Comments on: Some Quick Tuesday News http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479 Scoops, tips and comments published exclusively for friends of Scott Kelby Mon, 22 Mar 2010 02:20:30 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Waiting for the Night « Scott [o] Smith’s Digital World http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-9901 Waiting for the Night « Scott [o] Smith’s Digital World Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:35:21 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-9901 [...] than just a photo organizer, It’s become an important part of many photographers workflow. Scott Kelby uses it for all of his RAW processing and about 70% of his [...] [...] than just a photo organizer, It’s become an important part of many photographers workflow. Scott Kelby uses it for all of his RAW processing and about 70% of his [...]

]]> By: Doug http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-6960 Doug Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:15:53 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-6960 Hi Scott, Just a suggestion - a combined Lightroom/CS3 (Adobe for Digital Photographers maybe?) book would be great. I see multiple techniques for things like B&W conversion between the two products, and would be interested in your comparison between all the techniques in both products. I use lightroom for developing my raw files, then always export to TIFF in photoshop for things like sharpening and (especially) noise reduction. I also use the PS photofilters rather than LR. But then my workflow evolved during the LR beta, so I may be moving to PS for things I don't need to. Any possibility of a combined book or ebook? Hi Scott,

Just a suggestion – a combined Lightroom/CS3 (Adobe for Digital Photographers maybe?) book would be great. I see multiple techniques for things like B&W conversion between the two products, and would be interested in your comparison between all the techniques in both products.

I use lightroom for developing my raw files, then always export to TIFF in photoshop for things like sharpening and (especially) noise reduction. I also use the PS photofilters rather than LR. But then my workflow evolved during the LR beta, so I may be moving to PS for things I don’t need to.

Any possibility of a combined book or ebook?

]]> By: Ed W http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-6053 Ed W Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:47:22 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-6053 I read one of your posts where a reader asked about your workflow and you said 70% was now in Lightroom. I have PSE5 and have used your great book to finally get pretty handy in PSE. I also have several thousand images cataloged in PSE now. I really like the Organizer and could not imagine much better for what I do. But I am captivated by the new Lightroom interface. I have been reading the Adobe forums and see there is a way to import PSE catalogs into Lightroom. But are they similar in organization? And Adobe seems to have three different cataloging technologies right now (PSE, Bridge, Lightroom) - so which way are they headed and how do I preserve my current investment in tagging? Thanks for any direction/insight you might be able to post. -Ed I read one of your posts where a reader asked about your workflow and you said 70% was now in Lightroom. I have PSE5 and have used your great book to finally get pretty handy in PSE. I also have several thousand images cataloged in PSE now. I really like the Organizer and could not imagine much better for what I do. But I am captivated by the new Lightroom interface. I have been reading the Adobe forums and see there is a way to import PSE catalogs into Lightroom. But are they similar in organization? And Adobe seems to have three different cataloging technologies right now (PSE, Bridge, Lightroom) – so which way are they headed and how do I preserve my current investment in tagging? Thanks for any direction/insight you might be able to post.

-Ed

]]> By: Kevin http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-5553 Kevin Fri, 31 Aug 2007 20:09:03 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-5553 In addition to questions about whether Lightroom users need Photoshop, there's the question of whether PS Elements is "good enough." You can't answer that question, since everyone's needs are different, but I bet you can identify a half dozen realistic situations where you need one over the other, and readers can figure out if those situations apply to them. Put it together with some examples, and I bet it'll be one of the more popular entries here (especially since Adobe is currently offering special pricing on CS3 to PSE users, so it'll be a popular question for the next two weeks, which is when the deal runs out). Thanks! Kevin In addition to questions about whether Lightroom users need Photoshop, there’s the question of whether PS Elements is “good enough.” You can’t answer that question, since everyone’s needs are different, but I bet you can identify a half dozen realistic situations where you need one over the other, and readers can figure out if those situations apply to them. Put it together with some examples, and I bet it’ll be one of the more popular entries here (especially since Adobe is currently offering special pricing on CS3 to PSE users, so it’ll be a popular question for the next two weeks, which is when the deal runs out).

Thanks!

Kevin

]]> By: Dave http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-5454 Dave Fri, 31 Aug 2007 08:26:09 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-5454 Scott, Thanks for the details about your workflow. I like the idea of using LR for adjustments but am having some difficulty as follows. I currently use Lightroom 1.1 and CS2. I need to supply images to a library in RGB mode which I understand Lightroom doesn't use. The problem I am finding is that when I make adjustmenst in LR and get the histogram without any white or black clipping and then go into Photoshop CS2 - there is still some clipping evident in the images. I think this is due to the fact that the RGB 1998 colour space has less latitude than the LR RGB mode. So at the moment, my workflow is rather longer than I want it to be. Is there any way I can get around this? I would love to just work in LR alone were it possible. Thanks Dave Scott,

Thanks for the details about your workflow. I like the idea of using LR for adjustments but am having some difficulty as follows.

I currently use Lightroom 1.1 and CS2. I need to supply images to a library in RGB mode which I understand Lightroom doesn’t use. The problem I am finding is that when I make adjustmenst in LR and get the histogram without any white or black clipping and then go into Photoshop CS2 – there is still some clipping evident in the images.

I think this is due to the fact that the RGB 1998 colour space has less latitude than the LR RGB mode.

So at the moment, my workflow is rather longer than I want it to be. Is there any way I can get around this? I would love to just work in LR alone were it possible.

Thanks
Dave

]]> By: Jason http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-5205 Jason Wed, 29 Aug 2007 01:11:16 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-5205 Hey Scott, Thanks for the detailed answer on your workflow...quite thorough, and pretty much in keeping with what my guess was. As one who is working in many capacities (photographer, web designer, and graphics), I do find myself bouncing back and forth a lot depending on need. I do agree with what you're saying though on the place for Lightroom in the workflow - from a photography standpoint, it certainly does make things easier. I also think for default template web publishing it has its perks over CS2 (not had the $$$ to cough up for CS3 yet). I still have no idea how you stay on top of all the latest developments in the industry, and find the time to shoot, and find the time to teach, and find the time to attend Photoshop World, and find the time to...well, let's just say I am wondering where you find all the energy and time. I would imagine your days are long and nights are short... Anyway, thanks again for the info. Making a go myself at things with a rudimentary blog of sorts. Feel free to stop in and critique/comment as your feedback (or anyone's for that matter) would be most welcome. It's at www.canonblogger.com (I know....not the Nikonian you are...oh well! :) ) Hey Scott,

Thanks for the detailed answer on your workflow…quite thorough, and pretty much in keeping with what my guess was. As one who is working in many capacities (photographer, web designer, and graphics), I do find myself bouncing back and forth a lot depending on need. I do agree with what you’re saying though on the place for Lightroom in the workflow – from a photography standpoint, it certainly does make things easier. I also think for default template web publishing it has its perks over CS2 (not had the $$$ to cough up for CS3 yet). I still have no idea how you stay on top of all the latest developments in the industry, and find the time to shoot, and find the time to teach, and find the time to attend Photoshop World, and find the time to…well, let’s just say I am wondering where you find all the energy and time. I would imagine your days are long and nights are short…

Anyway, thanks again for the info. Making a go myself at things with a rudimentary blog of sorts. Feel free to stop in and critique/comment as your feedback (or anyone’s for that matter) would be most welcome. It’s at http://www.canonblogger.com (I know….not the Nikonian you are…oh well! :) )

]]> By: Mike Lao http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-5200 Mike Lao Tue, 28 Aug 2007 23:41:02 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-5200 Hey Scott, thanks for the post! I was actually confused when I read your cs3 book for digital photographers because you shared your workflow there and you were using Bridge but from your blogs and from your Lightroom book, you said most of your workflow is in Lightroom. :) I did adopt your workflow (in LR) so thanks a lot for that tip! Too bad, I'm not in Chicago for your LR tour. Maybe I can catch it next time. - Mike Hey Scott, thanks for the post! I was actually confused when I read your cs3 book for digital photographers because you shared your workflow there and you were using Bridge but from your blogs and from your Lightroom book, you said most of your workflow is in Lightroom. :) I did adopt your workflow (in LR) so thanks a lot for that tip!

Too bad, I’m not in Chicago for your LR tour. Maybe I can catch it next time.

- Mike

]]> By: Peter James Zielinski http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-5150 Peter James Zielinski Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:39:14 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-5150 Mike Early - Have you considered making a custom preset to export your images right into Photomatix Pro or Photoshop for HDR? Scott - Thank you so much for finally saying you hardly use Bridge as well! I'm a huge fan of all things NAPP...and no matter how many books I buy...how many hours of training I do on Lynda.com....everyone wants to start with a few chapters on Bridge. I wish someone would film your Lightroom Live seminar....I'd snatch that up in a second. Mike Early – Have you considered making a custom preset to export your images right into Photomatix Pro or Photoshop for HDR?

Scott – Thank you so much for finally saying you hardly use Bridge as well! I’m a huge fan of all things NAPP…and no matter how many books I buy…how many hours of training I do on Lynda.com….everyone wants to start with a few chapters on Bridge. I wish someone would film your Lightroom Live seminar….I’d snatch that up in a second.

]]> By: Mike Early http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-5149 Mike Early Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:11:14 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-5149 Scott, I still find myself using Bridge when I want to create a Pano from a sequence of images -- or an HDR image -- is there a way to do this from LR? Scott, I still find myself using Bridge when I want to create a Pano from a sequence of images — or an HDR image — is there a way to do this from LR?

]]> By: Mike Early http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-5148 Mike Early Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:10:01 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-5148 I still find myself going to Bridge to pull together those sequences for panos, to create HDR images, etc. since I can't figure out how to do that easily from LR (can it be done from LR?). I still find myself going to Bridge to pull together those sequences for panos, to create HDR images, etc. since I can’t figure out how to do that easily from LR (can it be done from LR?).

]]> By: Pat Flanakin http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-5145 Pat Flanakin Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:03:53 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-5145 Scott, Thanks for sharing your workflow. I have a question, please. Disregarding the speed of saving print formats in Lightroom for certain prints and perhaps other time saving features, as far as the quality of the print, do you believe the Lightroom produces a better print than Photoshop with basically the same settings? I am a bit concerned about not being able to actually see on screen the effect of "print sharpening" in Lightroom before printing and believe that unless you have already spent a few hours analyzing the effects of each level of print sharpening, you really are in a position to waste a lot of paper. In Photoshop, print sharpening is "real-time" and I don't have to wait to print the photo to see the effect. Would you mind sharing your thoughts on this? Thanks for any additional thoughts, Pat Scott,

Thanks for sharing your workflow. I have a question, please. Disregarding the speed of saving print formats in Lightroom for certain prints and perhaps other time saving features, as far as the quality of the print, do you believe the Lightroom produces a better print than Photoshop with basically the same settings? I am a bit concerned about not being able to actually see on screen the effect of “print sharpening” in Lightroom before printing and believe that unless you have already spent a few hours analyzing the effects of each level of print sharpening, you really are in a position to waste a lot of paper. In Photoshop, print sharpening is “real-time” and I don’t have to wait to print the photo to see the effect.

Would you mind sharing your thoughts on this?

Thanks for any additional thoughts,
Pat

]]> By: Scott http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479/comment-page-1#comment-5142 Scott Tue, 28 Aug 2007 13:25:37 +0000 http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2007/archives/479#comment-5142 Hi Chris: You're right---I'm a firm believer of "Get it right in the camera." I hate doing production work and fixing things I could fixed when I took the shot---I want to do fun things in Photoshop---not tedius photo fixing. :) As for how long I spend on the computer; I really enjoy the process of sorting the photo (Finding the keepers), and I only actually "Develop" the very shots from the shoot (which is usually a very small number of images), so I don't spend nearly as long as I used to behind a monitor, and that's mostly thanks to Lightroom (and I think less time in front of the monitor is actually a good thing). :) Thanks for asking. -Scott Hi Chris:
You’re right—I’m a firm believer of “Get it right in the camera.” I hate doing production work and fixing things I could fixed when I took the shot—I want to do fun things in Photoshop—not tedius photo fixing. :)

As for how long I spend on the computer; I really enjoy the process of sorting the photo (Finding the keepers), and I only actually “Develop” the very shots from the shoot (which is usually a very small number of images), so I don’t spend nearly as long as I used to behind a monitor, and that’s mostly thanks to Lightroom (and I think less time in front of the monitor is actually a good thing). :)

Thanks for asking.

-Scott

]]>