grberg

I'm just starting out with a Nikon d5200. I shoot mostly sports of the grandkids little league and soccer games and I've been using Picasa to do file management and a bit of editing. An instructor in a recent dslr class I attended recommended Photoshop Elements, but most posts I read says Lightroom is the way to go. Any insights from experienced photographers would be appreciated.

ggttc Loc: TN

I would try Elements 14 first...The reason I have not added Lightroom is simple... that not a day goes by that I don't see 2 or 3 posts about needing help with Lightroom...

Pretty simple and just my opinion...

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

There have been dozens of previous topics and you'll probably find more Lightroom fans than Elements. However, I went from Picasa to Elements (with a very brief foray into Paintshop Pro) and have loved Elements for three years.

One aspect I appreciate is there are quick, guided and expert tabs, so tools are tucked out of sight when you're in your mode of choice and you don't have to feel overwhelmed by the interface.

I find it to be easy to learn, clean and neat to work in, and well worth the $50 I paid (on sale).

grberg

Wow, thanks for the quick reply. Much appreciated.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

grberg - your reference to sports is the idea that would direct you to LR. The tool is excellent for dealing with large qualities of files. You'd develop a recipe for one image in a sequence and then sync all the other pictures in that sequence with the same edit. You might still need to tweek the keepers in the sequence, but the tool is quick and powerful (efficient) at large volume editing. (sequence being - same shutterspeed, ISO, lighting such as a burst during a key moment in the action or even over the course of several minutes or longer where the image parameters are much the same.)

rwilson1942 Loc: Houston, TX

I use Lightroom and occasionally Photoshop.
I do most of my RAW editing in LR but the real strength of LR is its organizational abilities.
Photoshop and LR use the same RAW editor but with somewhat different interfaces.
I only use PS if I need layers or to do somewhat serious removal of something in an image.
I also use PS to add watermarks to my images. I created brushes of my watermarks.
That lets me have complete control of size, color, location, opacity, fill and Layer Style of the watermark.
With Collections, multiple rating systems and keywording you can easily find images.
I've never used Elements but as I understand it it is a scaled down combination of LR and PS.

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

Adobe has been the must have costly Photo Manipulation tools for decades. Gimp has been the free ware graphic image manipulation tool for a similar length of time. In recent years there has been a plethora of Free ware or paid for alternatives available that has cherry picked what the majority of people 'Do' to there images. It is different horses for different courses. I would suggest you try before you buy. Gimp has responded to photography needs just as Adobe has responded to cataloguing, Raw and mass image manipulation using pre-sets. But few people use 'everything' that is available in the big programmes. Just like MSWORD you learn to write a letter and then add some of the fancy bits as you required it. You discover your post processing needs as you mature in photography. Until you know what manipulation tools you are going to use regularly or occasionally need it is hard to say 'this one' is best. I would look first at your Camera disk software and find its failings...(important word that) ..then see what free ware meets your needs and only then look at a paid for programme. Spend your money on learning and camera kit. Look on search at the top of the page for lists post processing software.
Have fun

LarryFB Loc: Depends where our RV is parked

You've already had a half dozen or so responses. If you are reasonably computer literate and have no problem learning a new program and spending $10.00 per month, Lightroom is hard to beat (I'm sure there will be some disagreement). Plus, the $10.00 also gets you Photoshop, which is usually considered to be the ultimate photo editing software.

Lightroom is essentially an organization tool for photographs, it does have some editing capability. With over 32,000 photos catalogued in Lightroom, I can usually find the specific photo I'm looking for in a few seconds. However, I do attach key words to each photo I take.

I have used Photoshop elements and it is a very good program. I went with Lightroom because I wanted to easily organize my photos, keep them organized, and be able to easily find a particular photo. Lightroom does that and much more.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Lightroom is for cateloging and modifying photographs with the ability to adjust white balance, exposure, DeHazing, etc (if you shoot in RAW). Elements is a slimmed down version of Photoshop for image manipulation.

grberg

I usually shoot about 200-300 shots in a game in JPEG, come home and load them in Picasa, drag 15-20 into an album, and email a couple of "keepers" back to the kids. If I occasionally get a really good action shot I make a 5x7 print for my den. Just a beginner but this has worked well so far. I read comments on UHH every day and have learned a lot from people willing to take the time to share their knowledge, thanks for the help.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Grberg - LR has much more editing capability than some other comments might lead you to believe. That said, it does not allow for layers that are the heart of complex image manipulation and some cutting edge noise and sharpening approaches where changes are made at different layers and then merged into the finished product (image).

Consider the use you described. Imagine you have these 15-20 keepers edited and ready to go. Using LR you don't have to file-save-as multiple different versions of the file in different sizes. Rather, you use the export tool in LR and specify the output parameters and export a version of the file sized for emailing. LR manages one master version of the image inside its catalog. It's more complicated, but I'm generalizing to make a point of how it can work .... As you get familiar with LR (via use and more effectively via training coupled with usage), you'll develop your own presets for "import", "export" and other regularly performed bulk tasks. So, when a parent calls up and says they love the image-x from last week's game, you can go back to LR, pull up that image and export (output) a different full-sized version and give to them.

You sound like you're happy with the out of camera results with minimal editing. LR will do as much or as little as you need. If you just need cataloging and bulk processing as I described above, this tool will do it. When you want / need more processing of your images, you can grow into the Develop module in LR. But, when you want to swap out people or change the sky, you're going to need a tool like PS or PSE or similar. I find LR's clone tool to be very effective, but it takes some skill and an understanding of what / what not it can do. I can't "clone in" a new sunny sky for a cloudy day in LR. But, I can clone out random specs of dust, or trash on a beach or even powerlines across the sky is I want to spend the time ... I mostly use LR for "perfecting" an image in terms of saturation and clarity. If it needs manipulation, I probably should have shot it better rather than planned for complex post processing.

You might also have a keyword strategy where you add the team name and team members to all the images you capture / keep. At the end of a season or even a few seasons, you could find every image of "John Smith" in just a few keystrokes. Using ratings, collections and other strategies the tool supports, you could find every image of John Smith that was printed, sent to the parents, etc, etc based on the level and complexity of the details you choose to track in the catalog. You have to come up with the strategy that works for you. LR provides the tool and flexibility to then implement and use that strategy.

bdk Loc: Sanibel Fl.

I started out with elements 12. My instructor said buy an older used version on ebay and see how u like it. ( i did) it did just about everything I needed it to do. I had lightroom and personally I hate it. Its still on my computer and I never use it. I now use PS6

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Elements is a small version of Photoshop, hence "Elements." It's cheap but effective. Give it a shot. Lots of instruction available fro free from Adobe.

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop-elements/using/topics.html

par4fore Loc: Bay Shore N.Y.

Adobe Elements 14! Everything you need! IMO Lightroom is better for those who have to deal with 1000's of photos and or have clients.
$69.00
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/adobe-photoshop-elements-14-windowsmac/4396401.p?id=1219742445777&skuId=4396401&ref=212&loc=1&ksid=0ffe6c99-756c-4357-aea2-47026efa36e9&ksprof_id=8&ksaffcode=pg45843&ksdevice=c

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

I have Photoshop Elements 10 and 11, Photoshop CC and Lightroom. I learned basic editing using Photoshop Elements, then gradually began using Photoshop CS5. You can probably find an older Photoshop Elements digital download for a reasonable price. The 11 version has three levels for editing and learning. Quick (very basic and auto), Guided (little more advanced with visible instructions and Expert (all manual). There are tons of Youtube videos online and built in videos via Adobe.

I would suggest PSE 11 or 12 for a start. Then eventually graduate to the subscription for Photoshop CC for $10 per month.
Mark