Lightroom vs. CS3 vs. Bridge

[JulieM]

I thought THIS was an interesting little piece in Scott Kelby's blog today about the advantages of LR over CS3 and Bridge.

[Joe M]

I read that this morning also Julie. I never really understood the need for Lightroom if I had Bridge/CS3, now I do.

I'll probably wait until Lightroom 2.0 comes out before I purchase though. From what I've read it's not going to be a free upgrade.

[lisabee]

Thanks Julie,
that's interesting, reading the comments from other readers makes for good reading too.

Lisa

[Codebreaker]

Sadly few people ever mention Elements in these type of reviews. I get the impression that its not taken seriously and I've come across some very patronising posts that suggest Elements is not for the serious Photographer.

I dispute this viewpoint. There's a lot you can do to process both RAW and JPEGs in Elements to get great images, but I think the decision factors of choosing between Elements and LR/ACR are these....and these are just my opinion and in no order of significance:-

1. The volume of images you need to process in a session

2. The need to just process, get creative or both

3. Cost

4. The desire for more toys

I also see a greater divergence coming between Elements ACR and LR/PS ACR. Some of the enhancements in LR B2 probably wont make it to Elements.


Colin

[JulieM]

I wonder if a lot of photographers could make do with PSE especially now that LR is part of the mix but have just been using CS too long to let go...

[Codebreaker]

Julie.....

I'm sure there are some Pro Photographers who do use Elements. For me the introduction of LR has reduced the need to use PS or Elements anyway. LR Beta 2 even more so.

Colin

[rhynetc]

I've also found that I need to use PSE much less frequently now that I'm learning Lightroom. And I agree, Colin, that the new features of Lr 2.0 beta promise to make me even more independent of PSE.

But I still want it there in case I "need" it!

Tom

[Ric Cisson]

As a photographer, and only since the arrival of Lightroom, I use Lightroom exclusively to import, organize and quickly process my files. I find, as a photographer, the workflow of Lightroom to be extremely efficient from importing to printing. I tried Bridge initially and found it to be ineffective for my means, in that yes I could process RAW, but once I got done with the process I had to send to Photoshop to continue, just seemed cumbersome. Then I tried the Organizer in PSE for a while and it seemed okay for what I needed and then not. It seemed somewhat efficient in that I could go right to the editor for processing in ACR and then further editing in the Editor...and it was okay for then. But when Lightroom arrived on the scene, I tried it once and was hooked and have never looked back. On my laptop for in the field needs is Lightroom and PSE6. What is so wonderful about Lightroom to me is that my workflow is so much more efficient and that I can export into PSE6 for additional editing without dealing with a cumbersome program that Photoshop has become. And the Print module within LR 1.4.1 and what I have experienced thus far with LR (Beta) 2 is simplified and just plain easy to use, which just adds to my efficiency during event photo sessions.

Don't get me wrong, I still use Photoshop CS3, but with Lightroom's Develop Module, I don't use it nearly as much as I have in the past. That said, the question was raised earlier about whether Pros use PSE. I know of 4 locally that do in conjunction with LR, and if you count me that is 5. Probably insignificant stats at this time, but it would be interesting to know the numbers and maybe Scott Kelby could pose a poll within his Blog, maybe even Matt and Dave could as well. But I believe that PSE has more of a place in my workflow, than ever before, since the arrival of Lightroom. I am seriously contemplating not upgrading to CS4 and beyond in the future, primarily because of the successful experience I am having with LR/PSE working together.

Just my two cents worth.