Layer effect, adjustments layers, layer styles, masking. Photoshop has limited 3D support and 3D printing. Photoshop has good text support and even has a spellchecker. Photoshop supports layer making is easy to make composite complex collages. Photoshop can be automated well via Actions and powerful scripting. Photoshop is a superior image editor it can do all the image editing that Lightroom can do and much much more. For it can not much of what Photoshop can. Lightroom is also easier to learn then Photoshop. Lightroom has limited editing capabilities but its editing is non destructive. If you run a Photo business lightroom may prove to be the image organize you want. Lightroom is a superior image organizer better then Bridge+Photoshop. As far as Bridge goes, Lightroom catalogs only still and video formats that come out of a camera, so if you need to catalog other formats like PNG, Illustrator, Flash, and HTML files you need to use Bridge. For example, if you're printing a raw file and want to fix a problem, in Photoshop it's a long trip back to the raw controls where in Lightroom you get there by pressing one key.īut the one thing that can't be argued is that if you often use tools that are only in Photoshop, you have to use Photoshop. In Lightroom, the same tasks are done in a single program and I find this makes it easier and faster to move between whatever features I need at the time. If you need to edit a raw file, organize it with others, and print it, in Photoshop you would need to drag that image through up to four programs: Adobe Camera Downloader, Camera Raw, Bridge, and Photoshop. The infinite undo history that never gets deleted is a very powerful Lightroom feature. When you need consistent output to multiple destination formats, the way presets work for Export and Print is so efficient it really tilts the workflow in favor of Lightroom. It's much faster to pick and rate and work with collections, faster to use and filter keywords and other metadata, easier to watermark images. In Lightroom, the features in Camera Raw and Bridge are more integrated and with some keyboard shortcuts that Bridge simply doesn't have. But if you work on high volumes of raw files, Lightroom is more efficient. If you tend to work on a few images at a time in great detail at a pixel level, Photoshop is your program when you need to edit raws or sync settings you've got Camera Raw and Bridge. So the features to support that workflow are integrated in one place. Lightroom was designed for today's workflows, where hundreds of images in raw format can flood in from a camera card in one session and you might handle thousands in a year, where metadata is important, and where there are typically multiple outputs: web/social media, print, and video. Camera Raw and Bridge are literally afterthoughts to that history, coded much later and completely separate programs than Photoshop. Photoshop originated many years ago designed for editing individual images in an era when images came as RGB or CMYK files from scanners, when you handled maybe tens of images at a time, and when there was one final output: print. But the difference between Lightroom and Photoshop is not about comparining the lists of features. It's true that with Bridge and Camera Raw you can do almost anything you can do with Lightroom. You may not need to be convinced Photoshop might be what you need.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |