Lightroom or CC

[Janet]

Hi there,

 

Can someone help with which one is the easiest to use(lol).

And explain the difference as I can't work out which is which.

Thank you

Janet 

[Johnnie5]

This is Adobe's explanation.

What is Adobe Creative Cloud?

Adobe Creative Cloud provides apps, web services, and resources for all your creative projects — photography, graphic design, video editing, UX design, drawing and painting, social media, and more. Build your own plan with individual app subscriptions or subscribe to the Creative Cloud All Apps plan.

 

Lightroom is just one app in a suite of over 20 apps available in creative cloud.  Lightroom is excellent for processing photos.

 

Search the web for Lightroom Photoshop bundle.

[Rebecca Ore]

The choice in the Adobe Creative Cloud system is between Lightroom Classic and Lightroom with Adobe Cloud Storage and program bits.  Adobe Creative Cloud is the overall management app for keeping programs updated and for access to items stored in Adobe cloud storage.  It’s a matter of what works best for you (cloud based or your own computer based.  I prefer Lightroom Classic, but free trials are available for both.  Adobe does appear to want all storage on the cloud.  You get some free storage with the subscription packages.

 

Capture One and DxO also have photo editing programs, and there are others.  

[Betty LaRue]

I have Adobe CC, just the LR & Photoshop apps. Both offer similar photo developing sliders. I develop in LR then move it to Photoshop, where I prefer to use the cloning tool & crop tool, and sometimes reduce size if the photo is borderline sharp. There is where I save it in jpeg for uploading. Reducing size often sharpens an image enough to pass. These corrections can be done in LR, but I had already become adept with Photoshop & some things seem more intuitive or maybe just familiar for me in PS.  Also, sometimes I use layers in Photoshop.

[Jill Morgan]

I think what she wants to know is if there are any differences between the two programs in processing images.  Do they have different features specific to that app.  I don't use LR,  I use ACR, so can't help her. So are there features in the CC version that Classic doesn't have, or vice versa.

 

Jill

[geogphotos]

I don't use Lightroom. Everything in Photoshop for me. 

[Allan Bell]

A simple answer to your question.

 

I use Lightroom Classic (LrC) because I find it easier to use with everything in one place including the Library for keywording of images.

 

Tried Ps some time ago and found it to be too steep a learning curve and the fact I was having to jump around to different programs to finish the job.

 

Allan

 

Others will probably refute these comments but it is how I found it.

 

 

Edited August 2, 2023 by Allan Bell

[Rebecca Ore]

My experience is that what you use for several years will seem better than anything you installed yesterday.  Picking which version of LR and using Photoshop is a matter of your brain and the program's interface.   I've been using some version of Photoshop and the LR that became Classic for at least a decade and a half.   Lightroom with the cloud storage used to have fewer features than LR Classic, but I think they're about the same now.   The advantage of LR with cloud storage is that you can use it on multiple devices.   Some people put new photos on a laptop, tablet, or phone, cull them, then edit on a desktop with a dedicated photo monitor at home/office/studio.  

 

The disadvantage of cloud storage is it costs $10 more a month if you go over 20 GB.   If you're not editing on multiple devices, it's probably not an advantage.  If you are or think you will, you can set up collections on LRC and allow that to synchronize them with LR in the cloud.  I only synchronize an iPad and cell phone photos.

 

LRC can be used simply or with more features.  And everyone had different ideas about how to organize the photo files.   Think about how you want to organize your photos.   Do you want family and cell phone photos in the LR catalogue, or just your candidates for Alamy?   You can also use Bridge, or not.   Organize by date or by type of photo (I go by date for most)?   Watch some YouTube videos and look at some tutorials on this.   It's really a matter of your mileage will vary.   Photoshop comes with the Adobe Photographers package.  I use it for some things.  It's about to release AI into the world in a big way (see their beta version).

 

Thirty day trials should give you a sense of what you prefer.   Lots of tutorials and books for all these.   And it's possible to do everything between Photoshop and Bridge, but Photoshop does tend for most people to have a steeper learning curve than LR in either flavor.   Some of us started with programs when they were less complex than they are now.   I may have had Lightroom I, which was released in 2007.   Got one  copy at an academic discount when I worked for Drexel as an adjunct instructor. 

 

This is a good Wikipedia article on Lightroom in general and the split between LR (cloud storage) and LRC, which features each has.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Lightroom

 

People tend to like or dislike programs based on factors that might not apply to another person.  

[Jill Morgan]

40 minutes ago, Rebecca Ore said:

My experience is that what you use for several years will seem better than anything you installed yesterday.  Picking which version of LR and using Photoshop is a matter of your brain and the program's interface.   I've been using some version of Photoshop and the LR that became Classic for at least a decade and a half.   Lightroom with the cloud storage used to have fewer features than LR Classic, but I think they're about the same now.   The advantage of LR with cloud storage is that you can use it on multiple devices.   Some people put new photos on a laptop, tablet, or phone, cull them, then edit on a desktop with a dedicated photo monitor at home/office/studio.  

 

The disadvantage of cloud storage is it costs $10 more a month if you go over 20 GB.   If you're not editing on multiple devices, it's probably not an advantage.  If you are or think you will, you can set up collections on LRC and allow that to synchronize them with LR in the cloud.  I only synchronize an iPad and cell phone photos.

 

LRC can be used simply or with more features.  And everyone had different ideas about how to organize the photo files.   Think about how you want to organize your photos.   Do you want family and cell phone photos in the LR catalogue, or just your candidates for Alamy?   You can also use Bridge, or not.   Organize by date or by type of photo (I go by date for most)?   Watch some YouTube videos and look at some tutorials on this.   It's really a matter of your mileage will vary.   Photoshop comes with the Adobe Photographers package.  I use it for some things.  It's about to release AI into the world in a big way (see their beta version).

 

Thirty day trials should give you a sense of what you prefer.   Lots of tutorials and books for all these.   And it's possible to do everything between Photoshop and Bridge, but Photoshop does tend for most people to have a steeper learning curve than LR in either flavor.   Some of us started with programs when they were less complex than they are now.   I may have had Lightroom I, which was released in 2007.   Got one  copy at an academic discount when I worked for Drexel as an adjunct instructor. 

 

This is a good Wikipedia article on Lightroom in general and the split between LR (cloud storage) and LRC, which features each has.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Lightroom

 

People tend to like or dislike programs based on factors that might not apply to another person.  

 

I have been using PS for 15 years as well, since CS4.  It was a huge learning curve then, I can't imagine starting from scratch now.  I would say I am extremely proficient in PS, but there are still things I discover that have been in the software for years and I never knew.  I spend about 4-5 hours a day in PS. Mostly graphics work.

 

I have tried LR a number of times, but return to ACR/PS every time.  I have my own file system, so don't need LR's.  But then I don't have the port size of many of the people here.

 

Jill

[Mr Standfast]

Many good points above. For me CC is feature heavy.

 

I use LRC for stock and news.

 

Library module for organising.

Develop module for levels, exposure, cropping, tidying.

 

Simples.

[Rebecca Ore]

2 minutes ago, Jill Morgan said:

 

I have been using PS for 15 years as well, since CS4.  It was a huge learning curve then, I can't imagine starting from scratch now.  I would say I am extremely proficient in PS, but there are still things I discover that have been in the software for years and I never knew.  I spend about 4-5 hours a day in PS. Mostly graphics work.

 

I have tried LR a number of times, but return to ACR/PS every time.  I have my own file system, so don't need LR's.  But then I don't have the port size of many of the people here.

 

Jill

 

Doing graphics work means using Photoshop and if doing vectors, Illustrator.   With LR, you can set up your own file system, then import without copying or moving into LR.  But what works works, and LR doesn't do graphics as well as other programs. 

[Betty LaRue]

I used ACR/PS for years before getting LR Classic. Some of the things I did in it through using layers I no longer find necessary. For instance, if a blue sky was too pale, I could use a layer, darken the whole photo to bring out a believable bluer sky, then brush off the darkening effect for the foreground. Sliders in LR & PS do that, now. But that simple adjustment wasn’t the only thing I did in it.

Even so, some of the adjustments besides the sliders in LR aren’t intuitive for me, and I know my way around PS enough to get what I want to do, done. I’ll probably always use both.

Had I never used ACR/PS, I would have learned all the features of what LR Classic offers now, but in the early days of LR, it wouldn’t have done what I needed. I would have been frustrated.

I think the OP would be happy with LR Classic, although speaking only for myself, if I were signing up today, I would still get them both for the reason that what you need today might not be what you need down the road if your learning curve is rapid.

I admit, way back in the cave days when I first bought PS in a box, I also bought a book called “Photoshop for Dummies” that quickly gave me directions in how to develop a photo. And I was most certainly lost without it.

[Jill Morgan]

1 hour ago, Betty LaRue said:

I used ACR/PS for years before getting LR Classic. Some of the things I did in it through using layers I no longer find necessary. For instance, if a blue sky was too pale, I could use a layer, darken the whole photo to bring out a believable bluer sky, then brush off the darkening effect for the foreground. Sliders in LR & PS do that, now. But that simple adjustment wasn’t the only thing I did in it.

Even so, some of the adjustments besides the sliders in LR aren’t intuitive for me, and I know my way around PS enough to get what I want to do, done. I’ll probably always use both.

Had I never used ACR/PS, I would have learned all the features of what LR Classic offers now, but in the early days of LR, it wouldn’t have done what I needed. I would have been frustrated.

I think the OP would be happy with LR Classic, although speaking only for myself, if I were signing up today, I would still get them both for the reason that what you need today might not be what you need down the road if your learning curve is rapid.

I admit, way back in the cave days when I first bought PS in a box, I also bought a book called “Photoshop for Dummies” that quickly gave me directions in how to develop a photo. And I was most certainly lost without it.

 

Betty, ACR is exactly the same as LR, except it doesn't off the cataloging capabilities.  

 

All my RAWs open in ACR, I do general adjustments for the whole batch then send them to PS as smart objects.  When I do that, if I want to make more adjustments in ACR to a specific image, I just double click on the image layer and it sends me back into ACR to do extra adjustments. Makes it easy to flow back and forth between ACR and PS when working on one image.

 

Also. for anyone that uses the Camera Raw filter, always convert your layer to a smart object first.  That way you can save the adjustments you make and tweek after.  If you use the filter on a rasterized layer, you can't adjust the changes you made.

 

Jill

[Janet]

Hi Everyone,

Sorry for the delay in replying 

Thank you all for your input and advice, maybe I need to take on one of the 14day trials to see how I get on.

Again thank you all.

Janet

 

[Allan Bell]

15 hours ago, Jill Morgan said:

 

I have been using PS for 15 years as well, since CS4.  It was a huge learning curve then, I can't imagine starting from scratch now.  I would say I am extremely proficient in PS, but there are still things I discover that have been in the software for years and I never knew.  I spend about 4-5 hours a day in PS. Mostly graphics work.

 

I have tried LR a number of times, but return to ACR/PS every time.  I have my own file system, so don't need LR's.  But then I don't have the port size of many of the people here.

 

Jill

 

I have my own file system too. I have it on LrC which is a big help.

 

Allan

 

[Steve F]

17 hours ago, Allan Bell said:

A simple answer to your question.

 

I use Lightroom Classic (LrC) because I find it easier to use with everything in one place including the Library for keywording of images.

 

Tried Ps some time ago and found it to be too steep a learning curve and the fact I was having to jump around to different programs to finish the job.

 

Allan

 

Others will probably refute these comments but it is how I found it.

 

 

+1

 

15 hours ago, Mr Standfast said:

Many good points above. For me CC is feature heavy.

 

I use LRC for stock and news.

 

Library module for organising.

Develop module for levels, exposure, cropping, tidying.

 

Simples.

+1

 

I do actually use Photoshop occasionally for stock, but just for more control on removing unwanted objects in the image.

[Allan Bell]

5 minutes ago, Steve F said:

 

I do actually use Photoshop occasionally for stock, but just for more control on removing unwanted objects in the image.

 

For removing objects in images I use an old copy of PSE.

 

Allan

 

[Betty LaRue]

Don’t forget sky replacement. I have done a few in PS. Can it be done in LR?

[Steve F]

15 minutes ago, Betty LaRue said:

Don’t forget sky replacement. I have done a few in PS. Can it be done in LR?

 

No, but it is selectable as a layer now so you can apply a bunch of adjustments to it.

[Jill Morgan]

Content Aware Fill is one of my favourite tools I use all the time. And it is so accurate it scares me sometimes.  I don't think it is on LR is it?

 

Jill

[Steve F]

41 minutes ago, Jill Morgan said:

Content Aware Fill is one of my favourite tools I use all the time. And it is so accurate it scares me sometimes.  I don't think it is on LR is it?

 

Jill

 

Not labelled as that, but it does have AI 'spot' removal now.

 

I generally find that if I have to do major edits in PS, it's not worth it in terms of the time involved so I bin the image. Also, to add to further comments above, you can do everything in LR, including cataloguing. No need for other programmes, unless you're doing more than everyday stock.

Edited August 3, 2023 by Steve F

[Mr Standfast]

6 minutes ago, Steve F said:

 

 

I generally find that if I have to do major edits in PS, it's not worth it in terms of the time involved so I bin the image. 

Also known as the secret sauce for passing QC! 😊

[Jill Morgan]

14 minutes ago, Steve F said:

 

Not labelled as that, but it does have AI 'spot' removal now.

 

I generally find that if I have to do major edits in PS, it's not worth it in terms of the time involved so I bin the image. Also, to add to further comments above, you can do everything in LR, including cataloguing. No need for other programmes, unless you're doing more than everyday stock.

 

When you shoot birds, quite often you will get distracting branches across part of the bird's body. Content Aware Fill does an amazing job at removing the dastardly branches and keeping the integrity of the image. Or removing a distracting object in an image in about 2 seconds.

 

One of my favourite tools.  In graphics I can extend a client's image either vertically or horizontally to fit one of my products such as custom tote bags.  If I don't, often an important part of the image will end up lost in a seam, or the image is so tight that to make it fit the dimensions of the bag I have to add on two or more of the sides.  But that is graphics, not stock.

 

Jill

 

 

[Marianne]

I use LR Classic to organize and do most of the processing and keywording on my images since in the last few year LR Classic can now do a lot of what you could only do in PS before - but still need PS to finish off some images - e.g. if I need content aware fill or if I'm using the photo as a starting point for digital art. 

 

The best part about organizing in LR is that you can find images even if they aren't on your computer - because you can have the images on your laptop and images on additional hard drives all in one catalog. I have 100,000 images in two older catalogs and 40,000 from 2016 to the present in my current catalog. That's way too many large files (I shoot with Sony 42 & 61MP cameras) to fit on my 2TB laptop, so some are on external drives. With LR Classic, even if the image isn't on a drive attached to my computer, it is still in the catalog so I can find it with a keyword search in my catalog, see it with the preview image, and even make changes to it that will sync up when i re-attach the hard drive it's on. I can also easily move the images between my laptop and various external drives right in LR Classic so for me it is the best way to organize images. If I switched to LR on the cloud, I'd be lucky to fit a year or two of images on the 1TB cloud. 

 

Of course if you don't have tens of thousands of huge RAW files, that's not a problem. If all your images are in regular LR in the cloud, you can find them all there and don't have to worry about what hard drive they're on (though I'd suggest you also keep  additional copies on a hard drive- they say best practice is to have your data in three different places - but that's a different discussion). 

 

I started with LR 1.0 and took a class at a local community college back in 2006 to learn Photoshop. And I've been taking additional classes, reading books, and watching online videos ever since to improve those skills.  As Jill said, there's always something new to learn  - It's a vast program. I love it. But I do a lot of fine art photography as well as mixed media photography, so PS is essential for me.  I can't imagine trying to learn Photoshop from scratch now, though in some ways it's simpler to do a lot of things than it was a decade ago and it's fun I love it so I'd say it's great if you can devote the time to learning it. 

 

I think that LR is easier to use than Classic - I tried it when it first came out and it simplified a lot of things, but I believe the AI that did the keywording for you turned me off since it wasn't accurate and I didn't want to then take photos into a second program to re-keyword them. I'm not sure if this is still the case but if so, It's something to consider since proper keywording is extremely important in stock photography - without accurate keywords you're unlikely to make many sales.

 

With the photographer's package (PS & LR Classic ), you can move seamlessly back and forth between the two. The PS sky replacement tool is brilliant as is content aware fill, two things you can't do in LR or LR Classic. You also can't turn your photos into digital art, paint on them and add textures, etc, though none of those things may interest you anyway - and programs such as Adobe Fresco (for iPad) let you draw on your photos working with separate layers. 

 

If you're simply shooting stock, and especially if it's mostly editorial where ethically you can't clone things out (other than dust spots), LR is probably enough. It's definitely the more consumer friendly version if you're a beginner. And a great deal for cloud storage if you don't already have that. 

Edited August 6, 2023 by Marianne