Lightroom 1.2

**Ogofmole** · #1 (**permalink**) 13-11-2007, 06:11 PM

I have been offered a version of Lightroom 1.2, but before installing, I wondered if it does anything different from CS2 which I already have installed. as I don't want to load software that I would not use.

**Alistair** · #2 (**permalink**) 13-11-2007, 07:47 PM

Oh yes ......... Lightroom is basically a database program that stores thumbnails of all your images and applies non destructive ‘changes’ to them. It works a lot like ACR in the changes it can make, however you can store key words with the images for sorting and finding images.

Lightroom will let you take an image from developing all the way to final print with out the need to go to CS 2 unless you need to to do selective editing. The main downside of LR is that you can not do soft proofing, look out for v1.3

Alistair

Spooks · #3 (**permalink**) 13-11-2007, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alistair

The main downside of LR is that you can not do soft proofing, look out for v1.3

Alistair

What is this then, mate?

Got to agree that LR is totally separate from PS and gives some cracking results. Personally, I am still learning it, so any more info would be great!

**Alistair** · #4 (**permalink**) 14-11-2007, 09:50 AM

Hi

What is soft proofing? Well it’s a long full article to explain, to much for here and now but I’ll try and be brief.

I feel that a photographer has two main post processing aims, the first is to bring out the details of the image as it was in their minds eye at the time they pushed the shutter, the second is to get this exact image to the out put device of choice as it looks on screen and there for as it was imagined when taking. Soft proofing which was introduced in v6 deals with the second.

In basic terms it simulates on screen how the printed image will look when printed with a particular printer/ink set on a particular paper. That in a nut shell is that. In practice it’s not quite as simple to use, you’ll need a fully calibrated workflow from monitor to printer including custom icc profiles.

With all in place, if you know your out put medium, then I find it best to work on the image in soft proof mode from the start.

I hope that gives you an idea of soft proofing, but is not, a good article can be found here

Alistair

**Ogofmole** · #5 (**permalink**) 14-11-2007, 06:22 PM

Hi Alistair,

Cheers for that, but as I do not do any of my own printing (all done on-line) I don't think that I will need version 1.3. I have now got the 1.2 version and loaded it, just playing at the moment, but I do like the web-gallery bit, I will probably use this to update my own site with.

Tautriadelta · #6 (**permalink**) 18-11-2007, 08:59 AM

Like Barry I do not do my own printing but it's not for the want of trying. I have an Epson RX500 and have never managed to get an acceptable print from it, let alone one that I could feel proud of. It is hard to imagine that you could get such bad quality prints even if you were doing it deliberately. Mine come out looking like they were shot at twilight, dark and lacking in colour. It is either because of some silly fundamental error on my part or a fault with the printer. I'm confident I've calibrated the monitor correctly and I use Photoshop CS1 for editing.
I know it would take a tome to explain the workflow process fully, but can anyone give me some hints, bullet points, or direct me to a book or website that might give me the help I need and explained in plain English?

**Alistair** · #7 (**permalink**) 18-11-2007, 09:20 AM

From camera to print is the most comprehensive guide I’ve seen. It involves not only an investment in time, but also in equiptment and is aimed at the more experienced user who is working in a colour corrected workflow. After saying that the explanations are in plain English and it goes to shedding some of the mystic that surrounds printing.

**Ogofmole** · #8 (**permalink**) 18-11-2007, 10:01 AM

Hi Dick, Many years ago I wasted so much money on printers, paper and ink and like you never got a print that I was really happy with, so from there (before broadband) I would put images on cd and send away for printing, but now with broadband and very competitive prices I use and recommend Photobox, I upload them and they are genially on my doorstep the following morning (excellent service).

OK, I agree that it would be very nice to print my own pictures, especially after going to all the trouble of taking and editing them as required, and I do know a few people who do this and produce some very nice prints. But for whatever reason it does not seem to work for me.

PAVMAN · #9 (**permalink**) 18-11-2007, 02:17 PM

Barry I support you comments ref Photobox excellent service and good quality prints at very very competitive rates
Cheers Peter

Tautriadelta · #10 (**permalink**) 18-11-2007, 06:43 PM

Thank you all for your swift responses and advice. I might take up Alistair's suggestion as I do hunger for the satisfaction of carrying out the whole process myself. However, if that fails and I do want to see how good my shots could look, Photobox sounds like a good bet. Cheers fellas.