Upgrade CS6 question

Started Dec 3, 2012 | Discussions thread
MikeFromMesa
Senior MemberPosts: 2,849
Like?
Re: Upgrade CS6 question
In reply to MichaelRose, Dec 7, 2012

MichaelRose wrote:

MikeFromMesa wrote:

MichaelRose wrote:

Since you already have Lightroom 4 (LR) (Your should be on 4.3 RC 858820) going to CS6 (PS) and ACR 7.3 would give you complete integration in your workflow.
Like when you need to send a RAW file to CS6 for extra processing and then have it return to LR as a *.psd.
The Lightroom 4.3 RC Develop Module is/uses ACR 7.3 as is compatible with CS6.

1) I thought LR always used TIFFs when calling a defined extenal editor.
1a) Are you saying that LR4 will use RAW images if a call is made to CS6?
Then how can it include any changes made in LR before the call? Surely it does not try to mimic all of the available raw formats, does it? Or perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying?

2) A second question - how does the ACR in CS6 compare to the (internal) ACR for LR4? Are they the same? Or is one better or more flexible than the others? And, if so, which one?

I had not thought to upgrade from CS5 to CS6 because I use PS so rarely. LR serves for about 98% of my processing and I only need PS for those kind of things that cannot be done in LR - layers, image distortion and other rarely used functionality. I had planned to continue to use CS5 for that but, if CS6 is that much better than CS5, perhaps I should reconsider ...

1) Your can set LR to create either a PSD or TIFF file when you send a RAW image to PS.

To me a PSD makes more sense than creating a L A R G E TIFF file.

A PSD file is a loss-less, editable format that you can retain complicated settings in, if necessary, for later modification.

1a) LR will use your RAW image file and if any changes have been made to it LR creates a sidecar file (filename.xmp) containing those changes that are then read by the ACR plugin in PS.

2) The ACR Module in LR uses the same ACR plugin that PS uses— they are the same except:

  1. The background colors are different (can't be changed in PS)
  2. They have the same controls, but they are llaidout differently and are
    much harder to use in ACR within PS
  3. LR has an actual History for Undos like PS—
    ACR within PS only has multiple Cmd/Ctrl-Z Undos!
  4. Not to name drop, but Scott Kelby at his November 15th Seminar I attended in Washington, DC said that LR was so much easier to use than ACR within PS that he now does most of his processing LR— and he uses PS less and less...

3) If you don't upgrade to CS6 you'll be limited to the ACR version 6.7 plugin in PS5.

HTH

Thank you for the reply.

1) I assume I misread your original post. You wrote "when you need to send a RAW file to CS6 for extra processing" and I thought you were saying that you could actually send the original raw file from LR (in my case, a CR2 file) to CS but I understand now that you meant that to mean "when you need to send a file to CS6 that was originally a raw file in LR" or something like that. As I said, I just misread your intent with that sentence.

2) I guess I did know that you could use a psd instead of a tiff but I never saw the reason to set it up like that. Tiff is also loss-less and, it has always seemed to me, the significant difference in a PS psd file is that it retains all of the current PS information. If I am using layers I can save the layers. If I have set up masks on the layers I can save those. I can then restore my exact process state when I reload them back into PS. But, if I am using LR and if I am going to lose all of that information when the file comes back into LR, what is the purpose? So I always use TIFF as it is much smaller. When I am working with an image in PS and want to get back to its current state I use psd. Otherwise TIFF.

3) I am no expert when it comes to photo processing but I would have said that LR was much easier to use than PS, at least for me, and that is the reason I do very little in PS. I use it only when I have to.

4) I use PS so rarely (probably 98% of my processing is done in LR or PhotoNinja which is also very nice) that I had not thought that the cost of upgrading was worth it. I do understand that CS5 is limited to the older ACR version, but is that version significantly worse than the newer one? I don't know and perhaps ACR 7+ is much better than ACR 6+ but, given how little I use CS5, I have not seen a difference. Perhaps you can tell me (that is an honest question) - is the new ACR significantly better than the old?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow