Do I Need Adobe Light Room

[Robster]

Hi All,
Please help me out, With regards to Adobe lightroom what does it do and do I need it.
To give you some idea I use Adobe CS or Elements 7 and Photomatix Pro 3 and shoot mainly RAW images.
Thanks

Robster

( I guess I could goto Adobe.com but It would be great to get others views about it)

[chris-p]

I got a trial version of Lightroom and haven't really used it. I use CS3 (and Photomatix for HDR) and while Lightroom is a well featured program I found that the most useful thing about it was batch processing of RAW files which is something I don't really do anyway.

I am sure there are people who find it much more useful than I do though!

[OliverJohnson]

No you don't NEED it, but you may well find that you'll wonder how you did without it if you start using it.

For me the biggest advantage of Lightroom (and Aperture) over Photoshop is the fact that I don't ever have to create a single TIFF file for any edited photo and I can create multiple different versions of the same photo and I can do all of that without taking up any more disc space than the original RAW file uses.

Lightroom isn't just about RAW processing though as it organises your library of photos (personally I still think Aperture's Library functions are still way better than Lightroom) making it easy to find and group your photos. It also can greatly speed up your processing by being able to either batch process of copy just one of several adjustments from one photo to any number that you choose. This is a big time saver.

The best thing you can do though is to download the trial version and give it a try for yourself

[Forseti]

Originally Posted by Robster

Hi All,
Please help me out, With regards to Adobe lightroom what does it do and do I need it.
To give you some idea I use Adobe CS or Elements 7 and Photomatix Pro 3 and shoot mainly RAW images.
Thanks

Robster

( I guess I could goto Adobe.com but It would be great to get others views about it)

Hi Robster. As to whether you need it or not depends on whether you are happy enough with Bridge (I'm assuming Bridge came with CS?). Basically Bridge works a lot like the Windows Explorer structure in that you open files by using the structure to the left of the application. Lightroom on the other hand is a DAM (Digital Assets Management) application in that it uses a database meaning that no images or edits etc are contained/saved/stored within the application itself. Your images can reside where you want them whilst any edits you make to those images, plus any keywords and ratings etc are stored entirely within the database. Camera Raw is also integrated within the Lightroom application itself whereas with Photoshop it's a plug-in. A lot of people (me included) find that having used Lightroom for a while their need to go across into Photoshop is becoming less and less. In short, if you shoot mainly using RAW format, want/need to do a lot of batch processing then it's a very good application. If on the other hand you shoot mainly jpegs then it's probably not worth the bother. One thing it does make you do however, is to become far more organised because if you don't use a methodical approach to sorting and organising your precious images it can become a real mess.

Photomatix Pro actually has a Lightroom plug-in available from their site so that you can edit away in Lightroom and then take the processed images across into Photomatix Pro.

Using both CS and Elements is a bit belt and braces yes? I think that in your position if I wasn't exactly sure, then I'd download and try the 30 day free trial. Don't import all your images (which to repeat are only into the database, not into Lightroom itself), rather only a small selection. Process them, edit them, add keywords and generally have a play. If at the end of the trial you feel comfortable with it and it meets your needs then perhaps consider buying it - and if not then nothings been lost.

Having just read Olivers post and in one part he is alluding to 'Virtual Copies'. By right clicking on an image you can create a virtual copy which is fully editable and which to all intents and purposes actually exists but doesn't take up any more room on your HD. What this means is that you can create multiple edited versions of the one image in a multiple of different ways i.e. one Sepia toned, a black and white version..........etc etc, you get my drift. And yes, once used it's hard to break away from it.

[duncan22]

Lightroom 3 is now out. You can download a copy from the website and use it through to April for no charge as it's a beta program.
By that time you will know if it is for you or not.

[Forseti]

I'll add a caveat to the last post. Adobe themselves are not even guaranteeing everything will work or even be fully functional with this beta version - in fact the Luminance slider is even greyed out as this is an area they are still seeking to improve upon. So if you do consider testing this beta version don't let your judgement be influenced should you not find everything working as you would perhaps expect.

[Robster]

Hi all
Thanks very much for the information, I wll download the trial version and see if it will suit my needs.
I will keep you posted.
With regards to having CS and elements I have CS on another PC and dont tend to use it much as elements as elements covers most of things that I require, I also cant open RAW files with CS as the updates are not available.
so thanks again to you Forseti, duncan22, chris-p and Oliver Johnson.
Best Wishes
Robster

[Gil Ritchie]

Originally Posted by Forseti

I'll add a caveat to the last post. Adobe themselves are not even guaranteeing everything will work or even be fully functional with this beta version - in fact the Luminance slider is even greyed out as this is an area they are still seeking to improve upon. So if you do consider testing this beta version don't let your judgement be influenced should you not find everything working as you would perhaps expect.

I am currently testing the Lightroom 3 Beta version - and already being a confirmed version 2 "addict" - I find this update superb - and would fully endorse the suggestion to download and try it out - whats more - this Beta is free for use until the full version ships - expected around April 2010 - it is a MUST for not only those not having used Lightroom before - but for those currently using version 2 - as there are enough subtle but well worth while improvements and additions to enjoy - what a great product.

[lifecapture]

If you want to 'develop' raw files then users are pretty much split between lightroom and aperture, obviously you need a mac for the latter. There are alternatives to this, if you have a nikon or a canon DSLR it should have shipped with a basic raw converter software for mac or pc.
I have tried aperture and lightroom and my preference is aperture, its just a personal user taste i cant really say why its better but its just the way it feels when i use it. I think using a RAW developer has greatly improved my results and has made my photography more rewarding, i am finally getting the results i was striving for, for many years. Free trials are available, there is no substitute for your own experience so i would recommend you download one and try it for yourself.

[ddraver@hotmail.com]

t'would appear they ve updated the noise reduction tool - that will be interesting. I wonder if they ll have added creative camera profiles for Sony? *dreams*