05-08-2006, 09:19 PM
ka jowct Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just recently (a week ago) got a camera that
> produces RAW files and am using Bridge and CS2, so
> I haven't had the time or inclination to try a
> different way of processing the images. What do
> you like better about Lightroom, specifically?
> Does it give you basically the same settings and
> options and defaults?
No, the interface is built more for photographers, not PS users. The terms are more intuitive, less "scientific".
I bet they produce the same results in the long run, but Lightroom "feels" better.
Things like sharpening & hue/saturation are best done as an adjustment layer in PS anyway.
Ideally, I think the RAW format needs to be addressed by Adobe like a Smart Object, in which the RAW file is linked but all adjustments/layers & tweaks are done by live-proxy via Photoshop.
I can dream.
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just recently (a week ago) got a camera that
> produces RAW files and am using Bridge and CS2, so
> I haven't had the time or inclination to try a
> different way of processing the images. What do
> you like better about Lightroom, specifically?
> Does it give you basically the same settings and
> options and defaults?
No, the interface is built more for photographers, not PS users. The terms are more intuitive, less "scientific".
I bet they produce the same results in the long run, but Lightroom "feels" better.
Things like sharpening & hue/saturation are best done as an adjustment layer in PS anyway.
Ideally, I think the RAW format needs to be addressed by Adobe like a Smart Object, in which the RAW file is linked but all adjustments/layers & tweaks are done by live-proxy via Photoshop.
I can dream.