Photoshop CS 5 is the latest and greatest and it does such magics as content-aware fill and basically anything you want.
Elements is a cut down version of photardshop and I don't know precisely what it doesn't do, I'm afraid.
Lightroom is a different product line altogether, and offers a streamlined environment specifically tailored for photographers and working with RAW images in the main. I basically want to marry it. It's amazing. Things it doesn't do include layers, copying and pasting arbitrary segments of images, stuff like that. Things it does do are anything you'd want to do as a photographer in your day to day.
Now, if you could transpose the code for that software into basic
and send me the printout I'll input (one finger type) it into my
Commodore 64.Thanks in advance.
@eyebrows Dammit! I was perfectly happy with my choice of paint shop pro until I watched that link. I suppose I'd better get saving. I have until Januray until my student ID runs out, maybe if I get some people to chip in for my birthday/christmas it will be possible!
I have noticed a very interesting difference in the last few months that I have been a member of 365.
But before I mention this difference, let me clarify two definitions first. A professional photographer is someone who earns a living solely from his/her photography. An amateur photographer is someone who shoots photos for fun, hobby, on the weekends, or for their children. That's it, no further complications, but it was necessary to make that distinction first.
What I have noticed on this site is that all professional photographers seem to use Photoshop and all amateur photographers seem to use Lightroom.
I used Lightroom for three months when I had a trial, about a year ago. At first, I enjoyed it because it was a combination photo database and editor all in one. Ultimately, it was too slow. My biggest grievance was the catalog system, which required updating every single time you added, changed, or moved photos. Works fine at first, but imagine what it's like to have 10,000 photos in that catalog.
Lightroom's advantage for most people are the presets. Sure, those presets make rendering in black and white, sepia, and making white balance corrections easy, but why would you want to let a computer tell you how your photos should look?
I find that people who are meticulous and really want to fully control how their photos look will use Photoshop. Sure, Lightroom can do the basic white balance corrections, adjust exposure, it can work with most types of RAW, but in the end it's a very limited editor very similar to Adobe Elements.
Here is the bottom line: Elements is a stripped version of Photoshop and costs the least amount, Lightroom runs middle of the road for cost and is good if you want simple, quick edits of your photos, and Photoshop is the Zeus of the editing world that can do everything you would want and probably a million things you'd never need.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Elements is a cut down version of photardshop and I don't know precisely what it doesn't do, I'm afraid.
Lightroom is a different product line altogether, and offers a streamlined environment specifically tailored for photographers and working with RAW images in the main. I basically want to marry it. It's amazing. Things it doesn't do include layers, copying and pasting arbitrary segments of images, stuff like that. Things it does do are anything you'd want to do as a photographer in your day to day.
they all do similar stuff a lot of its just down to preference i guess :)
Now, if you could transpose the code for that software into basic
and send me the printout I'll input (one finger type) it into my
Commodore 64.Thanks in advance.
Congrats on the nuptials.
But before I mention this difference, let me clarify two definitions first. A professional photographer is someone who earns a living solely from his/her photography. An amateur photographer is someone who shoots photos for fun, hobby, on the weekends, or for their children. That's it, no further complications, but it was necessary to make that distinction first.
What I have noticed on this site is that all professional photographers seem to use Photoshop and all amateur photographers seem to use Lightroom.
I used Lightroom for three months when I had a trial, about a year ago. At first, I enjoyed it because it was a combination photo database and editor all in one. Ultimately, it was too slow. My biggest grievance was the catalog system, which required updating every single time you added, changed, or moved photos. Works fine at first, but imagine what it's like to have 10,000 photos in that catalog.
Lightroom's advantage for most people are the presets. Sure, those presets make rendering in black and white, sepia, and making white balance corrections easy, but why would you want to let a computer tell you how your photos should look?
I find that people who are meticulous and really want to fully control how their photos look will use Photoshop. Sure, Lightroom can do the basic white balance corrections, adjust exposure, it can work with most types of RAW, but in the end it's a very limited editor very similar to Adobe Elements.
Here is the bottom line: Elements is a stripped version of Photoshop and costs the least amount, Lightroom runs middle of the road for cost and is good if you want simple, quick edits of your photos, and Photoshop is the Zeus of the editing world that can do everything you would want and probably a million things you'd never need.
A great summation of the programme differences put into plain English. Thanks,