Sounds like a solution in search of a problem. I suggest that you take a picture and adjust it in both LR and PS and time it. When done, ask yourself if the difference, if any, matters. I prefer the radial and linear gradient tools in LR but the shake reduction, by-pass sharpening, stamp and healing tools in PS. However, I do use LR's heading tool and adjustment brush but sometimes I need to go into PS for the better versions.

I need to get a lot of pictures out quickly than optional esoteric adjustments. No doubt PS is more powerful but for most of my work, LR does a great job. Plus, I have keywords. That being said, everyone needs to find the tools best suited for one's needs and skills.

UHH member Curmudgeon asked on another thread "should I crop the photo before or after I do the other pp?" I almost always crop as the last step, but it occurred to me that I wasn't sure why people crop images and that might affect how when and why they crop. I crop images for two reasons: to get a preferred aspect ratio, especially when printing an image; and to alter the composition of the image. Linda suggested a thread to explore the topic more.

Just to get the discussion started, here is my workflow, which is a little different than that used by people with Adobe software and so may be of some interest. I have been using this workflow for years and I don't think about it much. I hope this is reasonably intelligible.

I start with raw files, Canon.cr files, and the first stop is Canon's Digital Photo Professional. Typically I will make minor changes to the image there - brightness, contrast, shadows, highlights, more rarely straighten a horizon, adjust tone curves. The result then gets exported as a 16 bit TIFF file and saved in an appropriate folder. I create folders as I go through the season, that can mean 20 folders of a few hundred images each over a year.

All other work is done in a 15+ year old version of Paint Shop Pro - unsharp mask, resizing, cropping, and I also can create adjustment layers, work with masks, and use all of the various tools just as with Photoshop. Not as fancy as Photoshop, but fast, stable, easy to use, and much more affordable.

So I open the TIFF file for the image I want, and then make a copy - I'll call that copy one - to work on (edit > paste as new image) in the PSP proprietary lossless format. The raw files and the TIFF files are never altered. I close the TIFF file now and work with the PSP copy of the TIFF file. I then make a second copy with "paste as new image" - I'll call that copy two - and shrink that image 5-15%, and flood fill it with a solid color to save any confusion. I think of that as a "cropping template" and I want it to be the final size and aspect ratio for the image. I finish copy one with any processing needed - I do unsharp mask in PSP, in part because I like the unsharp mask function in PSP better than the one in DPP, and also because I don't want to sharpen images that are going to be focus stacked before they are stacked, as the stacked image will be too "crunchy."

Now I paste copy one into copy two as a new layer. This lets me move the image around in the "template" to fine tune the composition. Usually the composition is pretty close to where I want it in the original image, but on the rare occasions that a more severe crop is needed, I will shrink "copy two" more, as appropriate.

Last, "copy merged" and "paste as a new image" and then save that image - copy three - into the appropriate folder as a JPEG or TIFF, depending upon what it is going to be used for. I usually keep copy one and copy two open until I am sure I have what I want, in case I want to make any changes there. I can always go back to the TIFF if I screw it all up badly, or even go back to the raw file and make changes in export from DPP. Assuming that all went well, I close copy one and copy two without saving them.

Why crop? To improve composition, and/or to change the aspect ratio.

When? As the last step when I can concentrate solely on composition.

How? I like to put the image into a smaller "template" as a layer and then move it around until I think the composition is optimal. That way I can see what different ways to approach the composition will look like before the actual crop is done.

All of that takes me about 120 seconds per image typically, but as I write it out it looks pretty complicated. I like this method because it is so unambiguous and because it is easy to go back and start over when the inevitable screw ups or distractions happen.

Why, when, and how do you crop your images?

Mike

Bruce, you have opened a Pandora's box. I see two big issues here: the auto button and going to PS. I would like to share my experience with you. When Adobe upgraded the auto button a few months ago, it was a vast improvement over the previous version. I liked it at first but after a while I found it helped in much less than half the time. It was either way off in exposure or gave an unreal look to the shot. I now rarely use it.

Here is my development workflow. I start by adjusting exposure visually, applying +30 clarity and the medium contrast tonal range. Why the last two? Because I shoot raw with no adjustments and the shots are very flat and lifeless. The clarity and contrast bring the picture alive. Then I straighten, crop, adjust the other exposure sliders, make local adjustments, adjust the noise for high ISO pictures, vignette and then readjust the exposure as needed. If the picture needs something special, then I go into PS. I found, the hard way of course, that nailing the exposure is the best way of staying out of PS. I do about 90% of my editing in LR only. If I were interested in moving objects around or certain complicated effects, then I would spend more time in PS.

I have ranges for presets. For example, my clarity presets range from 0 to 60 in increments of 10. I have presets combine noise reduction, chromatic aberration and a lens profile. These do save a lot of time.

You mentioned you have many pictures from a family gathering. I go through the same thing but with basketball. The goal is to shoot your pictures well enough that you can stay in LR. PS is a time hog. Use only if you cannot find a way of doing it in LR. To be specific, you should explain in detail, possibly with pictures, why you think you have to use PS. Perhaps someone here can show you how you can do it in LR instead of PS.

Let me suggest one thing that is great for family shots. If you have any closeups of older people who are often self-conscious about skin lines, LR has a preset brush for softening them. Your subject will not even know you used it.

This photo was taken in 2016 while visiting the wonderful little coastal town of Camogli (silent "g"), located on the Italian Riviera. The photo has not had any post-processing; hope you enjoy making it your own. :-)

Feel free to download this photo to your computer and edit it anyway you wish. Color shifts, composites, black and white conversions, adjustments are all good. When you are finished with the edit, post it in this thread. We will accept edits until 9pm on Thursday when we will go to voting. Thank you.