On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 9:27 AM, steve harley <p...@paper-ape.com> wrote: > ... i think it would be great (and would induce me to switch from Aperture) if > Adobe would integrate PS with LR's non-destructive paradigm, such that > anything done in PS could be considered part of the non-destructive edit > trail and the image could continue to be managed in LR ...
You can actually use Photoshop to edit in a non-destructive manner by using layers skillfully. However, it tend to make the .PSD files very large and performance begins to bog down when you go past a certain point. Scott Kelby had some interesting things to say about non-destructive editing in an interview, I think on The Candid Frame podcast (not sure). He feels as I do that the value has been a bit over-hyped ... just like the dictum for obsessive keywording, etc. Both have their value, but not every photograph needs to be able to be re-edited from scratch forever, and not every photograph needs forty keywords applied. Yes, Lightroom (and Aperture) makes the management of the flood of photographs coming out of digital capture doable in a way that no pixel editor like Photoshop ever can. That is the purpose of these applications. However, I use LR even if I import one negative scan into a new catalog because I prefer its tools and UI for image adjustment. And, of course, I can always continue to use LR to manage my photos even if I take the photo into Photoshop for deep pixel bashing. LR just keeps things nicely organized in a way that makes sense for me. -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
