Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/12/27

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] photoshop-vs-lightroom
From: jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 13:00:38 -0600
References: <CB1DDFD9.18281%mark@rabinergroup.com><7664EEEA-F7F8-4C00-8950-74B3947D1A44@mac.com><CA36A6CB0E2548689EDA259BA0918518@billHP> <73C281344DDF4920BDA7D4948DFA6AC4@syneticfeba505>

Hi Ted,

I haven't tried Lightroom since the trial version, and I wasn't comfortable 
with it, so I went back to Elements, which I have used for years.  I believe 
in shooting RAW, because there is much more detail to work with, and much 
more flexibility in image processing.

I think Tina is offering good advice.  I suspect that Lightroom just lost 
its location data for your files.  Computers seem to find ways to frustrate 
us with little things, while being indispensable for a lot of work.

I don't have Lightroom installed, so I can't try Tina's "click on" 
suggestion.  But, if I were in your shoes, I would give it a try, and, if it 
doesn't seem to work, ask her for more suggestions.  She uses the program 
daily, and probably knows more about it than even she realizes.

Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <tedgrant at shaw.ca>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 12:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] photoshop-vs-lightroom


> Adam Bridge OFFERED:
>>>> This is seriously neat and means that your original file is ALWAYS
> there to be edited in its original state.<<<<<<
>
> Hi Adam,
> That being the case how is it when I was shooting RAW and downloading into 
> Lightroom. All had been going fine and I'd do the same routine everytime. 
> WHEN ONE DAY????????
>
> All I had on screen was about 2000 or more nice looking grey coloured 35mm 
> looking frames in the Lightroom folders / files?  Pictures? Images? 
> Frames? NADA !!! Not one but blank grey 35mm frames.... Unfortunately lost 
> some important stuff. :-(
>
> My immediate response??? Screw this LR stuff.... went back to shooting 
> JPEG and using Photoshop and all has been perfect ever since.
>
> I keep hearing LIGHTROOM folks say.... "The images are in there you just 
> have to find them!" Well OK I have looked in every conceivable click on 
> spot..... same thing, " beautiful grey coloured 35mm blank frames!" 
> Another? "OFFLINE OR MISSING!" Yeah right, they sure as hell are missing!
>
>>>>This is seriously neat and means that your original file is ALWAYS there 
>>>>to be edited in its original state.<<<<
>
> I can only offer...... "REALLY?" And where might I find them? I have found 
> some in folders through the Photoshop system.. But hundreds of 
> others??????????????? no where in site. If they were giving away the very 
> best LR system for free I'd have doubts about taking it. Unfortunately 
> when I read all the good & great stuff you fok are sayng about Light Room.
>
> cheers,
> ted
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Bill Pearce" <billcpearce at cox.net>
> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 9:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [Leica] photoshop-vs-lightroom
>
>
>> I'm not so sure I understand this non-destructive business. It is 
>> supposed to be the end-all answer to our problems, and answer to a 
>> question that seemed without an answer, and yet I've been doing the same 
>> thing for years. Simple, really, before photoshopping a file, save it 
>> with a different name, and do all you want to it, the original remains 
>> untouched.
>>
>> Oh well, I never said I was smart.
>>
>> Bill Pearce
>>
>> -----Original Message----- 
>> From: Adam Bridge
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 11:01 AM
>> To: Leica Users Group
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] photoshop-vs-lightroom
>>
>> On thing not mentioned: Lightroom is entirely non-destructive to your 
>> images. Everything it does is parametric - that is the changes are done 
>> on the fly. This is seriously neat and means that your original file is 
>> ALWAYS there to be edited in its original state.
>>
>> Photoshop doesn't do that unless you convert to smart filters.
>>
>> It's the creation of masks on the fly that is amazing inside Lightroom. I 
>> have a bit of an inkling on how it does it, but I sure admire the 
>> engineers who implemented those features.
>>
>> There are tasks that only Photoshop can do. If you need layers and 
>> compositing then Lightroom isn't it - although you can do much before you 
>> get to the point where you need those.
>>
>> I'm making these points, not to convince Mark that he's wrong, but simply 
>> to bring out a fundamental and profound difference between the two 
>> software environments.
>>
>> Adam
>>
>> On Dec 26, 2011, at 5:24 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
>>
>>> http://mansurovs.com/photoshop-vs-lightroom
>>> Here is a comparison.
>>> There are hundreds of others you could find in a minute.
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
> 




In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] photoshop-vs-lightroom)
Message from abridge at mac.com (Adam Bridge) ([Leica] photoshop-vs-lightroom)
Message from billcpearce at cox.net (Bill Pearce) ([Leica] photoshop-vs-lightroom)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca) ([Leica] photoshop-vs-lightroom)