Comments on: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom is outstanding!

By: Robert Nyman

Robert Nyman — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:51:11 +0000

Aldrik,

Thanks for the tip!

By: Aldrik

Aldrik — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 09:31:07 +0000

I use Bibble Pro, it’s deffently worth checking out, it’s a top class app (well priced and cross platform).

Will check out Lightroom on my other PC later, thanks for the heads up.

By: Robert Nyman

Robert Nyman — Sat, 18 Nov 2006 13:20:11 +0000

Jens,

But ah, the functionality and power you get in Lightroom can’t be compared to what you get in Photoshop elements.

By: Jens

Jens — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 15:38:46 +0000

“Fast” or “Slow” is in the eye of the beholder, I compare it to PS Elements that I run today.

By: Robert Nyman

Robert Nyman — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 08:59:04 +0000

Pat,

Yes, eventually it’s very likely that they want to get paid for it.

Jens, Jules,

Interesting. I know it can be slow on some computers, but I don’t know where the key issue lies then: if it’s in the RAM, processor and/or hard drive.

Will,

Very good input! For detailed editing and certain tweaks, Photoshop is definitely a complement.

By: Jules

Jules — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:55:11 +0000

Contrary to Jens, in my few minutes of exploring the application, I found it to be quite fast and I am running P4 2.4 with 512 RAM. The strange thing is that the minimum requirements is 768 MB RAM which, when I was downloading, caused me some concern but it seems to be running fine on my machine.

By: Will Sahatdjian

Will Sahatdjian — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 13:17:30 +0000

In response to the question about Lightroom eliminating the need for Photoshop, my opinion is that the two programs are complementary. Lightroom does a great job at “developing” (exposure, saturation, color balance, etc). The ability to create one preset and apply identical settings to several pictures is by far my favorite feature. My photos definitely look better since I’ve been using it, but I still almost always export to Photoshop for tweaks that I don’t want applied to the image as a whole. For example, if a picture of someone has part of their face in a shadow or there was a smudge on the lens, I would still use the dodge or clone tool to fix that. Lightroom isn’t intended for those kinds of edits and if you are a perfectionist, Photoshop is still going to be important to your workflow.

By: Jens

Jens — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 08:10:57 +0000

I love it too, the only thing not good right now is that it is real slow. IÂ´m running it on a P4 2.8 and itÂ´s really sluggish, that will probably hopefully be fixed for the final version.

By: Pat

Pat — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 19:51:34 +0000

Looks like it expires February 28, 2007 Thanks for the heads up, looks interesting!

By: Robert Nyman

Robert Nyman — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:08:35 +0000

Volkher,

I haven’t heard anything official, but i can imagine that the price will land just at the samel level or below as Aperture’s. Currently, Aperture is priced at $299.

dave,

Good to see that you’re as happy as me about it!

Steve, Jules

I’m pretty sure you will be pleased by it.

By: Jules

Jules — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:06:32 +0000

I currently use Adobe Photoshop Elements 2 and was thinking of upgrading to version 4 but it would seem to me that what I need is this application. I will definitely give it a try.

By: Steve Williams

Steve Williams — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 17:33:47 +0000

Thanks for the answers Rob

I’ll download the beta and give it a try! I’m in the market for a new camera, as a result I’ve been looking at what I can use to handle the RAW files and act as an intermediary to photoshop or filing system, but hadn’t got as far as trying anything yet.

By: dave walsh

dave walsh — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:36:27 +0000

I have been using it since beta 3 and IM like you, I love it and thinks it is a very powerful and easy tool to use… wouldnt look back..

By: Volkher Hofmann

Volkher Hofmann — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:34:46 +0000

Thanks for the review. Sounds interesting. I was trying to figure out what the final program might cost when it is released. So far, no luck. Have you heard anything?

By: Robert Nyman

Robert Nyman — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 12:17:20 +0000

Steve,

I understand that a comparison would’ve been nice, but I chose the one I preferred and gave a brief description of it instead.

To answer your question:

1) The way I see it, if all you’re going to do is edit actual photographs, Lightroom would be more than sufficient for that, meaning that Photoshop isn’t necessary. And I think that Aperture, although not as competent, is also meant to replace other image editing applications if photographs is your vice.

2) As far as I know, there’s no integration but the naturally given “Edit in Photoshop” when you right-click on an image.

3) You have two options when you refer to an image. Either work with the original copy (however, all changes will be kept in a separate Lightroom structure), or copy all images to a stand-alone Lightroom library.

No more questions now! Download the beta and try it!

By: Steve Williams

Steve Williams — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 11:25:53 +0000

Nice, though I’d have preferred some more comparison with Aperture and some equivalent screenshots.

I still don’t fully get Lightroom either. For example, would most people still need Photoshop if they had Lightroom? Does Photoshop integrate with Lightroom? And is the original image always preserved when editing?

Aperture makes more sense to me as an app, since it’s clearly an up-market version of iPhoto, designed to sit between the camera and your image editor of choice.