If you could do it all again...?

beaumont · 09-01-2008, 12:41 PM

I have a 10D which I have being learning for the past year or so. As per thread feedback I have been taking the photo's in both RAW and JPEG, saved the keepers in both formats, but have yet to attempt to alter the RAW collection. I am now ready to give it a shot.
The question I have is...knowing what you do now, and putting aside all post processing investments you may have made and any techniques vendor specifics you may be accustomed to...what post proccessing software would you choose today if you could do it all again?
thx in advance...

*mithrandir* · 09-01-2008, 02:11 PM

Adobe Lightroom 2.0 hands down.

*Ash* · 09-01-2008, 03:01 PM

Agreed there.
I have Adobe's PS and absolutely love its capabilities, but I'm probably using only 20% of its features, which Lightroom probably has all of. Unless you can justify the price diff, Lightroom it is...

code4code5 · 09-01-2008, 06:32 PM

You might look into Corel Paint Shop Pro Photo X2. It's at most $99 and has a great level of functionality. I've been using it for about a year, and it does everything I could ask of it. Then again, I'm not an expert. It handles PEFs without any issues whatsoever, although the catalog is a bit slow when it's trying to load previews of PEFs. Shutterbug magazine did a review of this version and I happen to agree. Shutterbug: Corel?s Paint Shop Pro Photo X2

*Clicker* · 09-01-2008, 06:43 PM

Although LR is a good "quickie" Photoshop would still be my main PP software.

beaumont · 09-01-2008, 07:59 PM

Thx for the feedback, Photoshop it will be. Anything else required or is it automatically compatible with Pentax?...

beaumont · 09-01-2008, 08:37 PM

What are the major differences between Photoshop Elements and Lightroom?

*Clicker* · 09-01-2008, 09:06 PM

If you have access to both Lightroom and Photoshop, it's best to have both.
Photoshop is great for finetuning individiual photos but LR can work albums better and the odd photo that needs PS and then sent back to LR.

LR+ PS is ideal, LR is good for most people as a stand alone especially for organizing online albums but when you need more exacting fine tuning PS is the one to work it in, they complement each other.

LR latest version should have Pentax RAW profiles loaded if not just check the Pentax software support.

PS Elements is just a chopped down version of PS and is usually adequate for those not doing any sort of major PP and only occasionally.

beaumont · 09-01-2008, 09:38 PM

Originally Posted by Clicker

If you have access to both Lightroom and Photoshop, it's best to have both.
Photoshop is great for finetuning individiual photos but LR can work albums better and the odd photo that needs PS and then sent back to LR.

LR+ PS is ideal, LR is good for most people as a stand alone especially for organizing online albums but when you need more exacting fine tuning PS is the one to work it in, they complement each other.

LR latest version should have Pentax RAW profiles loaded if not just check the Pentax software support.

PS Elements is just a chopped down version of PS and is usually adequate for those not doing any sort of major PP and only occasionally.

I've just been messing around with the Pentax Photo Lab program that came with the camera...opened up a raw file and saved it as a JPEG, but couldn't notice a difference between the JPEG that came from the camera and the JPEG that came from Photo Lab. Is this normal or am I missing a step?...
thx

*Venturi* · 09-01-2008, 10:15 PM

Despite the silent, almost missing, support from LightCrafts I would still choose LightZone right now.

If Adobe were to release a version of Lightroom to run native on Linux, and then I would have a really tough decision to make. LZ and LR each have their own strengths and in my perfect utopian world the two products would merge together and be totally platform independent.

Price matters, but an intuitive, photographer (not graphic artist!) friendly interface matters more to me. LZ and LR have the competition beat on every front in this area.

*LaRee* · 09-01-2008, 11:02 PM

Originally Posted by Clicker

If you have access to both Lightroom and Photoshop, it's best to have both.
Photoshop is great for finetuning individiual photos but LR can work albums better and the odd photo that needs PS and then sent back to LR.

LR+ PS is ideal, LR is good for most people as a stand alone especially for organizing online albums but when you need more exacting fine tuning PS is the one to work it in, they complement each other.

LR latest version should have Pentax RAW profiles loaded if not just check the Pentax software support.

PS Elements is just a chopped down version of PS and is usually adequate for those not doing any sort of major PP and only occasionally.

And I like using Lightroom and PSPX2. I don't use PSPX2 that often honestly because Lightroom really takes care of most of my needs. But I do have some fun filters for PSPX2 that I enjoy. You could also use PS Elements comfortably with Lightroom. Photoshop is so dang bloated imho and difficult to use. Besides, are you really willing to spend $600.00 on your post processing program for CS3?

beaumont · 09-01-2008, 11:06 PM

Originally Posted by LaRee

And I like using Lightroom and PSPX2. I don't use PSPX2 that often honestly because Lightroom really takes care of most of my needs. But I do have some fun filters for PSPX2 that I enjoy. You could also use PS Elements comfortably with Lightroom. Photoshop is so dang bloated imho and difficult to use. Besides, are you really willing to spend $600.00 on your post processing program for CS3?

Please pardon my ignorance. I was hoping to get away with one of the two, but it sounds like you feel both are a good idea?
thx

*LaRee* · 09-01-2008, 11:40 PM

Originally Posted by beaumont

Please pardon my ignorance. I was hoping to get away with one of the two, but it sounds like you feel both are a good idea?
thx

If I had to pick just one, Lightroom 2 would be it. Because of its cataloging abilities, I couldn't do without it again. But there are times when I want to clone something large out that requires use of another pp program with finer controls in the cloning department. That is really the only time I want something more than Lightroom 2. You could get away with just about any additional program for pp in addition to Lightroom. Many folks love the free "Gimp" software too. So many options!
If I were in your shoes, I'd give Lightroom 2 a try (you can download a trial version) and see if it meets your needs. It is always a good idea to try out any software before you buy if possible. Take your time to really give the programs you demo a good trial run to see how you like them.

beaumont · 09-02-2008, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by LaRee

If I had to pick just one, Lightroom 2 would be it. Because of its cataloging abilities, I couldn't do without it again. But there are times when I want to clone something large out that requires use of another pp program with finer controls in the cloning department. That is really the only time I want something more than Lightroom 2. You could get away with just about any additional program for pp in addition to Lightroom. Many folks love the free "Gimp" software too. So many options!
If I were in your shoes, I'd give Lightroom 2 a try (you can download a trial version) and see if it meets your needs. It is always a good idea to try out any software before you buy if possible. Take your time to really give the programs you demo a good trial run to see how you like them.

Thanks for all of the feedback. The theads all seem to indicated that shooting is RAW is a must, so it's time to get on the bandwagon! Per your advise, I will download a trial version of Lightroom...

pasipasi · 09-02-2008, 05:51 PM

I've never paid for software, thus linux and gimp :P