[HypnoLobster]

I just bought and downloaded this last night ($200). I was pretty unimpressed for about 4 hours, then I started delving through the tutorials and such.

Wow is this impressive. I've been a film guy and I just recently got into DSLR's. It's like photoshop except it's beautifully streamlined and chock full of little features that make editing so amazingly easy and smooth.

If you're into digital, get this. It is very worth it.

 

[Mrvile]

I use Photoshop for a vast majority of my visual stuff, including both photography and digital painting, but I find the features a bit clunky sometimes for quick photo processing...I might give this a try, it was featured in the latest Popular Photography.

 

[beerguy0]

I've been using the beta version for a while, and really like it a lot. The B&W conversion tool is especially nice, and the Tone Curve tool finally makes Curves a little more friendly. It's a bit hard to get used to having to import an image just so you can work on it, but eventually it pays off in that your photos are more organized.

I've used PS since version 4, and I think Lightroom is really what digital photographers have needed for a while now.

 

[Dimitris]

I tried it but it seems a bit heavy for my system. I think I am running out of memory (256mb).

 

[Dimitris]

Its funny how Adobe bought Pixmantec with free Raw Shooters and now they offer a fancier version of it charging $300 eventually.

 

[PiccoloNamek]

It won't even run on Windows 2000! Phooey!

Anyway, I won't be giving up Photoshop any time soon, I do far too much layer-intensive editing.

 

[blessingx]

Yeah I've been eyeing the Lightroom v. Aperture reviews trying to figure out which to get. Will likely pull the trigger soon now that both are out, but haven't made up my mind yet.

Here's a nice Ars review for anyone who hasn't looked into Lightroom.

 

[HypnoLobster]

Yep..

I'm hoping that it will eventually get the only other things I could use.. the lasso and layers. Despite lacking those two wonderful tools.. I still love this program. It is definetly a system hog. I have 2gb of memory, 3700+ and a 6800GS video card and it's a little choppy from time to time here, too.

 

[socrates63]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yeah I've been eyeing the Lightroom v. Aperture reviews trying to figure out which to get. Will likely pull the trigger soon now that both are out, but haven't made up my mind yet. Here's a nice Ars review for anyone who hasn't looked into Lightroom.

When you do decide, can you post about your choice? Which one and why etc.

 

[blessingx]

Will do. Over the course of the next few days, both these guys will be comparing also. May be worth following.

 

[mateo05]

I've tried out the betas, and I just got a free copy since I used to have Rawshooter, but I haven't tried out the final release yet. That said, although it looks promising, it's far too bloated and uncustomizeable (is that a word? lol), and the crop tool felt really weird. I don't remember much else.

I recommend you also try Bibble. I've tried most everything and found it to be the best, and I have ~65k shutter actuations under my belt

Oh, BTW, I only use Bibble for RAW, and I do all the tagging/sorting/captioning/photo management stuff in Breezebrowser. Yeah, its two programs, but it's by far the speediest way to do things IMHO.

 

[davidd]

I've played with the trials of both Lightroom and Aperture and so far I like Lightroom more, mainly because the interface is more appealing to me and performance is better on my MacBook (2GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM), and it's cheaper as well which is always a plus.

 

[blessingx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidd /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...performance is better on my MacBook (2GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM)...

Thanks for the info. This is my machine also, so I find your experience very useful.