RetouchPRO

Go Back   RetouchPRO > Technique > Photo Retouching
Register Blogs FAQ Site Nav Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Photo Retouching "Improving" photos, post-production, correction, etc.

Using Lightroom instead of the RAW converter

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 07-02-2012, 09:12 PM
ir0nma1den ir0nma1den is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 25
Re: Using Lightroom instead of the RAW converter

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertAsh View Post
If you want to do Vogue-worthy retouches you need Photoshop and some really good teaching videos. Lightroom is not going to get you there.

Save that money and buy Natalia Taffarel's DVD or some other top-grade retouching DVD with the money you'd otherwise spend on Lightroom. The Adobe Camera Raw module that's included with Photoshop will do anything core to retouching that Lightroom can do except file management. You can do file management on-disk yourself.
Already bought Taffarel's dvd, about half way through it. That's why I brought this question up since she mentioned that she uses ACR since it is (or was) more complete. If a pro does it, why wouldn't I?
Reply With Quote top
  #12  
Old 07-03-2012, 07:13 AM
Doug Nelson's Avatar
Doug Nelson Doug Nelson is offline
Janitor
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 7,068
Blog Entries: 21
Re: Using Lightroom instead of the RAW converter

We did a show where Chris Tarantino (a Vogue retoucher) does a beauty retouch using Lightroom. But even he had to bail to Photoshop about halfway through.
Reply With Quote top
  #13  
Old 07-03-2012, 11:26 AM
ratpat13's Avatar
ratpat13 ratpat13 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: CA
Posts: 85
Re: Using Lightroom instead of the RAW converter

All anyone is saying is that when it comes to processing raw in ACR or LR there is no real difference, it's not less or more complete then the other if your using the latest versions (I saw Natalia DVD, i remember the scene but not the context it shouldn't be taken to suggest that one is inferior to the other) . LR just has the addition of asset management, which is great if you need it. If my workflow was different and was only working on one or two images at a time then for each project then i probably would just use ACR as the asset management would be as essential, but that doesn't change how either works. It has to do with your workflow requirements and what your use to, but there is nothing that keeps either from being used for high end work.
Reply With Quote top
  #14  
Old 07-03-2012, 10:28 PM
D Thompson's Avatar
D Thompson D Thompson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 176
Re: Using Lightroom instead of the RAW converter

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewrodney View Post
If anything, LR offers more options outside the processing in terms of an unlimited history (ACR has none) and the ability to build iterations using Virtual Copies.
I know it is not the same as LR and Virtual Copies, but ACR does have Snapshots which can be used in a similar way. The Snapshots are stored in the xmp file and can be retrieved very easily.
Reply With Quote top
  #15  
Old 07-04-2012, 09:30 AM
RobertAsh RobertAsh is offline
Senior Member
Patron
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Oakland, CA area
Posts: 380
Re: Using Lightroom instead of the RAW converter

Quote:
Originally Posted by ir0nma1den View Post
Already bought Taffarel's dvd, about half way through it. That's why I brought this question up since she mentioned that she uses ACR since it is (or was) more complete. If a pro does it, why wouldn't I?
Makes sense Another good DVD source is this forum, as Doug points out. Or http://DigitalPhotoshopRetouching.com if you haven't seen their other ones. Or the DVDs on Slickforce.com.

That said, Lightroom has dropped in price by half. It's now $150 down from $300. And it does make organizing files easier that ACR does, as well as adding some nifty features like virtual copies, collections and adjust updates for many images at once. The unlimited history mentioned above also comes in handy at times.

One important caution about virtual copies, by the way -- if you update the underlying PDF/TIFF file in Photoshop then all the virtual copies Lightroom get adjusted the same way. I wish there was a switch to turn off that characteristic. But for just experimenting around quickly in Lightroom they can be pretty useful.

Also, for me, I find myself with a fair number of hybrid files (or 'Franken-files' I guess ) that have partial Lightroom and partial Photoshop adjustments. It takes forethought and discipline (or rework) to avoid that situation on important files. You also need to think about how you want to print them (I do as much print as possible from Photoshop, not Lightroom).

If you're a beginner retoucher your money is better spent on training materials. If you're where you want to be then Lightroom or some other file management software could be useful, especially at the current lower price point.

Last edited by RobertAsh; 07-04-2012 at 09:38 AM.
Reply With Quote top
  #16  
Old 09-06-2012, 06:18 PM
soia1138 soia1138 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Newburyport, Massachusetts
Posts: 21
Re: Using Lightroom instead of the RAW converter

Pretty simply put, for RAW processing LR and ACR are the same exact thing. LR kicks Bridges butt as far as file management goes and makes the whole workflow from RAW conversion to PS so so much smoother. Two programs to do everything you need. Most people, much like myself, once they use LR enough will never go back to the Bridge, ACR, PS bull. Unless you are working with the entire Adobe Creative Suite, then that is what Bridge was really built for, but purely for photography you can't beat LR to PS, it's why the built LR in the first place.
Reply With Quote top
  #17  
Old 09-06-2012, 07:41 PM
grossmisconduct grossmisconduct is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 41
Re: Using Lightroom instead of the RAW converter

Hi! I personly use Lightroom for importing photos from the memory card because it automaticly deselects any photos on the card that are already in my library. I then shut down LR and open in ACR. This because on my system LR for some reason darkens the photos. At first the thumbnails show up fine and then a split second later they are darkened (I have turned off auto toning). My second reason for going in to ACR is that the thumbnail rendering ( or should I say scrolling down) is faster in ACR. And as others have already stated: the editing options and sliders are all the same, even the engine.

Personly I think a more interresting question would be what is the better of ACR/LR or CaptureOne?
Personly I am not in a position to say. My only experience with CO was a couple of days with the trial before I had a harddisk crash (Not blaming CO for the crash but it didnt seem costeffective to reinstall it)
Reply With Quote top
  #18  
Old 09-09-2012, 07:20 PM
RobertAsh RobertAsh is offline
Senior Member
Patron
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Oakland, CA area
Posts: 380
Re: Using Lightroom instead of the RAW converter

I agree. Lightroom is a fantastic image file organization tool and has an unmatched workflow and working environment -- but it re-renders the colors of my JPEG thumbnails. It's maddening. Especially when it throws off the skin tones.

And it doesn't have to do that. You can see the faithfully displayed JPEG previews, then right before your eyes LR changes the colors. That means Adobe could just leave your files alone if they wanted to. But they don't.

That's it's biggest and most glaring fault for me because I can't get that faithfully rendered look back. ACR does the same thing. The only difference is that the new ACR and LR re-render the colors more consistently between themselves. But they still change the JPEGs instead of giving you the choice and option.

CaptureOne used to do a noticeably better job of skin tone rendering than Lightroom or ACR did. Now Lightroom and ACR do a better job than they used to and CaptureOne's advantage has diminished.

For faithful JPEG rendering I use Photo Mechanic, then export out TIF files. For some reason (thankfully) Lightroom and ACR seem to respect TIFs and PSDs and don't shift their colors. It's really too bad because I'd like to have a one-stop shop for RAW file processing, one that renders my JPEGs like my camera LCD does so I know for sure what I'll get when I import.
Reply With Quote top
Reply

  RetouchPRO > Technique > Photo Retouching


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Plug-In: Camera Raw 5.7 vickatter Software 3 12-08-2013 06:46 AM
Using Raw formats rayi23 Input/Output/Workflow 7 04-30-2011 11:13 PM
Please help - RAW desaturating and altering hue ysbryd Input/Output/Workflow 4 04-07-2011 09:11 AM
RP LIVE "Advanced Raw Processing" (rebroadcast) Doug Nelson RetouchPRO LIVE 12 02-02-2011 03:39 PM
OEM Raw Converters vs. Adobe Camera Raw Doug Nelson Software 4 12-11-2010 05:36 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2016 Doug Nelson. All Rights Reserved