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

Started Apr 25, 2014 | Discussions thread
Ron AKA Veteran Member • Posts: 4,875
Re: Since Lightroom is so good, what do you use Photoshop for?

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.


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.

 Ron AKA's gear list:Ron AKA's gear list
Sony RX100 Epson Stylus Photo R3000 +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow