Rloren

Hello...
My current objective for now is editing real estate photographs which I am just getting into.
I am editing photos in Lightroom 6 which I bought outright.
If my out of camera photos are good there can generally be only a few adjustments needed My biggest friend seems to be the adjustment brush which works out fine most of the time, but I am still working on cloning and healing.

I watch two real pros on You Tube and everything they do starts in Lightroom and then goes right into Photoshop, generally into layers. Then I stop watching because for now I do not have Photoshop.

Just trying to make this a general question. If my out of camera shots are good most of the time is Lightroom fine?
And, does photoshop bring a whole higher level of editing esp. in problem areas?

I rely on HDR when I have to. Does photoshop do that better?
And lastly, I 'm not big on monthly subscription bills. Buying it outright would be ok?
Thank you...

Phil Martin Loc: New Hampshire

Check out Affinity Photo. For me it's "Photoshop on Steroids," and it costs a flat-out $49. How can you go wrong with that?

Rloren

Thank you, I'll check it out...

Tomfl101 Loc: Mount Airy, MD

Photoshop is essential if you are using flash. You will inevitably get reflections that can only be fixed by taking a second image with the flash at a different angle, taking the reflection out, but leaving you or your flashhead in the picture. You will need to select the two images, then send to PS as layers and mask-layer out the reflection. If you are only doing HDR you won't need PS but HDR can look rather strange in some situations and won't work well enough to bring outside detail from windows. If you are serious about real estate you must have Photoshop in your workflow.

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

Lightroom is a "compliment to", not an "instead of" to Photoshop.

blackest Loc: Ireland

Lightroom is really good at managing your photographs and it does basic raw development with the same raw engine that photoshop uses. Adobe would like you to use photoshop for layer based work but it doesn't have to be photoshop. There are lots of work flows you can use.

You might balance the highlights and shadows in Lightroom and use export to ... e.g a psd file and open that in affinity photo or photoshop or something else.
Lightroom can even register the psd file in your catalogue so when you click save in your other editor the psd file is in your catalog with the new layers added.

If you don't want to spend on an external editor Raw Therapee might be one to try but there are plenty of other graphics programs that can be used and most will give you 30 days to try before buying.

Rloren

Yes, there was one wow moment to me when the photographer walked into the picture with hand-held flash and then removed himself from the photo. Looks tricky. I have more work to do...

Tomfl101 Loc: Mount Airy, MD

It's easier than you think. Check out Rich Baum videos then do some tests in your own home. You'll get the hang of it in short order.

lsimpkins Loc: SE Pennsylvania

PS is no longer available for purchase as a standalone application, but only as part of a subscription. You may be able to get a copy of CS6 used, but licensing might be an issue with such a purchase.

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

To your first question, "If my out of camera shots are good most of the time is Lightroom fine,?" the answer is, in general, yes.
And, to your second question, "And, does photoshop bring a whole higher level of editing esp. in problem areas?" Also, yes.
As to the third question, "I rely on HDR when I have to. Does photoshop do that better?" In my opinion, if you stick with automated HDR, then LR is fine. PS will allow you to blend by hand so that you can control what occurs.
And, to the question of buying PS, "Buying it outright would be ok?" No, you cannot purchase it outright.

Using the spot/clone tool in LR is clumsy, it is ok in some cases but useless for very large areas. It appears to have been created to literally be used just for spotting. Using PS you can take spotting and removing to a completely different level.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Lightroom has a great parametric, or rules-based editor. It can make fast work out of making broad, sweeping global adjustments. It is already included in Photoshop in the form of Adobe Camera Raw.

What you can't do in LR is make precise, local adjustments, work with layers, merge two images, use layers, brushes and blend modes to enhance or repair an image, content aware operations, etc etc etc. The functions are not interchangeable, so the answer is yes, editing is more comprehensive and precise in Photoshop.

HDR is the same in both, but you have additional tone mapping you can do in PS that is not available in LR.

Part of what you will discover over time is that the images that you once thought were ok out of LR really aren't. LR is a very fast way to get to proof stage, but not for proper image finishing. I haven't seen a raw converter alone that could produce finished images.


If you "buy" software (you aren't really buying anything but a license to use it) thinking you own something tangible, think again. Also your LR 6 is out of date. In automobile terms it's an Edsel - no longer made and soon to be completely abandoned. As new computers with greater processing ability, newer operating systems, new cameras and lenses hit the market, you will find support for your current license of LR as well as the new stuff - to diminish. One day you will get a new computer, camera or lens and won't be able to use it, and you'll realize the benefit of having software that is current and aggressively updated/upgraded.

Subscription model of software delivery is only a way to even out cash flow for a company and it's endusers. Photoshop used to cost $1000 and LR $300 - and another $300 and $100 at upgrade time - usually every 18 months. Not needing to manage a hugely expensive distribution channel - packaging, printed manuals, media, inventory, return of defective media, pricing etc - ends up being a big benefit, both in price and software quality. Essentially, by cutting out the middlemen - you are buying software at whole cost. May this way of looking at it can help you get over your hangup

lsaguy Loc: Udall, KS, USA

If you're just doing a few adjustments why not check out Irfanview? It's free, very quick to learn and might be all need for your jpg's.

BebuLamar

I use Photoshop but not Lightroom. I hate the cataloging function of Lightroom.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

To be concise: no, you can do everything you need within LR, based on the limited needs you've expressed. Just because you can do everything better and / or more precise in PS, that doesn't mean you need that power. Do you need a Ferrari to drive to the grocery store, to drive to work, to take the kids to basketball practice? To do what you need for 99% of your everyday life and needs?

You mention cloning and healing. These tools in LR6 are surprisingly powerful, but they do take a bit of practice and they're not appropriate for complex situations. But, how complex are the situations you get into in real estate photography? Another $120 per year complex? For the video you aborted, what was that author doing? Is that an edit your photography even needs? Could you have worked harder during the image capture to simply avoid the edit need in post?

And finally, how much video training have you taken on LR? The free video training is virtually limitless, and like most things being free, some is better than others. If you need more training on cloning and healing, have you looked for available LR videos on the topic? Noise reduction? Sharpening? The S-curve or split toning?

For HDR, I find Topaz Adjust is "better" for my tastes / work than LR's HDR function or Photomatrix, but I do only single-image HDR for probably 1 in 200 keeper images. You might find a dedicated tool that runs as a plug-in to LR better suited to your needs if HDR is a regular aspect of your real estate work.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

The rule of thumb from most in the past is that someone who knows his gear and does good exposures can do 90-95% of everything in LR.
So it depends on what you do to your photos. If what you want to do doesn't need PS than you can get by fine with just LR. And of course there are alternatives. Photo Shop Elements will do most of the things you need PS for in addition to LR. Esp if you invest $12 in a program called "Elements+" that adds many of those other PS features to PSE. PSE will sync with LR just like PS does. PSE is $69.99 or the version with Premiere Elements added (for video) is $99.99. One objection some have is that PSE only does 16 bit editing globally (whole photo) and when you go to layers and some detail work it reduces to 8 bit.