Digital BW, The Print

I can compare Lightroom with Photoshop CS2. Lightroom has a much 
better color mixer functionality than CS2" 6 or 8 channels versus 
only 3. Plus Lightroom has a nice interactive color pick function. 
On the downside: LR adjustments apply always on the entie image. So 
no burning, dodging,local curves and all the neat tricks PS has to 
offer. So in the end I always prefer PS.

From what I hear is that Photoshop CS3 has a similar color mixer as 
Lightroom, so will combine the best of both worlds.

In the end, the two are very different tools, Lightroom a very good 
photomanager package + raw convertor, with very decent image 
adjustment functions. Photoshop remains the gold standard for image 
manipulation. I'm happily combining the two in tandem: it's so easy 
to launch PS from Lightroom..

Joost
  

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Kip Babington 
<cbabing3@...> wrote:
>
> I used the LR beta version for several months and generally liked 
the 
> way I could get BW images, and I started to get used to the 
interface.  
> But I didn't go with the production version when it became 
available 
> because (1)  I already had a system in place for image management 
and 
> especially for "contact print" production (IMatch) that I didn't 
want to 
> give up for a new database system, (2) I often use some of the PS 
tools 
> (healing brush, paintbrush, clone tool, etc.) that weren't 
available in 
> LR and I didn't want to have to switch out to PS to use them, and 
(3) I 
> had used Convert B&W Pro (a third-party PS plug-in) from my 
(digital) 
> beginning to do B&W conversions and was just more comfortable with 
its 
> film/darkroom-like controls.
> 
> If I were starting from scratch I probably would have considered 
VERY 
> seriously going with LR and would have been happy with what I 
didn't 
> know, but with my history it just wasn't worth it.  To me.  YMMV.
> 
> Cheers,
> Kip
> 
> nsams2002 wrote:
> >
> > How's Lightroom working out for black/white conversion for those 
using
> > it? Thanks.
> >
> > Norm
> >
> >
> >  
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>