Originally posted by Gordon: Originally posted by achiral: unless it has all the functionality of PS included.
|
Isn't that the point ? Photoshop has so much functionality included that you've probably never even used. Pre-press separations, drawing tools for graphic design, image ready etc (Never used as a photographer)
Originally posted by achiral: i could do the same things way faster in PS CS2, lightroom just looks cooler. i wish CS2's raw interface looked like Lightroom and was a lot faster Lightroom is,
|
So which is it - photoshop is faster, or lightroom is faster ? :)
I found for 90% of what I'm shooting lightroom does all the processing I need. I hardly need to use photoshop - and only when I'm trying to do per-pixel manipulation (dust removal, editing, or creative effects) I've found lightroom hugely faster than bridge/ photoshop, once you learn the shortcuts and workflow.
The main problem is that the lightroom -> photoshop workflow is a bit clunky. The rest of the things, like golive integration and stuff will no doubt be handled by the lightroom plug-in architecture - just as soon as someone writes the bits.
Originally posted by achiral: But really isn't this just something "cool" to get more money from people? It's not really a new idea or something that isn't already out there for photographers. |
It isn't a new idea - its just a much improved workflow than the clunky bridge/ Adobe RAW/ Photoshop flow that most people go through. I get the feeling its designed to make you spend as little as possible of your time infront of a computer, editing images.
I think the idea is to build a tool for digital photographers, addressing the things they do - getting pictures into a computer, selecting the good images, processing the RAW files, getting output in a variety of forms, quickly.
Photoshop is an hodge-podge of different tools for different audiences.
Analog photographers, pre-press work, designers, graphic artists, web designers. Jack of all trades. |
yeah i see what you're saying about focusing it just for the photographer, getting rid of all the functionality that a photographer would never use. but what about the stuff i really want as a photographer that lightroom doesn't have? that means i need both programs, which doubles my time. in my mind, it would be cool as an owner of cs2 to be able to "plug in" the things from CS2 that aren't currently in lightroom. i guess the needs vary from person to person
Message edited by author 2006-10-29 19:14:28.
|