DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

So first of all, how much IQ do you need for real estate photography? Are you producing glossy brochures for high-end houses or are you producing images for online distribution? Online photos are generally viewed at fairly low resolution so you don't need a lot of effort going into them. Last time I looked for a house some of the online photos were presented at about 500 pixels maximum width.

And if you are doing this commercially, remember that the subscription price goes into the cost of production so it is deductible.

Having said all that, LR/PS is not either/or. They both have strengths and weaknesses and they complement each other. You might want to use both of them. They talk to each other, which makes using both fairly easy.

LR excels at image organization. It enables you to find an image several years later when you have forgotten where you put it, assuming you add keywords to your shoots. LR is a pretty good basic editor, and for most of my shots it takes care of 90% of my edits, although probably 90% of my shots are casual, not commercial. PS is the king of editors but it has so many capabilities that it takes a while to master. OTOH, you can do all your graphics with it and put them into your fancy brochures.

My answer to your title is yes.

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

I am not arguing. It is a compliment to Photoshop. It was developed as such. It is also a very powerful tool in its' right when it comes to external editing with a remote source.

It is also interesting to note that with camera raw in either Elements or Photoshop, one can accomplish 80% of what Lightroom can do. It is that other 20% that advanced users really take advantage of.

On the other hand, there are tools in Elements and Photoshop that do a better, quicker job than how it is done in Lightroom. Spot healing is a good example. So yes, Lightroom is a compliment to, not an instead of to Photoshop. It does not matter what other external editors one has in their repertoire.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

I'm assuming, though you don't say, that you shoot raw. If that's true, then your current camera must be compatible with Lightroom 6. Just bear in mind that if you ever replace that camera, LR6 may be unable to process the new format, which will require either that you convert your files with Adobe's free DNG converter, or else you'll have to move into the subscription model in order to obtain a version of LR compatible with the new camera.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Why ask others...no one knows better than you.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

"Do I Really Need Photoshop if I Have Lightroom?"

Yes.... and no.

Lightroom can only do so much. It has fairly limited image editing capabilities.

Maybe LR has all you need. Hard to say.

For me, I need a lot more than what LR offers (including layers & masks, which are a powerful tool to have at your disposal... and not available in LR).

I use Photoshop... but it's not the only alternative.

For example, you also could use Adobe Elements 2019 for added capabilities, incl. layers & masks. You can do far more precise retouching with it, too. Nice thing about Elements is that you can buy it outright... no "monthly rent", the way there is with Photoshop (actually, I still use PS CS6, which was the last perpetually licensed version... but copies of it are hard to find and tend to be expensive when you do).

Some of the other image editing programs others are bound to recommend can be used in conjunction with LR, too. You can "right-click" on an image in LR and "send" it to another software. Not just Photoshop.

One reason I often recommend Elements is because it has both built-in support and lots of third party support. There are plug-ins available for it, just like there are for LR and PS. But you are by no means limited to only Elements..... there are lots of alternatives.

Maryak

Better ask the question in reverse

"Do I really need Lightroom if I have Photoshop

IMHO No!

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Affinity is a one time cost, $50. I found the 3D perspective tool to be valuable for adjusting buildings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RVj6i9SjXE

And yes, robertjerl is right about Elements +

jlg1000 Loc: Uruguay / South America

You can also try ON1, it has all the LR features plus some of PS (layers, masks) already built in.

It’s about $70 perpetual license, free to try 30 days.

rond-photography Loc: Connecticut

I use LR almost exclusively. However, for HDR, if you do your shoots that way, it is horribly slow. I got Photomatix to process the HDR on my real estate shoots. It does it in batch mode, so you just start it and walk away (for a few minutes). It is very quick, but you will still probably want to adjust some of the results in LR.

As someone pointed out, you might need to clone out a flash reflection, etc. However, you can do this with PS Elements, Affinity, ON1, and many other non-subscription programs.

Rloren

Thank you everyone for your input and advice...

johnst1001a Loc: West Chester, Ohio

I have PS, yes I pay $10/month. I used to have PS element, and routinely bought their upgrades which cost $79, or $99. A friend of mine recommended another program, which cost $99, but it also has upgrades about 1/year, costing $79. that same company now offers their latest package for up to $129, saying its a perpetual license advertising no monthly charge, obviously to fight against Photoshop. It does not say free upgrades. So $129 is about $10/month. other packages have different offers, thus impossible for me at least to know the best value. what I have learned is jumping from one program to another is there is a learning curve which can be frustrating. I am happy with what i have, will pay for it, but stay with one, not jump from one to another.

Phil Martin Loc: New Hampshire

Once I discovered Affinity Photo, I canceled my PS account. Adobe, greedy as always, demanded that I pay 50% of the balance. I figured it was well worth that to get Adobe "off my back."

Rloren

catchlight.. Loc: Wisconsin USA- Halden Norway

If you want to do basic adjustments, Lightroom is it. Photoshop is the ultimate step that will go much further.

LR has storage, but for me personally, external hard drives work better. Everything is in Photoshop, including all the lightroom adjustments.

mvetrano2 Loc: Commack, NY

I have the subscription versions of Lightroom and Photoshop, but only use Lightroom for everything. I feel that everything that I need to do to my raw images can be done in Lightroom. Even though I have Photoshop, I have never used it for any photo editing. I know it is probably more powerful than Lightroom, but lacks the cataloging and face recognition that I use more than edits. So, for me, even though I pay for both, if Lightroom came as an only subscription without Photoshop, I would change my subscription.