Internet and not by a CD or DVD, enticing you to store your work in the cloud, and sharing programs and pictures on multiple devices including mobile.

DGStinner Loc: New Jersey

A lot of software is no longer distributed on physical disks. Ever use a browser other than the one your computer came with?
You are not enticed to store anything in the cloud. All my images are kept on local external drives.

docerz

Agreed...also don't forget the tremendous organizational benefits of LR. If set up with some forethought and effort you can locate photos in literally seconds from several thousands of pictures. It's that plus excellent post production abilities.

WayneT Loc: Paris, TN

Well stated!

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

Jerry, I realize that is peanuts, but there is no tax on the $9.99 in Florida. Your state may be different. My Adobe Photographer's bundle (Adobe Lightroom, Adobe Bridge, and Adobe Photoshop) is exactly $9.99 per month from my automatically dunned debit card. Generally, I am getting a couple of thousand dollars worth of software for $120 a year (lower than what the bill on my Visa or MasterCard would cost me if I purchased the software bundles outright with my credit cards. And, the 9.99 per month is cheaper than what I would have spent on a cup of coffee from Wa Wa, 7-11 or whatever your favorite convenience store/breakfast bar is. And, I get the use of the software both at home and on the road (2 desktop computers, one laptop, and on 2 cellphones ((the cellphones have it but I never use it). In addition, should I want to, I can put images on the Adobe cloud and reach the images I shot with my cameras and processed with my software on my cell phone to show friends or prospective clients. (Note: I rarely use the cell phone to show clients, but it is there if I need it.) Sure I could have purchased the Lightroom CD and the Photoshop CD but they would have only been good until the end of that upgrade series and then, if I wanted to stay on the "current" version rather than continue with an older version, I would have to purchase again. Can Adobe increase the price of the package? Sure, but they can increase the cost of the stand alone packages or completely do away with them too. Realistically, I spend more in gas going to photoshoots each week (maybe even each day) than I spend a month on Adobe software on my 3 computers.