Lightroom 4
Posted 22/04/2013 - 16:10 - Helpful Comment
Link
Quote:
I can't help thinking when I use pse I can be destructive as I want as I only ever work on a copy anyway
As long as we use "Save As" and a new file name, our original is safe and untouched, regardless of what processing we have done.
I can't help thinking when I use pse I can be destructive as I want as I only ever work on a copy anyway
Best regards, John
Posted 22/04/2013 - 18:21 - Helpful Comment
Link
I tried Lightroom 3 once, for about half an hour, thought it was too complicated and went back to Photoshop CS3.
A year later....tried Lightroom 4, gave it two weeks then realised just how good it is!
I now use Lightroom for most editing and Photoshop only if I need 'Layers'
A year later....tried Lightroom 4, gave it two weeks then realised just how good it is!
I now use Lightroom for most editing and Photoshop only if I need 'Layers'
Regards,
Michael
Michael
Posted 22/04/2013 - 19:25
Link
mcpieman wrote:
That's all true but it isn't really (or entirely) what is meant by a non destructive editor. Using 'non-destructive' just to mean not overwriting your original source file would trivialise it to the point of worthlessness.Quote:
also a few have mentioned that Lightroom is Non-destructive ! I don't understand this point
I couldn't agree more with Jim on this, no software is destructive, just users chose to use it destructively. I have photoshop CS6, I never save any changes to the RAW but always create a separate PSD file for mods, I'd want to keep any layers anyway. If I didn't have CS6 I'd pick elements over lightroom, I grew up with MS-DOS and like to know where everything is in terms of disks and folders (i.e. catalogue myself), I'm probably just getting old but can't seem to get on with modern software that hides disks/folders etc from the user.also a few have mentioned that Lightroom is Non-destructive ! I don't understand this point
With a conventional or 'destructive' editor you make succesive changes to the image as you edit it. For example if you decide to 1) convert the image to b/w, then 2) crop it a bit, then 3) denoise and 4) play around with the tone mapping each of those changes affect the image permanently so you can't change your mind and reverse the first steps back to a colour image and a different crop whilst leaving the denoise and tone mapping changes in place.
A 'non-destructive' editor by contrast doesn't build up a successive set of changes on the image but instead records a set of 'image transformations' that make up the final edit so at any point you can alter any one of those transformations without affecting the others. A side effect of this is that (with some editors) you can just 'cut' the entire series of image transformations from one image and 'paste' them onto another thus replicating the edits on that second image, or whole set of images.
That all said I'm sure there are some companies that will bend the meaning to suit themselves and advertise anyting as 'non destructive'
Posted 22/04/2013 - 21:46
Link
mcpieman wrote:
Well Lightroom certainly doesn't do that.
Quote:
also a few have mentioned that Lightroom is Non-destructive ! I don't understand this point
I couldn't agree more with Jim on this, no software is destructive, just users chose to use it destructively. I have photoshop CS6, I never save any changes to the RAW but always create a separate PSD file for mods, I'd want to keep any layers anyway. If I didn't have CS6 I'd pick elements over lightroom, I grew up with MS-DOS and like to know where everything is in terms of disks and folders (i.e. catalogue myself), I'm probably just getting old but can't seem to get on with modern software that hides disks/folders etc from the user.also a few have mentioned that Lightroom is Non-destructive ! I don't understand this point
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Posted 22/04/2013 - 21:48
Link
gwing wrote:
With a conventional or 'destructive' editor you make succesive changes to the image as you edit it. For example if you decide to 1) convert the image to b/w, then 2) crop it a bit, then 3) denoise and 4) play around with the tone mapping each of those changes affect the image permanently so you can't change your mind and reverse the first steps back to a colour image and a different crop whilst leaving the denoise and tone mapping changes in place.
A 'non-destructive' editor by contrast doesn't build up a successive set of changes on the image but instead records a set of 'image transformations' that make up the final edit so at any point you can alter any one of those transformations without affecting the others. A side effect of this is that (with some editors) you can just 'cut' the entire series of image transformations from one image and 'paste' them onto another thus replicating the edits on that second image, or whole set of images.
That all said I'm sure there are some companies that will bend the meaning to suit themselves and advertise anyting as 'non destructive'
Nicely explained gwing
mcpieman wrote:
That's all true but it isn't really (or entirely) what is meant by a non destructive editor. Using 'non-destructive' just to mean not overwriting your original source file would trivialise it to the point of worthlessness.Quote:
also a few have mentioned that Lightroom is Non-destructive ! I don't understand this point
I couldn't agree more with Jim on this, no software is destructive, just users chose to use it destructively. I have photoshop CS6, I never save any changes to the RAW but always create a separate PSD file for mods, I'd want to keep any layers anyway. If I didn't have CS6 I'd pick elements over lightroom, I grew up with MS-DOS and like to know where everything is in terms of disks and folders (i.e. catalogue myself), I'm probably just getting old but can't seem to get on with modern software that hides disks/folders etc from the user.also a few have mentioned that Lightroom is Non-destructive ! I don't understand this point
With a conventional or 'destructive' editor you make succesive changes to the image as you edit it. For example if you decide to 1) convert the image to b/w, then 2) crop it a bit, then 3) denoise and 4) play around with the tone mapping each of those changes affect the image permanently so you can't change your mind and reverse the first steps back to a colour image and a different crop whilst leaving the denoise and tone mapping changes in place.
A 'non-destructive' editor by contrast doesn't build up a successive set of changes on the image but instead records a set of 'image transformations' that make up the final edit so at any point you can alter any one of those transformations without affecting the others. A side effect of this is that (with some editors) you can just 'cut' the entire series of image transformations from one image and 'paste' them onto another thus replicating the edits on that second image, or whole set of images.
That all said I'm sure there are some companies that will bend the meaning to suit themselves and advertise anyting as 'non destructive'
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Posted 22/04/2013 - 22:01
Link
Thanks everyone for your input, some interesting viewpoints, i've noticed that elements 10 is more expensive than 11, any views on this please:
Posted 22/04/2013 - 23:17
Link
Quote:
i've noticed that elements 10 is more expensive than 11
Just had a quick google and elements 10 can be had for around £30 and elements 11 around £50. Maybe price confusion could be with versions that include premier elements (video editing) then prices for pse 10 start around £40 and for pse 11 around £60. Of course you need to shop around as price vary greatly and hence the potential overlap making pse 10 appear more expensive than pse 11. i've noticed that elements 10 is more expensive than 11
I hope this makes some sense
All the best.......Jim:
Posted 22/04/2013 - 23:21
Link
Oh thanks Jim for that info. i'll have to do a proper search
Posted 24/04/2013 - 17:21 - Helpful Comment
Link
Hi,
Iv'e got a Pentax K30 and shoot all my shots in both RAW and JPEG, there's a neat setting on the camera which saves every shot you take in both formats. I then transfer all the photos into Photoshop Elements 11, which has two elements to it (if you'll pardon the pun), a pretty good Organiser & a picture Editor.
Elements 11 gives you the ability to edit RAW imagines very easily, as soon as you open a RAW file Elements pulls up the relevant editing parameters, e.g. Exposure, Shadow, Saturation, Clarity, etc, and being new to Photoshop Elements, I'm finding it a lot more complicated to use all the standard editing facilities provided in Elements 11 to get anywhere near the same results on the JPEG version of the image.
Typical time to edit a RAW image; 2 minutes, the same image in JPEG using Elements Expert mode 8-10 minutes.
Editing RAW images in Photoshop Elements 11 is a doodle!
Iv'e got a Pentax K30 and shoot all my shots in both RAW and JPEG, there's a neat setting on the camera which saves every shot you take in both formats. I then transfer all the photos into Photoshop Elements 11, which has two elements to it (if you'll pardon the pun), a pretty good Organiser & a picture Editor.
Elements 11 gives you the ability to edit RAW imagines very easily, as soon as you open a RAW file Elements pulls up the relevant editing parameters, e.g. Exposure, Shadow, Saturation, Clarity, etc, and being new to Photoshop Elements, I'm finding it a lot more complicated to use all the standard editing facilities provided in Elements 11 to get anywhere near the same results on the JPEG version of the image.
Typical time to edit a RAW image; 2 minutes, the same image in JPEG using Elements Expert mode 8-10 minutes.
Editing RAW images in Photoshop Elements 11 is a doodle!
It's not the strongest species that survive, nor is it the most intelligent. It is those most adaptable to change.
Posted 25/04/2013 - 21:16
Link
Hi Peter, thanks for that, i think i'm leaning towards Elements
Posted 26/04/2013 - 02:33
Link
Question for Smeggypants.
Anyone heard about a replacement for CS6?
Quote:
Apart from cleaning up 35mm neg scans, which I use a bitmap editor for, I use Lightroom and Nik software plugins for 100% of my photo editing and managing.
Which bitmap editor are you using please? Also do you have any tips on how best to use it for cleaning up those 35mm scans.Apart from cleaning up 35mm neg scans, which I use a bitmap editor for, I use Lightroom and Nik software plugins for 100% of my photo editing and managing.
Anyone heard about a replacement for CS6?
As for me, all I know is that I know nothing.
Posted 26/04/2013 - 03:01
Link
Lü wrote:
Question for Smeggypants.
Anyone heard about a replacement for CS6?
I use photopaint. But only cos I've used it for years and know it. I'd probably get photoshop if starting over.Question for Smeggypants.
Quote:
Apart from cleaning up 35mm neg scans, which I use a bitmap editor for, I use Lightroom and Nik software plugins for 100% of my photo editing and managing.
Which bitmap editor are you using please? Also do you have any tips on how best to use it for cleaning up those 35mm scans.Apart from cleaning up 35mm neg scans, which I use a bitmap editor for, I use Lightroom and Nik software plugins for 100% of my photo editing and managing.
Anyone heard about a replacement for CS6?
I clean the scratches by using the clone tool before importing to Lightroom for everything else
I use viewscan as scanning software with a plustek 7500i filmscanner . Excellent
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
93 posts
14 years
Forest of Dean
So I guess this makes LR easier to use in this respect:, although I can't help thinking when I use pse I can be destructive as I want as I only ever work on a copy anyway.
Peter I know I didn't give it a fair trial, and like I said maybe I will give it a better look sometime.
So for now after my very very quick peek into the world of LR, and the fact that nothing has been said about it that has grabbed my attention I think I will stick to elements
Please don't get me wrong I am not anti LR or pro elements, I couldn't care less what software people choose to use, horses for courses and each to their own etc. my post earlier was just my initial thoughts be they right or wrong.
Jim