# Decision time - Lightroom and Photoshop



## Chris Wimlett (Dec 16, 2018)

I've been running Classic and CC in parallel for a month or two, and think it's time to come down on one side or the other (I'm getting too confused!).  I work mosly on a laptop, so prefer not to  have the external hard drive that holds my photo library connected unless I need to bring everything into sync.

In Classic, for images I want to edit in Photoshop,  I open the images in PS after I've carried out raw conversion, applied profiles, adjusted exposure adjustment, sharpening, etc. then return to Classic.  

 In LR CC, I've found a good workflow is to do the same adjustments as in Classic, but then to download the Original + Settings to my local drive.  I then open the images in PS, using _Browse in Bridge _and making any final adjustments in ACR.  I often use multiple images in PS and am not too worried about returning the edited images to LR.   Printing, exporting to JPEG, is all done in Photoshop. 

Apart from the added cost of the 1GB photography plan and the more limited cataloguing in CC (which I can live with), I can't see any downsides to the LR CC route - can anybody think of anything I'd be missing if I moved away from Classic?

Chris


----------



## rhynetc (Dec 17, 2018)

Hope there are responses to this inquiry because I'm on the same knife edge.  For example, I continue to worry about not being able to print from Lr CC.


----------



## Chris Wimlett (Dec 17, 2018)

Printing is not a problem if you finish off in Photoshop, but it would be good to know if it will be added to LR CC at some point.  The irony is that if you have the photography plan you get two great options for printing (Classic or PS), whereas with the Lightroom CC plan you get none.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Dec 17, 2018)

Chris Wimlett said:


> Apart from the added cost of the 1GB photography plan and the more limited cataloguing in CC (which I can live with), I can't see any downsides to the LR CC route - can anybody think of anything I'd be missing if I moved away from Classic?



It sounds like you've thought it through well, and found good solutions for the limitations that affect you.



rhynetc said:


> Hope there are responses to this inquiry because I'm on the same knife edge.  For example, I continue to worry about not being able to print from Lr CC.



Tom, have you thought about which features you'd miss, other than printing? There's a general comparison here that might help: Lightroom CC vs. Lightroom Classic - Which Do I Need? | The Lightroom Queen


----------



## johnbeardy (Dec 17, 2018)

Chris, have you thought about how you will deal with LRCC's lack of a trash feature? For example, let's say you delete a file in LRCC but then decide you want it back. Have you thought about how you would do so?

John


----------



## rhynetc (Dec 17, 2018)

[QUOTE/]Tom, have you thought about which features you'd miss, other than printing? There's a general comparison here that might help: Lightroom CC vs. Lightroom Classic - Which Do I Need? | The Lightroom Queen[/QUOTE]
Thanks, Victoria.  I would also miss editing in Nik plugins, btw.


----------



## rhynetc (Dec 17, 2018)

I apologize for hijacking.


----------



## MarkNicholas (Dec 18, 2018)

The problem with LR Classic, LR CC and Photoshop is that they are all sufficiently different and do such different things in such different ways that it is almost impossible to decide one over another. Its a bit like limiting your tool box to either a screw driver, a hammer or a hacksaw but not all 3.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (Dec 18, 2018)

rhynetc said:


> Thanks, Victoria.  I would also miss editing in Nik plugins, btw.


If you have Photoshop, they can easily be accessed through Photoshop. Or Save To > JPEG and then open in Nik would work too.


----------



## Chris Wimlett (Dec 18, 2018)

Victoria Bampton said:


> It sounds like you've thought it through well, and found good solutions for the limitations that affect you.



Thanks Victoria, it's good to get a 'sanity' check.  What I forgot to say is that I do prefer the new LR CC interface and it's definitely snappier on my PC.



johnbeardy said:


> Chris, have you thought about how you will deal with LRCC's lack of a trash feature? For example, let's say you delete a file in LRCC but then decide you want it back. Have you thought about how you would do so?



For the moment I've decided to continue importing into Classic and use this as an archive of untouched images (apart from total disasters).  I then import the same images into LR CC and can be much more ruthless about what to delete.  I rarely take more than 50 pictures in a shoot and so far this is manageable.



rhynetc said:


> I apologize for hijacking.



Joining a discussion, isn't highjacking 



MarkNicholas said:


> Its a bit like limiting your tool box to either a screw driver, a hammer or a hacksaw but not all 3.



I think this is what led me to  realise that for images I want to process in Photoshop, it's easier to download them once I've done all I want in Lightroom.  (If I just want to print or export in a particular format, I use Edit in Photoshop from LR).

Reading through the above it looks like I've come down on the side of LR CC, so thanks for all the comments!

Chris


----------



## rhynetc (Dec 18, 2018)

Chris,
If I understand your workflow, I believe you import everything into Classic but don't do any (or much) editing there.  You then import "good" images into Lr CC and process them using the Lr CC software, then export to Photoshop for printing.  Do you sync only those images with Classic?

Do I understand you correctly?


----------



## Chris Wimlett (Dec 18, 2018)

rhynetc said:


> Chris,
> If I understand your workflow, I believe you import everything into Classic but don't do any (or much) editing there.  You then import "good" images into Lr CC and process them using the Lr CC software, then export to Photoshop for printing.  Do you sync only those images with Classic?
> 
> Do I understand you correctly?



That's pretty much correct, except that I don't sync anything with Classic -  I  just use it to import images, delete the really bad ones, but do no other editing. In LR CC, I cull more ruthlessly, do metadata changes, raw development, etc.  Anything I just want to print or export, I edit in Photoshop from within LR CC but don't bother to save the resulting TIFF.  If I want to take things further in PS (probably for only a few percent of my images), I save Original + Settings to my local drive.

It's still a bit experimental, but is working well so far and is less complicated than it sounds.  The big advantage is being able to download raw images from the cloud for Photoshop, but being able to open Photoshop open without LR saves over 1 GB of memory as an added bonus.


----------



## rhynetc (Dec 18, 2018)

Thanks, Chris.


----------

