Since Lightroom is so good, what do you use Photoshop for?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
soloryb
Senior MemberPosts: 1,163Gear list
Like?
Re: Since Lightroom is so good, what do you use Photoshop for?
In reply to Glen Barrington, 4 months ago

Glen Barrington wrote:

soloryb wrote:

Ron AKA wrote:

soloryb wrote:

Robgo2 wrote:

soloryb wrote:

Actually, if you work in layers, never altering the background layer, Photoshop is non-destructive as well. Files are much larger, but that is another issue.

If you flatten the layers before printing you can do some pixel destruction. Wouldn't that result in a reduction in print quality if there were many layers involved?

Firstly, you should always make a duplicate image for printing, leaving the master copy intact. Secondly, I am not aware that flattening the print file causes any degradation of print quality, even though pixels are altered permanently. Finally, are we sure that Lightroom does not create a hidden converted file as part of the printing process? If so, that would involve altering pixels.

Rob

I'm fairly certain that any edits that PS does to an image causes some image degradation as it alters the actual pixels. Flattening just consolidates all those edits, which means that the image pixels have been altered and therefore degraded. I've read (and also always followed this practice) that you should flatten all your layers before sending the image to the printer. That means that after editing in PS and then printing, you are working with a slightly degraded image. The greater the number of edits, the more this is true. I really don't know at what point this makes a difference in the final print.

I know that LR printing involves a complex interpolation algorithm, but this is the first time I've heard anybody say that it might alter pixels during this process and then affect the quality of the final output. One of the biggest selling points for LR is that it never alters pixels like PS can. Could you please say where you got this information?

I'm sure Lr is making a temporary print file as I am not aware of any printer accepting a RAW file for printing. I think the point of "non-destructive" editing is being lost in the discussion. The benefit is being able to go backwards to the original file. I don't believe the benefit is better quality when you finally make a print, as you will convert to a JPEG or TIFF to print at the end of the day anyway.

I don't know what LR is doing after you press the print button. There are no indications that such a temporary intermediate tiff or jpeg is being created - just to interface with the printer. You're left with the original RAW at the end. Somehow I doubt that if there is such a phantom file being created, it's a jpeg.

Could anyone who knows what sort of information LR is sending to the printer please climb in here? I've always assumed it was dealing with the print engine directly from the RAW data of the image.

soloryb

No print utility can access raw data directly, it might be good to remind ourselves how a raw file interacts with the raw developer:

http://glenbarrington.blogspot.com/2014/04/how-raw-works_11.html

-- hide signature --

Thanks for the link to your article, it explains things well. I specifically want to know whether or not LR actually creates an intermediate temporary tiff or jpeg or any other file when you send an image to the printer or any other output. My understanding was that this is not so.

soloryb

 soloryb's gear list:soloryb's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Fisheye-Nikkor 16mm f/2.8D +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow