reader wrote:
Hello
I have used Picasa but want to start processing RAW files. Also, I understand Picasa will no longer be supported as Google moves you to their Google Photo application. So, I am looking for advice on my next photo processing software application.
It looks to me like Lightroom will be next as it has wider usage and third party support. But my next question is do I go with a stand alone copy or the Cloud subscription. I am a bit leary of the subscription service as it looks like another way to move people to a service cost which will become a "necessary utility" and then the cost will start to escalate over time. Sort of like moving from an antennae to cable tv. A standalone is a fixed investment.
Please post your thoughts on going with standalone Lightroom vs Lightroom CC.
If you have a strong recommendation and want to talk me out of Lightroom please post those thoughts too.
Hello br I have used Picasa but want to start proc... (
show quote)
Get Photoshop Elements instead.
Elements also has tons of third party support, is a lot easier to learn to use and is more of a stand-alone software that borrows a lot of the major features from both Lightroom and Photoshop.
In fact, LR and PS individually are not full-featured software programs. LR is a powerful image cataloging, organizing and management tool, with minimal, rapid, mostly global image adjustment and optimization tools. It's not really designed to take images all the way to the finish line. PS, on the other hand, is the Mac Daddy of all image adjustment and optimization tools, with tons more capabilities for that purpose than LR and the ability to finish images to a very high degree... But PS has minimal , rather primitive cataloging, organizing and management capabilities.
In other words, LR and PS are sort of like two sides of a coin. Someone needing to both manage high volumes of images and finish them to a high degree including commercial usage will need both programs... and need to spend a year or two of rather intensive study learning to use them well. Some people who only ever make small prints or share their images online get by with LR alone... Meanwhile some other folks who only shoot small numbers of images but finish them to a higher degree, plus have other means of organizing, searching and cataloging their files might be fine with PS alone.
LR is still available as a stand-alone... although Adobe has started to be slow with updates for LR6 and will discontinue support at some point. To be able to work with some of the very most recent cameras' files, you would need LR CC. PS CS6 is already getting hard to find... and when you do it's likely to be expensive (especially if not able to upgrade from an earlier version). And, Adobe has already discontinued all support for it. PS CC has some additional features, too. So, there really isn't a lot of choice any more, but to go with the subscription software and pay your monthly fee (which I'm sure Adobe will jack up in price eventually, just like cable TV providers).
Elements, on the other hand, is a stand-alone with perpetual license that covers both the management and finishing aspects working with images. It's sort of a lite version of both LR and PS. It doesn't have all their features... but it has the ones most photographers are likely to use. It's an "8-bit limited" application... which basically means that it only can save 8-bit files such as JPEGs (though it can handle higher bit count RAW files just fine and is kept up to date with more recent cameras). This actually is fine for most peoples uses... nearly all printing, Internet sharing, etc. only requires 8-bit files. It's only some commercial applications and extremely high end work that might need 16-bit files, such as TIFFs and PSDs.
Elements also has three user-selectable interfaces: beginner, intermediate and expert modes. You can start with one and advance to the other... or switch back and forth between them at any time. There isn't any sort of similar user support in LR and PS. In comparison, LR might be considered "very, very expert"... while PS is "very, very, very, very expert". With either of them, plan on spending
a lot more time learning to use them well (especially Photoshop itself).
For example, Elements has a cloning/healing tool that's more similar to Photoshops very precise one, able to work right down to pixel level... than to the rather crude cloning/healing brush in Lightroom. And, you can work in layers and masks in Elements to make targeted adjustments, almost the same as PS... which you can't do in LR. On the other hand, Elements has more cataloging and image management capabilities than Photoshop.
In fact, Elements is a good way to get started to eventually step up to LR and PS... if you ever find that necessary.
Personally I use PS CS6 and LR6 on my primary editing workstation. I used to have LR on a laptop, too... but will probably be using Elements on it instead now (not sure if my current version of LR6 is licensed to use on multiple machines, the way my older version was). I've been working with Photoshop since version 4, back around 1995, and with Lightroom since the first version of it was introduced about ten years ago.
I experimented a bit with some of the freebie software over the years... but it just doesn't seem to work as well... at least for me. I'd stick with Adobe products, but am not a fan of subscription software and may need to shop around for something else in the future (I think LR6 and PS CS6 will serve all the cameras I'm likely to be using for the next few years, though.)
So, for most people I'd recommend the current version of Elements (now 14). It's updated every couple years and seems to only be offered in full versions.... but at $100 or so for those, works out to about $50 a year (or less, depending upon the user).... which is less than half the annual PS/LR CC subscription cost... and one heck of a lot easier to learn to use!