Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Lightroom query


thatmanbrian e2
3 342 3 United Kingdom
6 Oct 2011 8:12PM
I'm using the latest LR 3.5 and wonder why in the Library module the View/Sort always defaults to sort by added order? I want it to sort by filename which it does till the next time I launch it. I can't for the life of me find how to set this permanently. Help!

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

streetg e2
11 68 United Kingdom
6 Oct 2011 8:33PM
Hi - I have just tried my version and by using the sort drop down menu in the bottom toolbar it seems to remember the last setting if when I exit and relaunch the application
thatmanbrian e2
3 342 3 United Kingdom
6 Oct 2011 8:43PM
Ah yes, I see it. Naturally, I had been going to the drop down menu at the top! Thanks.Smile What an odd way of doing things though?
Railcam e2
8 484 Scotland
6 Oct 2011 9:35PM
Unfortunately Lightroom is a bit messy. It took me ages to find the thumbnail size slider. Then I read somewhere that it displays in Library Module, grid mode and it is hidden under the RH Menu panel. Hide the Menu Panel and bingo - there it his.

There are lots of similar things that are hidden. It has taken me six months to get up to speed with it. Not at all intuitive, but very powerful when you find the various bits. Stick with it.
thatmanbrian e2
3 342 3 United Kingdom
6 Oct 2011 9:48PM
I've been using LR & CS5 for my photography for a while now. It appears Adobe don't give the LR development team the same resources as Photoshop. I resent paying so much for Photoshop because as a photographer, I only need a fraction of its features, but those I do use are essential to me and are unavailable in LR i.e. layers etc.
JJGEE
9 6.4k 18 England
6 Oct 2011 10:09PM

Quote:It appears Adobe don't give the LR development team the same resources as Photoshop



Why do you think that ?


Quote:I resent paying so much for Photoshop because as a photographer, I only need a fraction of its features, but those I do use are essential to me and are unavailable in LR i.e. layers etc.


Why not get Elements, cheaper than CS5 and has the layers you want.
lobsterboy e2
11 14.3k 13 United Kingdom
6 Oct 2011 10:42PM

Quote:It appears Adobe don't give the LR development team the same resources as Photoshop
Why do you think that ?



I don't know about PS but everything I have read about LR gives the impression it is a relatively small team.
JJGEE
9 6.4k 18 England
6 Oct 2011 10:56PM

Quote:LR gives the impression it is a relatively small team.


But a lot of the features are common to both Photoshop / Lightroom..... especially the "basic functions" like the RAW conversion, White Balance, Exposure, Blacks,Vibrancy etc.
lobsterboy e2
11 14.3k 13 United Kingdom
6 Oct 2011 11:00PM

Quote:But a lot of the features are common to both Photoshop / Lightroom..... especially the "basic functions" like the RAW conversion, White Balance, Exposure, Blacks,Vibrancy etc.

There is a seperate team that works on ACR for both products, but after that they are completely different beasts.

If you get a bored moment, do Help>About on both products and you can see who is on each of the teams. I haven't counted up but PS looks like it has a lot more to me.
I do like the job title "Photoshop Grandpoohbar" though Wink
thatmanbrian e2
3 342 3 United Kingdom
7 Oct 2011 9:19AM

Quote:Quote: It appears Adobe don't give the LR development team the same resources as Photoshop

Why do you think that ?



Simply because Jeff Schewe says so and he was on the development team for Lightroom. See Shadowland/Lightroom Story

As for why you'd need LR over CS5 Jeff has this to say:


Quote:I personally really like Lightroom and the direction itís headed-but of course, Iím biased. Donít get me wrong, I still like PhotoshopÖIím pretty good at Photoshop. But Photoshop is an application with many masters used by many different types of users in a lot of different industries. Itís also a huge application, not only from the code base but from the complexity of use. Itís tough for photographers-some of them old graybeards-to learn all the ins and outs of working with Photoshop. Add the complexity of a new application, Adobe Bridge and the powerful but complex interaction between Bridge, Camera Raw and Photoshop and you have a lot of photographers whose eyes spend a lot of time glazed over.

Iím also really glad that the professional photographic community is finally getting the attention of not one, but two big players in the computer software biz. Iím tickled to death that Apple and Adobe are paying us so much attention.

Nick_w e2
7 4.1k 99 England
7 Oct 2011 9:43AM

Quote:I've been using LR & CS5 for my photography for a while now. It appears Adobe don't give the LR development team the same resources as Photoshop.


But they do different jobs. Lightroom is essentially a RAW converter, but you can get outstanding results without going to Photoshop.

No it doesn't have layers - it has adjustment brushes and graduated filters instead (the adjustment brushes are a bit like Nik filters control points - tho not as good).
IMHO it has better colour correction tools than photoshop, or I should more accurately say more intuitive.
The clone tool often gives better results than the one in photoshop.
You can apply settings to multiple images without complex actions/scripts.
The Clarity slider is much easier to use than complex settings to get the same local contrast adjustment.
Get one image right you can then apply all the same settings to other images taken at the same time, in seconds.

I don't like the cataloging system in Lightroom, I just cant get on with it. Some of the export functions to say Photomatix and even CS5 can be a bit clunky and erratic.

If I were a pro for day to day work I would use Lightroom almost exclusively - because its much, much quicker. It must be said for complex work / corrections, composites you just cant beat Photoshop - and as quality not speed is my only concern all my images are finished off in Photoshop.


Quote:There is a seperate team that works on ACR for both products, but after that they are completely different beasts.


I thought ACR & Lightroom shared the same RAW conversion engine ? so must be from the same team. Just ACR doesn't have (or need) all the bells and whistles.
lobsterboy e2
11 14.3k 13 United Kingdom
7 Oct 2011 10:06AM

Quote:I thought ACR & Lightroom shared the same RAW conversion engine ? so must be from the same team. Just ACR doesn't have (or need) all the bells and whistles.

One team works on ACR & another works on the rest of LR, but they are heavily interlinked which is why you always seem them released at the same time. But the ACR team have to make sure their stuff works with bridge/PS as well as LR.


Quote:Some of the export functions to say Photomatix and even CS5 can be a bit clunky and erratic.

Just to clarify for those who are not aware, you shouldn't need to use the "Export" function to get stuff into CS5 - there is an option to "Edit in" which allows you to go straight into PS.
Nick_w e2
7 4.1k 99 England
7 Oct 2011 10:09AM
Thanks for the clarification.
thatmanbrian e2
3 342 3 United Kingdom
7 Oct 2011 10:26AM
Nick_w, I'd say LR was a rather lot more than "essentially a RAW converter". It is a major workflow tool with cataloguing/library an important element. I agree that a lot of the features LR shares with PS are better in LR ie spot brushes, colour correction etc.

The main advantage of LR for me is that everything is totally non-destructive. The original RAW file is always there, untouched. LR also uses a different colour space to the default in PS. It is roughly equivalent to ProPhotoRGB I believe, which is rather wider than Adobe RGB. I setup my PS to use the Pro colour space so that when editing an LR file in PS, there are no losses in conversion.

The only time I transfer an image to PS is if I need to use layers, do HDR work or use a plugin. But many plugins now also interact with LR anyway. So I wonder if adding layers to LR wouldn't remove my needing PS completely?I think layers in Lightroom would be awesome!Tongue (But may be impossible?)
User_Removed 5 4.6k 1 Scotland
7 Oct 2011 10:43AM

Quote:Nick_w, I'd say LR was a rather lot more than "essentially a RAW converter". It is a major workflow tool with cataloguing/library an important element. I agree that a lot of the features LR shares with PS are better in LR ie spot brushes, colour correction etc.

The main advantage of LR for me is that everything is totally non-destructive. The original RAW file is always there, untouched. LR also uses a different colour space to the default in PS. It is roughly equivalent to ProPhotoRGB I believe, which is rather wider than Adobe RGB. I setup my PS to use the Pro colour space so that when editing an LR file in PS, there are no losses in conversion.

The only time I transfer an image to PS is if I need to use layers, do HDR work or use a plugin. But many plugins now also interact with LR anyway. So I wonder if adding layers to LR wouldn't remove my needing PS completely?I think layers in Lightroom would be awesome!Tongue (But may be impossible?)




I am firmly with that man Brian on this.

Perhaps that is because I have never had/taken the time to learn Photoshop properly and the advent of the first edition of Lightroom co-incided with me buying my first dSLR camera so I used it from the start and upgraded as each new version was launched.

I have gradually added plug-ins such as Nik Silver Efex Pro2, HDR Efex and Color Efex Pro4 which I use direct from Lightroom (although I could also use them from within PS CS5).

Really the only reason I go into PS now is if I want to do some major cloning-out of unwanted objects in an image or, for example, to replace grey sky with a nice blue one with fluffy clouds.

I could live without PS but not without LR.

.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.