We've been talking about Lightroom vs Photoshop and the point has been made more than once that Lightroom lacks some of Photoshop's capabilities; I have tried to defend the that Lightrooom may indeed be all that some photographers need, especially some of us amateurs.
But with all that in mind, I should perhaps throw in here the observation that I myself and still sitting a bit on the fence. I have not yet placed my order for Lightroom. I'm not vacillating between Lightroom and Photoshop. For me, that's like choosing between going to a movie or to the dentist. No, my dilemma is whether to commit to Lightroom or to something else, and the #1 candidate in the "something else" category is
Lightcrafts' Lightzone.
No question that Adobe's product is the safe choice here - and no question that Lightroom is a really nice product, especially for a 1.0 release. But for folks like me who definitely DO NOT want to bother with Photoshop, the fact that Lightroom's Develop module bears more than a passing resemblance to the photo-editing tools in Photoshop is not really a plus. The "zone mapper" in Lightzone is, in my view and the view of many reviewers, original and brilliant. It's easy as pie but tremendously powerful, especially once you realize that Lightzone, unlike Lightroom, does support something that you could call "layers". Furthermore, Lightzone does offer tools for selecting areas of the photograph and modifying exposure or color or sharpness, etc., just within those zones - the very thing that has been mentioned here as reason why Lightroom won't replace Photoshop.
Lightroom will instantly have a support industry in place. Already a dozen books are waiting to be shipped and a magazine is ready for its first issue. There are training sites all over the web and courses have already been launched. Lightzone, on the other hand, is almost invisible. In addition, Lightzone's browser is anemic; its batch-processing features are pretty weak, too; it takes a lot of memory and even then it's slow. Still, it's as powerful as Lightroom, yet much easier to use, at least once you figure it out. I confess that the zone mapper baffled me at first, but I've stuck with it, and now I find difficult to get the thing out of my head. The tone curve in Lightroom seems crude by comparison.
If I had to place a bet on myself (is that even legal?), I'd wager that I'll end up making the safe choice and buying Lightroom. But my trial period for Lightcrafts' Lightzone has ten more days left - exactly the time remaining to the official release of Adobe Lightroom. I plan to use every one of those days trying to make up my mind.
Will
Originally posted by davemdsn 
Similar Threads 
