Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hello,

In a few days you will notice that I have only 113 pictures now. :(

I deleted 15 pictures in accordance to your advice about duplicates.

I appreciate your advice and will pull others as I resubmit them brighter.

Thanks,

Jacob Y.

Good for you.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You can purchase Lightroom 6 from Amazon 

 

I'm currently using Lightroom 5 which I purchased directly from Adobe. If Adobe still sells the standalone software it's not easy to find.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The last time I bought Lightroom (or an upgrade) from Adobe I had to start by pretending I was going to buy the subscription. That was when I finally got the choice. I think I also had to pretend I was buying it new in order to get to where I could choose an upgrade. They do hide it these days. If you google "how to buy standalone Lightroom'" there are instructions. Very annoying. For someone like me who has never spent sufficient time to learn Photoshop the standalone Lightroom is perfect.

 

Paulette

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The last time I bought Lightroom (or an upgrade) from Adobe I had to start by pretending I was going to buy the subscription. That was when I finally got the choice. I think I also had to pretend I was buying it new in order to get to where I could choose an upgrade. They do hide it these days. If you google "how to buy standalone Lightroom'" there are instructions. Very annoying. For someone like me who has never spent sufficient time to learn Photoshop the standalone Lightroom is perfect.

 

Paulette

 

 

+1

 

Allan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

Thank you for your advice.

Is there a way to buy Photoshop outright as opposed to paying for it monthly?

I also recently looked at my pictures on a search and did notice that they are kind of dark.

Thanks,

Jacob Y.

If you're looking for low cost options, then you can pickup Photoshop Elements (PSE) quite cheaply, especially older versions on eBay (I use Version 8). I use Adobe Lightroom to convert from RAW, but it's also possible to use the free Adobe DNG convertor (which supports the RAW formats of all the latest cameras), to convert RAW to DNG files which will then open in older versions of PSE. However... I strongly recommend Lightroom for RAW conversions as it can automatically remove CA, vignetting and lens distortion, which saves so much time it soon pays for itself. I use the standalone version of LR4 as I don't like subscription payments. PSE8 does everything I need.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Edited to remove link at MDM's suggestion.

 

Apologies to all.

 

I had to get something wrong today it's Friday 13th. :angry:

 

Allan

Edited by Allan Bell
Link to post
Share on other sites

Adobe have a sale on software until June 15th

 

Allan

Allan - that is not an Adobe site. Adobe don't do software sales. If it's too good to be true .....If I were you, I would remove that link.

Edited by MDM
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're looking for low cost options, then you can pickup Photoshop Elements (PSE) quite cheaply, especially older versions on eBay (I use Version 8). I use Adobe Lightroom to convert from RAW, but it's also possible to use the free Adobe DNG convertor (which supports the RAW formats of all the latest cameras), to convert RAW to DNG files which will then open in older versions of PSE. However... I strongly recommend Lightroom for RAW conversions as it can automatically remove CA, vignetting and lens distortion, which saves so much time it soon pays for itself. I use the standalone version of LR4 as I don't like subscription payments. PSE8 does everything I need.

 

 

There have been some major advances in Lightroom since version 4. You might want to check out version 6 while it is still available as a standalone as I'm guessing that it won't be available much longer except by subscription. The upgrade was about £60 a while back. Similarly there have been some major advances in Photoshop over the years in terms of speed even if you don't need the features but that is another story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The cost of a monthly subscription to Adobe's software makes it a very clear choice for me. Lightroom is tough to get used to at first as you don't open files or save them afterwards, and cannot "save as" to change the format, etc.. Once you understand how it works though I find it's so much faster and easier to use than other software, and the integration with PS saves time too.

 

Before I bought LR I used PS Elements and although it did most things, it was a lot messier to use than LR. Also it lacks the masking feature that the full PS has (at least the older version did but from what I read a while ago, that may now have changed), which I didn't used to think was important for fairly basic photo editing, but now I couldn't live without it at all for many of my more artistic images.

 

I'm all for getting stuff for free if possible, but after trying all sorts of free photo editing options years ago (including GIMP that I find painful to use compared to LR), I wouldn't go back. It reminds me of when I first did stock and didn't want to spend 100 quid on my Spyder to calibrate my monitor, as I thought I could do a good enough job setting it up manually by using various test cards/photographs. I ended up removing most of my first images after seeing how poor they actually looked after buying my Spyder calibrator. As others have said, you sometimes have to spend a bit of money if you want the best results.

 

Geoff.

In case anyone considering getting LR is confused, the files can be exported under different formats which can be done quickly with presets of your own. Edited by mickfly
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you're looking for low cost options, then you can pickup Photoshop Elements (PSE) quite cheaply, especially older versions on eBay (I use Version 8). I use Adobe Lightroom to convert from RAW, but it's also possible to use the free Adobe DNG convertor (which supports the RAW formats of all the latest cameras), to convert RAW to DNG files which will then open in older versions of PSE. However... I strongly recommend Lightroom for RAW conversions as it can automatically remove CA, vignetting and lens distortion, which saves so much time it soon pays for itself. I use the standalone version of LR4 as I don't like subscription payments. PSE8 does everything I need.

 

 

There have been some major advances in Lightroom since version 4. You might want to check out version 6 while it is still available as a standalone as I'm guessing that it won't be available much longer except by subscription. The upgrade was about £60 a while back. Similarly there have been some major advances in Photoshop over the years in terms of speed even if you don't need the features but that is another story.

 

 

Thanks - I've installed the trial versions of every PSE since 8 and they've all been significantly slower (no idea why). I haven't tried PS at all, I may try LR6 sometime, but suspect my preference may to swap to an "all in one solution" such as ACDsee or OnOne once their raw convertors improve, as I hate having to import images into LR and maintain catalogues.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

If you're looking for low cost options, then you can pickup Photoshop Elements (PSE) quite cheaply, especially older versions on eBay (I use Version 8). I use Adobe Lightroom to convert from RAW, but it's also possible to use the free Adobe DNG convertor (which supports the RAW formats of all the latest cameras), to convert RAW to DNG files which will then open in older versions of PSE. However... I strongly recommend Lightroom for RAW conversions as it can automatically remove CA, vignetting and lens distortion, which saves so much time it soon pays for itself. I use the standalone version of LR4 as I don't like subscription payments. PSE8 does everything I need.

 

There have been some major advances in Lightroom since version 4. You might want to check out version 6 while it is still available as a standalone as I'm guessing that it won't be available much longer except by subscription. The upgrade was about £60 a while back. Similarly there have been some major advances in Photoshop over the years in terms of speed even if you don't need the features but that is another story.

 

Thanks - I've installed the trial versions of every PSE since 8 and they've all been significantly slower (no idea why). I haven't tried PS at all, I may try LR6 sometime, but suspect my preference may to swap to an "all in one solution" such as ACDsee or OnOne once their raw convertors improve, as I hate having to import images into LR and maintain catalogues.

Mark, I use LR like this.

I upload my images from my card to a raw folder on my desktop. That folder might be titled: "16-05-14-Overholser" or "16-05-10-Flowers". Then I will import the folder into LR. All that is added on import is my copyright info and date. I develop an image>open into PS. There I may do a bit more editing, crop, spot, etc. save as a tiff. Use Bridge to keyword after every image has gone through both programs. I select like images in Bridge, so the keywords apply to those multiples. Then if there are different things like number of people or whatever, I add/ change those keywords that apply to individual images.

Then I open each, save one JPEG copy next to its raw in the original desktop folder then save a jpeg to my created Alamy folder titled ALAMY 206 (each upload folder has a number, ALAMY 206, ALAMY 207, ETC. I delete the tiff.

I do no cataloging in LR.

When my Alamy folder JPEGs have been uploaded and pass QC, I move the desktop folder with raw + jpegs and the ALAMY numbered folder to my 2 mirrored desktop hard drives. The only time these are on my computer are always on the desktop in undeveloped folders.

This keeps my computer lean and mean and fast.

LR cataloging is confusing to me. I understand how handy it is for those who use it. I only have used LR since I joined CC and am used to my system before LR, so prefer to continue it.

You can use all the nifty develop features of LR without doing the catalog bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is another alternative, not free but cheap.

 

Affinity Photo by Serif Labs for £39.99 in Apple app store. It has had 37 ratings and gets 5 stars.

 

I do not have anything to do with Serif Labs.

 

Allan

 

EDIT Personally I use LR6 and PSE14 both stand alone and purchased as upgrades from previous versions.

Edited by Allan Bell
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

If you're looking for low cost options, then you can pickup Photoshop Elements (PSE) quite cheaply, especially older versions on eBay (I use Version 8). I use Adobe Lightroom to convert from RAW, but it's also possible to use the free Adobe DNG convertor (which supports the RAW formats of all the latest cameras), to convert RAW to DNG files which will then open in older versions of PSE. However... I strongly recommend Lightroom for RAW conversions as it can automatically remove CA, vignetting and lens distortion, which saves so much time it soon pays for itself. I use the standalone version of LR4 as I don't like subscription payments. PSE8 does everything I need.
 

There have been some major advances in Lightroom since version 4. You might want to check out version 6 while it is still available as a standalone as I'm guessing that it won't be available much longer except by subscription. The upgrade was about £60 a while back. Similarly there have been some major advances in Photoshop over the years in terms of speed even if you don't need the features but that is another story.

 

Thanks - I've installed the trial versions of every PSE since 8 and they've all been significantly slower (no idea why). I haven't tried PS at all, I may try LR6 sometime, but suspect my preference may to swap to an "all in one solution" such as ACDsee or OnOne once their raw convertors improve, as I hate having to import images into LR and maintain catalogues.

Mark, I use LR like this.

I upload my images from my card to a raw folder on my desktop. That folder might be titled: "16-05-14-Overholser" or "16-05-10-Flowers". Then I will import the folder into LR. All that is added on import is my copyright info and date. I develop an image>open into PS. There I may do a bit more editing, crop, spot, etc. save as a tiff. Use Bridge to keyword after every image has gone through both programs. I select like images in Bridge, so the keywords apply to those multiples. Then if there are different things like number of people or whatever, I add/ change those keywords that apply to individual images.

Then I open each, save one JPEG copy next to its raw in the original desktop folder then save a jpeg to my created Alamy folder titled ALAMY 206 (each upload folder has a number, ALAMY 206, ALAMY 207, ETC. I delete the tiff.

I do no cataloging in LR.

When my Alamy folder JPEGs have been uploaded and pass QC, I move the desktop folder with raw + jpegs and the ALAMY numbered folder to my 2 mirrored desktop hard drives. The only time these are on my computer are always on the desktop in undeveloped folders.

This keeps my computer lean and mean and fast.

LR cataloging is confusing to me. I understand how handy it is for those who use it. I only have used LR since I joined CC and am used to my system before LR, so prefer to continue it.

You can use all the nifty develop features of LR without doing the catalog bit.

 

Looks like you use LR in a similar way to me. In reality our images are added to LR's catalogue (that happens when they are imported). In my case they are only there very briefly. Once I've finished editing a batch of images, I delete them from the LR catalogue. I'm more that happy with the organising capabilities of Windows Explorer or Mac Finder, combined with a decent directory structure. Smart folders on the Mac are also really powerful. In this way all my file copying , deleting, moving (whether they be my images or other documents) is all handled by the OS and I'm fee to move from one OS to another, or switch image processing sofware. Main loss is the non-destructive editing capability of LR, but I always tend to do some final tweaks in PS anyway, so the non-destructive aspect of LR isn't really relevant to me.

Edited by M.Chapman
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you're looking for low cost options, then you can pickup Photoshop Elements (PSE) quite cheaply, especially older versions on eBay (I use Version 8). I use Adobe Lightroom to convert from RAW, but it's also possible to use the free Adobe DNG convertor (which supports the RAW formats of all the latest cameras), to convert RAW to DNG files which will then open in older versions of PSE. However... I strongly recommend Lightroom for RAW conversions as it can automatically remove CA, vignetting and lens distortion, which saves so much time it soon pays for itself. I use the standalone version of LR4 as I don't like subscription payments. PSE8 does everything I need.
 

There have been some major advances in Lightroom since version 4. You might want to check out version 6 while it is still available as a standalone as I'm guessing that it won't be available much longer except by subscription. The upgrade was about £60 a while back. Similarly there have been some major advances in Photoshop over the years in terms of speed even if you don't need the features but that is another story.

 

Thanks - I've installed the trial versions of every PSE since 8 and they've all been significantly slower (no idea why). I haven't tried PS at all, I may try LR6 sometime, but suspect my preference may to swap to an "all in one solution" such as ACDsee or OnOne once their raw convertors improve, as I hate having to import images into LR and maintain catalogues.

Mark, I use LR like this.

I upload my images from my card to a raw folder on my desktop. That folder might be titled: "16-05-14-Overholser" or "16-05-10-Flowers". Then I will import the folder into LR. All that is added on import is my copyright info and date. I develop an image>open into PS. There I may do a bit more editing, crop, spot, etc. save as a tiff. Use Bridge to keyword after every image has gone through both programs. I select like images in Bridge, so the keywords apply to those multiples. Then if there are different things like number of people or whatever, I add/ change those keywords that apply to individual images.

Then I open each, save one JPEG copy next to its raw in the original desktop folder then save a jpeg to my created Alamy folder titled ALAMY 206 (each upload folder has a number, ALAMY 206, ALAMY 207, ETC. I delete the tiff.

I do no cataloging in LR.

When my Alamy folder JPEGs have been uploaded and pass QC, I move the desktop folder with raw + jpegs and the ALAMY numbered folder to my 2 mirrored desktop hard drives. The only time these are on my computer are always on the desktop in undeveloped folders.

This keeps my computer lean and mean and fast.

LR cataloging is confusing to me. I understand how handy it is for those who use it. I only have used LR since I joined CC and am used to my system before LR, so prefer to continue it.

You can use all the nifty develop features of LR without doing the catalog bit.

 

Looks like you use LR in a similar way to me. In reality our images are added to LR's catalogue (that happens when they are imported). In my case they are only there very briefly. Once I've finished editing a batch of images, I delete them from the LR catalogue. I'm more that happy with the organising capabilities of Windows Explorer or Mac Finder, combined with a decent directory structure. Smart folders on the Mac are also really powerful. In this way all my file copying , deleting, moving (whether they be my images or other documents) is all handled by the OS and I'm fee to move from one OS to another, or switch image processing sofware. Main loss is the non-destructive editing capability of LR, but I always tend to do some final tweaks in PS anyway, so the non-destructive aspect of LR isn't really relevant to me.

 

 

The images are not added to the catalog, only a pointer to the images. The catalog is simply a flatfile database but it is way more powerful for handling digital information than the Mac Finder etc - application of metadata presets, keywording, full size image preview with colour management, smart collections, ability to export in different file formats and so on. And the way it integrates with the Develop module and other areas of LR is very powerful and convenient. However, I doubt that I would convince you - just pointing this out really.

Edited by MDM
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

MDM,

 

OK maybe the images themselves aren't in the catalogue, just pointers to the files, but what about all those hi-res previews that it creates, they are surely in there? Also if I delete a file in Windows Explorer, the LR catalogue is messed up. I do use (and like) LR for it's Develop module. I also apply presets, and export in different file formats. But I dislike the requirement to import the images. All my other tools work directly on the image files without the need to import first. I am a LR fan, just not all of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No the previews are held in a separate file with the same name as the catalog in the same folder.  If you delete a file outside of LR, then the thumbnail will show with a question mark and you just remove it. It doesn't mess up the catalog. You can even do a search for missing files and remove them from the database. You are not importing the images - if you were then the catalog would be enormous. I have my main catalog with over 60,000 images and it is 1.57 GB. The previews file is around 100 GB. The images are well over 3 TB. So you are saving negligible disk space by clearing the catalog.

 

I used to use Bridge before LR and that is similar to the Finder or Win Explorer - they are file browsers. Now that was messy - continually losing the previews which would have to be regenerated for one thing and I had to have a separate database to keep track of things.

 

I'm actually a bit surprised at your dislike of Lightroom's database facility as you are clearly knowledgeable in relation to computers and it really is not difficult but I figured I wouldn't convince you :).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. I thin

 

No the previews are held in a separate file with the same name as the catalog in the same folder.  If you delete a file outside of LR, then the thumbnail will show with a question mark and you just remove it. It doesn't mess up the catalog. You can even do a search for missing files and remove them from the database. You are not importing the images - if you were then the catalog would be enormous. I have my main catalog with over 60,000 images and it is 1.57 GB. The previews file is around 100 GB. The images are well over 3 TB. So you are saving negligible disk space by clearing the catalog.

 

I used to use Bridge before LR and that is similar to the Finder or Win Explorer - they are file browsers. Now that was messy - continually losing the previews which would have to be regenerated for one thing and I had to have a separate database to keep track of things.

 

I'm actually a bit surprised at your dislike of Lightroom's database facility as you are clearly knowledgeable in relation to computers and it really is not difficult but I figured I wouldn't convince you :).

I think whether you call the previews as being part of the catalogue is down to semantics. You're right in terms of how the system is implemented, but in terms of how it behaves, they might just as well be integrated. I'll give you another example of how the "catalogue" frustrates me. If I rename a folder of images in another tool, LR losses track of all the images in there. It still has their thumbnails, but it's lost the link to the images themselves. Yes, it possible to rebuild the associations, but I find this tedious.

 

On the other hand, Windows Explorer and Mac Finder don't have this problem. Their search capabilities also allow locating images by name, date, keyword etc.

 

I did wonder about doing all my image file operations within LR so the catalogue stays up to date, but I wasn't confident I would like the restrictions that imposes. I've got about 20,000 images files which would take forever to import making the "catalogue" (including associated files) valuable and the LR database would get quite large. Importing one file would cause the database to update producing a new version of a rather large file to backup. (Or have I misunderstood?). I also found LR very slow compared to BreezeBrowser when browsing images and doing 100% side by side comparisons. I still use BreezeBrowser on Mac using Parallels. I find it is by far the fastest way to reviewing the images I've just taken, selecting the best and deleting the rejects. No need to import the images or generate high previews, it just works.

 

"You are clearly knowledgable in terms of computers"

 

Thanks. I'd like to think so. But I am getting slower to learn new tricks, and I hate having restrictions imposed on how I use a computer or access my files. For example when Windows 10 imposed automatic updates I swapped to Mac. Or, having to use LR to for all image file management when I want the freedom to use a wide range of tools to move, copy, edit, browse, create images on any platform/computer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just bought LR6 (on CD) and ........ a book (which I didn't finish yet;)

What I found out from the book is that all those previews can actually take up a lot of space, therefore it recommends to install LR on the same disk (or external harddisk) as the one where the images are stored in order not to overload your C-drive. 

Now here's my probably stupid question  :unsure: Photoshop CS6 only allows me to install the program a couple of times. Is that the same with Lightroom 6? Or can I install it on several harddisks (including those with video footage which preview clips probably take up even more space because when you drag your mouse over them from left to right, you see the sequence)?.

The maximum number of installs isn't mentioned on the box nor in the book. 

 

Cheers,

Philippe 

According to the license agreement, you can install Lightroom on two computers and you are not supposed to use the two simultaneously - same as Photoshop. I have LR installed on the same drive as the operating system but I keep the catalogs and the associated preview files together on a fast external drive. That works perfectly but you do need to be using a fast external drive (USB3, Thunderbolt or Firewire on Mac). It doesn't make sense to install the app itself on several external drives so perhaps you are misinterpreting the info.

Edited by MDM
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. I thin

 

No the previews are held in a separate file with the same name as the catalog in the same folder.  If you delete a file outside of LR, then the thumbnail will show with a question mark and you just remove it. It doesn't mess up the catalog. You can even do a search for missing files and remove them from the database. You are not importing the images - if you were then the catalog would be enormous. I have my main catalog with over 60,000 images and it is 1.57 GB. The previews file is around 100 GB. The images are well over 3 TB. So you are saving negligible disk space by clearing the catalog.

 

I used to use Bridge before LR and that is similar to the Finder or Win Explorer - they are file browsers. Now that was messy - continually losing the previews which would have to be regenerated for one thing and I had to have a separate database to keep track of things.

 

I'm actually a bit surprised at your dislike of Lightroom's database facility as you are clearly knowledgeable in relation to computers and it really is not difficult but I figured I wouldn't convince you :).

I think whether you call the previews as being part of the catalogue is down to semantics. You're right in terms of how the system is implemented, but in terms of how it behaves, they might just as well be integrated. I'll give you another example of how the "catalogue" frustrates me. If I rename a folder of images in another tool, LR losses track of all the images in there. It still has their thumbnails, but it's lost the link to the images themselves. Yes, it possible to rebuild the associations, but I find this tedious.

 

On the other hand, Windows Explorer and Mac Finder don't have this problem. Their search capabilities also allow locating images by name, date, keyword etc.

 

I did wonder about doing all my image file operations within LR so the catalogue stays up to date, but I wasn't confident I would like the restrictions that imposes. I've got about 20,000 images files which would take forever to import making the "catalogue" (including associated files) valuable and the LR database would get quite large. Importing one file would cause the database to update producing a new version of a rather large file to backup. (Or have I misunderstood?). I also found LR very slow compared to BreezeBrowser when browsing images and doing 100% side by side comparisons. I still use BreezeBrowser on Mac using Parallels. I find it is by far the fastest way to reviewing the images I've just taken, selecting the best and deleting the rejects. No need to import the images or generate high previews, it just works.

 

"You are clearly knowledgable in terms of computers"

 

Thanks. I'd like to think so. But I am getting slower to learn new tricks, and I hate having restrictions imposed on how I use a computer or access my files. For example when Windows 10 imposed automatic updates I swapped to Mac. Or, having to use LR to for all image file management when I want the freedom to use a wide range of tools to move, copy, edit, browse, create images on any platform/computer.

It's not semantics - it is practically different. And, for example, it allows the use of Smart Previews where you can edit files on a laptop when the files are not actually there. I don't think one would expect a program to keep track of file renaming outside of that program as the file names act as the primary key in the LR database. However, it is really a very simple matter to relocate a renamed or moved folder as long as the files have not been renamed. You just click on the question mark and navigate to the missing folder. LR is not perfect but, together with PS integration, it is extremely good in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just bought LR6 (on CD) and ........ a book (which I didn't finish yet;)

What I found out from the book is that all those previews can actually take up a lot of space, therefore it recommends to install LR on the same disk (or external harddisk) as the one where the images are stored in order not to overload your C-drive. 

Now here's my probably stupid question  :unsure: Photoshop CS6 only allows me to install the program a couple of times. Is that the same with Lightroom 6? Or can I install it on several harddisks (including those with video footage which preview clips probably take up even more space because when you drag your mouse over them from left to right, you see the sequence)?.

The maximum number of installs isn't mentioned on the box nor in the book. 

 

Cheers,

Philippe 

 

 

 

Not sure if I understand correctly what your book suggests...

 

As MDM pointed out, previews (both regular and smart previews) are stored in the same directory as the catalog. I suggest to install LR on your local hard disk, and also store your catalog (and thus the previews) on the same local hard disk.

 

 

I have LR and my catalog on the local disk of my notebook, as well as the last few thousand pictures I took. From time to time I move older pictures from my local disk to my NAS server, to which the access is slower, but with "unlimited" storage. Of course I do this moving of folders in LR in order to keep the references in the catalog working. Pictures on the NAS server I can only access while I have a network connection, but since the catalog and previews are on my local disk, I always have at least a hi-res preview with me.

 

 

 

 

Christoph

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have well over 20,000 images as well but the actual import doesn't take very long. Of course I started 5 years ago so there was no big bang of imports and previews to be created all at once. Full-size previews from raws can be a bit time-consuming but you can just do it for selects.

You just get into the discipline of renaming in LR and all's well. Even if LR loses something you get a prompt to remind it where it's gone.

Edited by spacecadet
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just go out and purchase Adobe Elements.  It will do everything you need for stock photography.  Every one of my images which you can see by clicking on my image total on the left of this page was edited in Elements.  I have sales every month so the low cost of elements was well worth it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just go out and purchase Adobe Elements.  It will do everything you need for stock photography.  Every one of my images which you can see by clicking on my image total on the left of this page was edited in Elements.  I have sales every month so the low cost of elements was well worth it.

I don't think Elements has automatic CA removal does it? That's one of the things I really like (and need) from LR develop module, it saves so much time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.