>> I certainly disagree. There is more than one way to slice the "Layer"
>> cake. So much of how we work in Photoshop is a result of the type of
>> tools available to us there.
>
> There's that "we" and "us" stuff again. Leave me out of that group, please.
Whoa, there bub. I stand by that statement 100%. All of US tend to
adapt our ways based on the tools available. WE (including you) tend
to use layers for some stuff and masks. Why? because they are powerful
tools that once learned, become the hammer that pounds everything that
resembles a nail.
>>Lightroom packages up the same end results with different types of tools.
> Here, I most strenuously object. That may be true for you and your "we/us"
> buddies. It is far, far from true for me. As for the millions happily
> turning out endless images with halos long dark edges ...
Lightroom doesn't have layers. But, amazingly enough, WE're
discovering that you can do some things with the local adjustment
tools that WE usually use layers to accomplish.
WE used to use the cloning tool a lot. Now WE tend to use the healing
brush with content aware fill.
> More seriously, it's clearly an excellent product. If what it can do
> effectively meets anyone's needs, great. There are those for whom it is
> insufficient to realize the desired end results.
The defenders of any form of technology or system or political
viewpoint will frame their arguments with a carefully selected and
crafted premise.
>> It takes seconds in Lightroom to do what it takes minutes in Photoshop
>> to do.
> Aw, c'mon. The vast majority of LR function is just a different front end
> for ACR, with all the same settings and sliders. All of that is as easily
> and quickly available in ACR when one opens a Raw file in PS. I'll admit I'm
> only able to comment as far as a finished image file and web version. If Bob
> says the print engine is superior, I take his word for it.
So, you just restated my argument above and claimed it as your own.
> HUH????? ACR/PS have batch capabilities. They even work, whether you and
> your "we/us" coterie may not know how to use them. Ever use "Droplets?"
Yes, ACR/PS has batch capabilities. But that also assumes one final
output/process. LR allows recursive adjustments and processes in an
interactive manner. For example, I can apply a WB setting across 200
images in seconds, continue on my way and then go back and make
wholesale changes in seconds. Or select a half dozen to make
adjustments to. Or generate alternative versions of the same files...
The batch processing aspect of LR is output based. The batch
processing aspect of ACR/PS is part of almost every step you do.
> Me Disagree Moose
That's OK. I know that you are a little misguided, so you're forgiven.
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|