I’ve used PSP in the past I think it is a great alternative to Adobe. Problem is I think PSP is still ported to Windows only. I love my 27” iMac. I am using Lightroom 1.4 mostly as a cataloging tool, and there is still plenty of editing power there.
I’ve used PSP in the past I think it is a great alternative to Adobe. Problem is I think PSP is still ported to Windows only. I love my 27” iMac. I am using Lightroom 1.4 mostly as a cataloging tool, and there is still plenty of editing power there.
--- Steve from Missouri ---
Whatever editing program one has, adding Irfanview is a valuable asset for the few basic operations it provides. I use it more than all other programs combined for viewing and culling out unwanted images, for resizing, for changing image formats, and for printing. It requires little HD space, and loads instantly even on old slow computers.
Rick "talk to me" DenneyOriginally Posted by j.e.simmons
Okay, I decided on Ps. I needed a kick in the butt, and there's two Ps courses--Ps I and Ps II--offered at Univ New Mex. They provided the necessary kick. They are both completely online courses.... Oh, well. I start in mid-Feb. Pray for me!
Peter Collins
On the intent of the First Amendment: The press was to serve the governed, not the governors --Opinion, Hugo Black, Judge, Supreme Court, 1971 re the "Pentagon Papers."
Peter, you should look into Adobe’s student program if they still have it. When the company sold its products, I saved a lot of money by qualifying as a student.
Every option that has been discussed in the thread has a steep learning curve. I'm going to suggest a slightly different approach. You might find yourself quite happy using a combination of Lightroom and Photoshop. To give you some idea of the Lightroom learning curve, it's the software we use in a one term course I teach. I guide the students and provide lots of resources, but learning Lightroom is their responsibility. Most have never used it before and are up and running quickly.
Lightroom is an extremely good tool for "digital asset management" (in other words, organizing and working with the actual files that are your pictures). I have no desire to organize my files at the operating system level, or to deal with multiple versions of files. This is where Lightroom shines. It's also a very capable "editor" -- but non-destructive. When I switched from film to digital, I used Lightroom exclusively for my black and white photography (which is basically all my photography that isn't family snapshots). There are things one could do in Photoshop that you can't do in Lightroom -- but I usually don't want or need to do any of those things. Of course, others have different wants and needs.
One reason I like Lightroom is it allows me to work in a broadly similar way to how I printed in the darkroom. Ideas like dodging and burning transfer over nicely. If you don't want to stray too far from what the camera recorded on the film, you don't have to. Note that I print inkjet, but I'm using a black and white inkset. It's an open source inkset -- so you prepare the inks yourself rather than buying them pre-mixed. This approach is very compatible with my Lightroom workflow. I finish the picture in Lightroom, export it as a TIFF in grayscale, and then print using Quadtone RIP.
Here's the twist though and why I suggested you might need both Lightroom and Photoshop. At the end of 2018 I came back to film and large format. I camera scan my negatives and then process them in Lightroom. I now have to use Photoshop for some functions because they simply work better -- most importantly spotting. With small digital files (like the 6000x4000 pixel files created by my Fuji X-T2 -- and even larger ones from Sony cameras), spotting in Lightroom ranges from "just fine" to "painful but fine". However, the files produced from camera scanning, which will be comparable to what you're going to make with your V800, seem to overwhelm my system; it's a very powerful system, so this is a Lightroom issue. I get around this easily by doing spot removal in Photoshop and then returning to Lightroom for the rest of the work.
Thank you, rdeloe!
My mentor--who is my son-in-law!--uses Lightroom exclusively. I will probably do much the same once I have mastered a little of Ps. I have Lr in the monthly subscription, just sitting there. I will circle back at the beginning of April when I've finished the 6-week course. Again thanks. Your comments have been printed! I'm 73 and still work better with paper.
Peter Collins
On the intent of the First Amendment: The press was to serve the governed, not the governors --Opinion, Hugo Black, Judge, Supreme Court, 1971 re the "Pentagon Papers."
Photoshop is an amazing tool. Lots of people started there and never left. I happened to start with Lightroom, so barely touch Photoshop. I prefer the default non-destructive work flow approach of Lightroom. It also fits well with Adams' idea of "the negative is the score and the print is the performance". I also appreciate the way Lightroom lets new users do a lot without having to know a lot.
If you do decide to have a look at Lightroom after learning Photoshop, here are some resources I use in my course to get the students up to speed.
Victoria Bampton's Quick Start Guide is a good place to begin. It's free. The rest of her site has other useful material.
Adobe's Lightroom help and support site is worth bookmarking.
Adobe's Lightroom YouTube channel is also very good.
I quite like Julieanne Kost's Lightroom videos. Her style is calm and constructive.
Laura Shoe has loads of tutorials and videos. She's also excellent.
Finally, if you prefer books, Scott Kelby's books are very good. His sense of humour is an acquired taste, but the content is solid. I like these two for teaching (but get the more recent versions if you're using the current version of LR).
Kelby, S. (2015). The Adobe Photoshop Lightroom CC book for Digital Photographers. New Riders.
Kelby, S. (2015). How Do I Do That in Lightroom? Santa Barbara, CA: Rocky Nook.
Good luck,
Rob
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks