Chucktin

[ChuckTin]

I've spent a lifetime in and around photo and I'm aiming to retire this year. I've worked PS since version 3 and LR, off and on, since it's beginning.
I use LR but do not like LR. To me its interface is clumsy, cluttered and non-intuitive. I much prefer working directly in PS, I'm accustomed to it and know where the tools I need are.
That being said, LR lives on my laptop for use on trips and when I am too lazy to crank-up my desktop. Lazy, that's me.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[Gnits]

Many people are the opposite, who find PS interface to be impossible to grasp and find Lr to be intuitive (once concept of the Catalog is mastered). In my view the combination of both provides an optimum workflow. having said that, there are lots of areas where both apps could be improved, as always.

 

[clee01l]

I agree with "Gnits". My first version of PS was from CS2. I found it convoluted and not intuitive. It was too complex an app for some one just starting PS. PSP (as originally developed by JASC) was a simpler interface that (for JPEGs) did all of the same basic tasks as PS.
I started with a trial of LR1, approaching it is another image editor instead of a true data manager. I gave up and went back to PSP. Once I realized the necessity for an image data manager, I searched around looking at various Windows tools When I switched to RAW, I started using BibblePro while I searched around for a workable DAM tool. This caused me to revisit LR (now at a more robust v2.4) This time I was more comfortable with the paradigm shift in workflow and the inclusion of Parameter Image Editing (PIE) and ACR helped me realize that in one tool I had both a good DAM tool and a versatile RAW processing engine that could handle 97% of my image processing requirements without the need for PS or PSP.
When I got my first Photographer's bundle, I revisited PS to find the two or three features not included in LR were more comfortable to manage and that the ACR interface in LR was better than the ACR interface in PS.

 

[Victoria Bampton]

Hi ChuckTin, welcome to the forum!

I think it's just a question of familiarity. I felt the same initially, but now I'm comfortable in both.

 

[oleleclos]

I think it's just a question of familiarity.

I agree. I used PS a lot years ago, and it wasn't the interface I disliked; it was the fact that PS makes irreversable changes to the picture. Non-destructive editing was the reason I changed to Lr, and it did take a little while getting my head round it. Particularly the way it manages files, but once understood, that's almost as big a reason for using Lr as the way it does its editing.

 

[Ian.B]

"familiarity" is the word. If you have PS and PS works for you then keep using PS ChuckTin
I think we all battled moving from PS or adding LR to our work flow. like anything new and different it can rather frustrating and the only way I could do it was to work only in LR until I had a usable understanding of it.