crushr13 Loc: Sacramento, CA

All the time I see ads for LightRoom Presets and packages of them. Since I avoid Adobe only because I am so opposed to their monthly subscription price deals, I do not have LightRoom. My question is (although it may seem rather obvious), are they usable with other software, too? Or only with LightRoom?

If the answer to that is no, which is probably rather obvious thinking about it, how does one go about creating presets for photo editing software? Or learning how? It sounds like it would be great, but I have no clue on where or how to start. And I would like to learn more about it.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

LR presets are specific to LR. The for-sale and free ones are a waste money, even the free ones. For similar functionality in other products, consult the documentation and / or google against u-tube, where examples of usage and creation will be demonstrated.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

I have found this not to be true. Certainly, there are presets available commercially that are crap. But, there are some excellent packages from respected Photographers that can make a major impact on your Post Processing.

Joe Allam's Urban series for street photography
Greg Seim's for Landscape photography
Tony Northrop's Landscape, Dynamic Range, Perfect Skies, Portraits, and DeNoise

To name a few, are a regular part of my workflow. I don't really care if I borrow techniques or presets from others; it is the final look that I am after.

Another critical addition to the workflow you are missing if you eschew the Adobe Creative Cloud package.

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

I totally agree. Someone's version of an image style is rarely my vision, in nearly 100% of the ones that I have looked at on trial, including those from self-promoting photographers. I like packages like Nik and On1, which do provide a basic set of presets. I constantly get offers from On1 for this and that set of presets and I find that all too often they are overcooked for my taste. You're right - if an application can save a group of settings under a unique name, then it can reuse those settings on other images. The problem I see with most presets is that they are pretty specific to the author's images taken with the author's camera(s) in specific light, and generally don't work all that well across other images from other cameras in different light. It's just as easy to create one's own custom setting(s) for one's images as it is to use a canned preset and spend time tweaking it to one's taste or vision.

GENorkus Loc: Washington Twp, Michigan

I look at presets and styles as something I'll consider if it's free only. One reason is similar to what has already been said, it someone elses version. Sure I can remodify that to more my likings but when I have various images, it's unlikely they all need the same style or preset.

By just doing it myself and batch modifing what is needed from that, I retain more about using the main post edit program and my personal feelings about the image.

If I were to start using styles and presets, how long would it be before I just let a "company" do all the post processing work? (That's a story on it's own.)

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

Presets today something else tomorrow. Since you don't use it you haven't the foggiest idea what you are be missing. For the $10 a month you get one powerful PP package. Remember what PS would cost when that was purchasable? $10 a month is chump change.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

I have to agree, they are certainly not a waste of money (although I never did buy any, I always create my own, but there are certainly many out there that are well worth it, or one can get scripts,or make their own. And there too, many well worth it, incl. all the free ones!

crushr13 Loc: Sacramento, CA

Thank you for the comments. Even with the few I got, I saw various perspectives about working with presets. I don't do enough photography yet to warrant spending the Adobe monthly cost each and every month, whether I use it or not. I would rather spend money once, and go from there. Just my feeling.

CHG_CANON thank you for your comments about how to learn to see about making my own presets, when I get to that point. In fact, your suggestion was so good, it even will probably still apply when I do get up to speed, and know more of what I seek to do with my images. Very constructive, so thank you.

JackB

Another against Lightroom! Geesh.!

Bunkershot Loc: Central Florida

I agree, Lr presets are useless. I've never looked at one that I could employ. Best to do your own development...

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

I would think that if a packaged software stated that it was a "preset for Lightroom" then it is only a preset for Lightroom, but that really is a question that you would need to direct to the manufacturer of the software, not to people on this forum. Our crystal ball does not always work well? Using presets could be a good learning tool for people who do not have the skill set needed to edit an image successfully. I'm pretty sure there are good preset and lousy preset packages available, for LR or other software. You will need to try whatever you choose out and see if it works for you. Ultimately, many people want to process an image using their personal skill and artistic vision and that might appeal to you at some point when your skill grows. I am not a preset user in general, but I do like the presets that come with Luminar and sometimes with a few other programs that I use. It's up to you what you choose to do with your own work.