Lightroom is losing value? (Page 6): I agree completely!

Muddyvalley Loc: McMinnville, Oregon

larryepage wrote:

I am a minimalist when it comes to post processing. Although I have the entire Adobe photographic suite, everything I need or wish to do can be accomplished in LightRoom.

I agree completely!

tenny52 Loc: San Francisco

If an image after LR and PS, further processing will only diminish its beauty, then it is done deal.
But I find the other way round; those plug-ins can always enhance the image after from LR/PS.
So my workflow is LR(batch, lightings), ICE (for stitching) and then via PS plug-ins(Topaz Denoice, Sharpen, Adjust, Remask, and/or Lumina), then PS.
Anyone think/do differently?

cahale Loc: San Angelo, TX

tenny52 wrote:

Currently and most of the time, I only need LR for its White-balance, Lighting functions and Raw-Jpeg conversion. Then I process the image much easier and faster with the plug-ins of Topaz (Adjust AI, Denoise AI, Sharpen AI, Clean, ReMask) and Lumina AI. Do you agree?

Use the proprietary software that comes with you camera. It will take care of the white balance while converting RAW to JPG. And you don't even have to pay for it.

tenny52 Loc: San Francisco

cahale wrote:

Use the proprietary software that comes with you camera. It will take care of the white balance while converting RAW to JPG. And you don't even have to pay for it.

That's why for those who have to pay monthly, there are plenty of alternatives and LR/PS are losing values.

whitehall Loc: Canada

Gene51 wrote:

I use Lightroom for 100% of my initial editing, as well as the catalog and for exporting to jpeg. It is the fastest way I know of to reduce a set of 1000 raw captures to something I could show to a client (really good proofs). From it I can launch just about any external processor with the confidence that it will be added to the catalog once I am done processing externally. I also use DXO, Capture One, and On1 Raw.

Gene,

I am a Canon shooter Because of the limitations of Adobe when processing CR (Raw images) I have been using DXO of late to process prior to importing to LR. However, it is very slow, like watching paint dry. Alternatively, I could use DXO as part of my PP to reduce noise and affect lens corrections. Otherwise, I agree LR can do 95% of my PP needs. What do you recommend? Thanks.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

tenny52 wrote:

I don't use LR for Cataloging, because it will lose its tracking if the folder's name is altered. I use Faststone for keeping my stock, and include all my external programs.
Moreover, I find LR is very good at batch and Hightlights/Shadow processing.

Not if you do all changes / moves while in light room.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

tenny52 wrote:

Currently and most of the time, I only need LR for its White-balance, Lighting functions and Raw-Jpeg conversion. Then I process the image much easier and faster with the plug-ins of Topaz (Adjust AI, Denoise AI, Sharpen AI, Clean, ReMask) and Lumina AI. Do you agree?

No.....I love the cataloging and do almost all of my editing in LR. it is very good for most editing the over all image, and I can edit several at once for some things. LR is very fast for this. I use photo shop for specifics and layers.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

whitehall wrote:

Gene,

I am a Canon shooter Because of the limitations of Adobe when processing CR (Raw images) I have been using DXO of late to process prior to importing to LR. However, it is very slow, like watching paint dry. Alternatively, I could use DXO as part of my PP to reduce noise and affect lens corrections. Otherwise, I agree LR can do 95% of my PP needs. What do you recommend? Thanks.

What Adobe limitations in processing CR files are you referring to?

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

tenny52 wrote:

Currently and most of the time, I only need LR for its White-balance, Lighting functions and Raw-Jpeg conversion. Then I process the image much easier and faster with the plug-ins of Topaz (Adjust AI, Denoise AI, Sharpen AI, Clean, ReMask) and Lumina AI. Do you agree?

Absolutely...there are so many alternatives that re efficient, highly specialized, or much more simple to use!

Cheers!

GreenDruid Loc: Toronto, Canada

Think about Rawtherapy and other Light room like free software.

chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA

GreenDruid wrote:

There is also cheaper or free software. Adobe can't keep up with others.

...er, lots of Adobe users would laugh at your last sentence. Especially experienced photographers who've delved into the free and cheaper world (I'm one of those). I suspect you've never become adept at using the LR to PS system. Adobe is a giant outfit with resources beyond what most, if not all, competitors can bring to bear. They are constantly updating their software to remain in the position they're in, with a huge customer base...which I believe are listened to. I dunno if I'm a "fanboy" as much as an avid user, and I take the time to try (and buy) other promising products...not so much to "compare" them (even though that's intrinsic in the act) as find an edge! For example, I bought Luminar 4 to get an edge on sky replacement and was pleased with their effort...but then Adobe pops that function into Photoshop. Uh...it's better! And I haven't had a need to open Luminar since. <shrug>

pego101

Every day something gets bashed here. Amazon, nikon, Canon, ups, abes of maine. B&H, Adorama today it's lightroom. Lol. It's actually a great program for cataloging and then using photoshop through lightroom at least that's my workflow.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

It's a sign. See it. Believe it. It says: Use Lightroom.

Valenta Loc: Top of NZ

Cs6 does the lot... (never have used Lightroom)

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

Valenta wrote:

Cs6 does the lot... (never have used Lightroom)

CS6 does A lot, but I wouldn't say it does THE lot. But even PSCC doesn't have the DAM that Lightroom does.