Are You a convert to Elements?

[russellsnr]

Hi, I no it may seem a strange road to go down but I use CS 4 and it is now getting on a bit, to be honest I do not use and never have used half of it's capacity there seems so much you can do that it gets confusing when all you want to do is manipulate a photograph/s.
I have L/R4 and am considering un-installing CS 4 and going to PSE 10 (for the price it seems like a bargain, and we all love those)
So to the question. Has anybody else gone down this road and for those who already use elements what are your thoughts on (A) The program and (B) the content aware feature in PSE 10? (Like the look of that)
I no that a lot of third party software will not work with elements but again that is not really a problem as many like OnOne software, HDR software work as stand alones.

Many Thanks for any and all input.
Russ

[Colin Southern]

Hi Russell,

I have to admit to being a bit surprised and puzzled; Photoshop has a lot more tools than PSE, but you don't have to use them. What is it that you're finding you're having trouble with?

Personally, I get my images to the 80% mark in ACR (which for all intents and purposes is the same in PSE) - leaving (most of the time) fairly simple and straight-forward things in Photoshop (sharpening, blemish removal etc).

[russellsnr]

Hi Russell,

I have to admit to being a bit surprised and puzzled; Photoshop has a lot more tools than PSE, but you don't have to use them. What is it that you're finding you're having trouble with?

Personally, I get my images to the 80% mark in ACR (which for all intents and purposes is the same in PSE) - leaving (most of the time) fairly simple and straight-forward things in Photoshop (sharpening, blemish removal etc).

Hi, Colin and thanks for the quick reply.
I believe my biggest problem is my location (sounds funny that doesn't it?)
I am from the UK but live in Greece (Rhodes Island) and here there is no one who seems to be into photography in an enthusiastic way, in the UK as in the USA etc etc there are camera clubs where you can find out or have hands on with someone who knows what a program like photoshop can do, here I have to try and teach myself (not to far from 60) and that along with wanting to do what photography is all about "be out taking photographs and not sitting trying to learn a program that to be honest seems over my head" makes me think that the cut down version (Elements) maybe a better option. I understand what you say that CS Photoshop is far more loaded with features than Elements will ever be but as I said in the OP I have never used used those hidden features and feel I probably never will.
Again Thank you for the reply.
Russ

[Inkanyezi]

It might seem strange as a question, but I have been there, done that. OTOH my first Photoshop version was Photoshop 4, which did not have at least one feature that seemed to be available in Elements at the time I got the program, which was about to be replaced by the next version, and thus sold at a bargain price. From there, I have got sick and tired of proprietary operating systems and won't ever go back there again, so I now use programs as UFRaw and Gimp instead. It's really not about the features, and there are scores of tools in Gimp that I might never use, just as there were in the other programs. I am also on my 67:th year, and I don't think age is an impediment to learning new stuff, as there is hardly a day in my life that I don't learn anything.

So which program to use is mostly a matter of preferences. I agree that Photoshop is more user friendly in some respects than Gimp, but I was really disappointed with the version of Elements that I got, and I don't intend to upgrade. It had two enormous warts that I didn't want to live with. The first was its unfriendly management tool, Organizer, that once gleefully erased all images from one of my memory cards, without storing them in the right place on the hard drive. The program could not be disabled, so in order to eliminate it, I first had to find out which component caused the annoyance, then erase it, as there was no means of disabling it. The other misfeature is the white balance tool that must have been added 1:st of April. So for white balancing a jpeg by eyedropper, I use a raw converter that can open jpegs, which works better and is simpler than any Photoshop version I tried. I won't ask Adobe to FMH by upgrading, even if they later have added a working white balance tool. It's not that I couldn't learn a new program, but I have found a workflow that works and see no reason to mend something that is not broken.

And I think that last sentence is what governs eventual down- or upgrading. If you find that Elements works better for you, then maybe it is preferable over the other program that you might not like so much. It may also be a matter of budget. Upgrading expensive programs might not be an option for someone, while for another it's peanuts and no turnoff. I once paid for Elements, but it had serious flaws, which did not get fixed as they should by patching, but one of them was fixed by "upgrade", charging once again for what should have been made right from the beginning. I don't like the idea to pay more for what you already should have had. That is one of the reasons why I prefer free software. I paid licenses till getting tired of it. Microsoft and other proprietary software is out of here, I don't want it any more.

But if you prefer Elements, go for it. It's a good package nowadays, even if I don't like it. It is superficially a bit more user friendly than some other programs, part of it because it is crippled, part because of good design. There are many alternatives, but we tend to use what suits us best. For you, it might be Elements.

[Colin Southern]

Hi, Colin and thanks for the quick reply.
I believe my biggest problem is my location (sounds funny that doesn't it?)
I am from the UK but live in Greece (Rhodes Island) and here there is no one who seems to be into photography in an enthusiastic way, in the UK as in the USA etc etc there are camera clubs where you can find out or have hands on with someone who knows what a program like photoshop can do, here I have to try and teach myself (not to far from 60) and that along with wanting to do what photography is all about "be out taking photographs and not sitting trying to learn a program that to be honest seems over my head" makes me think that the cut down version (Elements) maybe a better option. I understand what you say that CS Photoshop is far more loaded with features than Elements will ever be but as I said in the OP I have never used used those hidden features and feel I probably never will.
Again Thank you for the reply.
Russ

Hi Russ,

I'm in my 50's too - and like you, don't have many local photographers that I have a lot of interaction with. But I think my first thought was "so what"; personally I find it easiest to just invest in a little training - be it via books - videos - or even CiC.

In my opinion, Photoshop is just a big toolbox ... we can use as many or as few of the tools as we want. May I suggest just asking us wbout the things you're having trouble getting to grips with, and see if we can help? Sure, one can get into the complexities of layers - paths - selections etc, but it can also be as simple as Ctrl + L to adjust levels, or Ctrl + U to adjust saturation, or Ctrl + B to adjust the colour balance of an image. It doesn't have to be hard.

[jprzybyla]

Hi Russel, first let me say I have you by a few years...69 this month. I was a serious amateur photographer in the days of film and transparencies, when Nikon's F3 was top of the line. Then I migrated to golf and photography took a back seat. Recently, as of last October I bought my first DSLR and since then it is photography, photography, photography. I use Adobe Lightroom 4and Photoshop Elements 10 for post processing. In the beginning I only used Photoshop Elements 8 (it came installed on my laptop) and then upgraded to PSE10 for the content aware healing tool and also layer masks. I use Lightroom 4 for developing raw files and organizing my images (the best organizer as far as I am concerned). As Urban said...the Photoshop Elements Organizer is terrible. I have PSE10 set up so it boots directly into the Editor, I never see the Organizer and have it set to never search for photographs so it is not a problem. Most time I do not use PSE10 doing all the post processing in Lightroom. Right now there are excellents websites with tutorials on Lightroom (that is how I learned) and also videos on YouTube. I believe for someone like Colin the full blown Photoshop is necessary. He is a professional...I am not, being retired and enjoying photography as a serious hobby. I like to keep things simple. I found Lightroom 4 and PSE10 easy to get up to speed with, but then each day I learn something I can do with them that I did not know the day before. I would say that imagination is the limit. This version of Lightroom is half the cost of the previous version and with the addition of PSE10 is relatively inexpensive way to have powerful tools for post processing. Urban said that JPEG's could not be opened in PSE's Raw Converter, that is not correct. They can be by going to the File Menu...select Open As, and once the image is selected at the bottom where file types is seleceted choose Camera Raw for the JPEG. The Raw Converter will open and the tools in the Raw Converter are available for JPEG's. I only covert to JPEG for posting in the forum, my website or email otherwise I use Adobe's DNG and TIFF. I hope this helps you, it worked for me.

[kdoc856]

Just to ditto everything Joe just said. I initially did all my organizing and editing with PSE, but then got turned onto Lightroom, and have used 3 and 4. I think LR4 and PSE 10 are a great combination for a non-pro, beginner to advanced. These will amost never hold you back. Since I've started using Lightroom, my computer time is significantly reduced as so much can be done there, and it is not infrequent that an image never needs PSE10.

[Andrew1]

Another vote for some of what Joe said. Why pay for the designer/publisher version you will never use? I'm not a professional shooting a zillion photos so don't need the organizational structure Lightroom was created for. I can find them easily myself. Elements was created with the "elements" of the CS that photographers needed and has been supplemented with other actions CS does not. I can't comment on the organization problems others listed because I just use a simple folders structure. Elements will do some of the normally listed differences to CS, just not by the same name or actions. Check out a Photoshop vs Elements search on the web.

There are two things I have found I wished Elements did better. The first is Curves. I saw a demo on what Curves can do and thought it was something worth upgrading for. I then found a program called Elements+ which is a great add-on that unlocks the existing Curves information within the Elements program. All is good.

The second shortcoming of Elements is the watered down version of Adobe Camera RAW. Most of the benefits I see quoted regarding photographers work in Lightroom is not "Lightroom" per se, but is actually in the full ACR piece. I would like a couple of the additional options in the full package. Having Elements means I just make the adjustments following a different route.

Why not put it to the test? Download the free trial of Elements. See for yourself what it can do and if it fills your needs. Hope this helps a bit.

[russellsnr]

Hi, OK many thanks for all the input, thinking now as I have L/R4 and PS CS4, elements would be a bit of a waste of money.
As I said in my OP it's photography I am interested in and suppose should not get to embroiled in the post processing part of it.
As some of you have pointed out I am not the oldest kid on the block and you are never to old to learn.
Books I have on PS & L/R, all I need is something between the ears to stop the info going right through
Again many thanks for the input.
Russ

[herbert]

I think Elements is still limited to 8-bit processing. If you are pushing your images around a bit then it will make a difference if you can use 16-bit instead as in Photoshop CS.

If you do most of your work in the raw file then this is still 16-bit. However the raw functionality of Elements is limited to tone adjustments and sharpening. I think the perspective correction, vignetting tools, split toning, colour blending sliders, and camera calibration are not there. If you value these things then Lightroom is the cheapest way to get them.

The way to know if you like Photoshop CS or Elements is to try them on the 30-day free trial. Make sure you read about all the features and try them out. If you cannot find a way to put them into your workflow then do not buy them.

Alex

[arith]

I use PSE10 and with plugins can do everything16 bit bar creative stuff using layers and masks.

[enaiman]

Until recently I thought PSE 9 was good but now I've got CS 5.5 and I'll never look back.
My very big surprise comes from ACR. Surprisingly, I can see now more options which didn't exist before: the 3 tabs are now about 8- 9, lens correction is there, curves and other useful stuff and I love that.
In CS, layer adjustments are "made easy", HDR pro is included and some other stuff I've only read about.

It will take a bit to get used with but I am happy

[cliveanne]

I don't know if I am a convert as yet. I have recently purchased Elements 10. Having worked with PaintShopPro 6,7 & 10 also Serif Photoplus 10 all old hat now. I find the learning curve steeper with PSE10 than the others mentioned. I also find that the organiser a bit daunting. I like the slideshows I can make, I'm used to Photo Story 3 for windows, but the mouse sticks on that program (I have Widows 7, P'Story 3 is running as XP service pack 3)
So far I have no complaints

[Karl]

I have only ever used PSE - started with 7 and now have 9. For me Elements does everything I want and need and doesn't cost an arm or a leg. I am not interested in al the stuff that comes with CS4 or 5 or whatever. If you could just get PS as a stand alone without all of the other parts of CS then I might consider it - but for what I do Elements is good and for me the less time behind a computer the better - I have a 10 minute rule "if I can't get the shot to a good standard in 10 mins I delete it".

But it is each to their own.

Karl

[DanK]

I went through this too. I started with film in 1968 (!) and made the switch to digital relatively recently. I found (still find) CS5 to be very tough sledding--not just because it is so complex, but because there are so many different ways of doing things. Also, I can do all of my editing for the majority of my images in LR, so I forget things in CS5 from lack of use.

However, as long as you have photoshop and LR, I can't see much reason to add a less capable software package. There is a huge amount of help for photoshop available on the web, which is one reason I switched to it several years ago. In addition, for a modest price, you can get online tutorials. I paid for a couple of months of Lynda.com and worked through some of their basic photoshop tutorials. It was very helpful. (If you do it, pay the few bucks extra to get access to the images that they show in the tutorial, so you can practice as you watch.) Once I had done that for a bit, I found that I could usually refresh my memory or extend what little I know by doing a google search.

[Scott Stephen]

I may have an odd perspective on this, but I bought Lightroom and also Elements 10 the same week about 2 months ago. I got into LR first, and now 2 months later I have honestly not yet bothered to even open PS Elements 10!
Lightroom lets me do the basic general editing I need to do for my photos. I have never yet really felt the need to export an image over to Elements for more in-depth manipulation. If I have a shot with 3 people in it and I don't like 1 of them, I just live with it rather than cloning them out of the shot. (ha).
Also, LR helps organize all the thousands of shots you accumulate in digital photography, which PS does not.
Also you can apply the same basic "formulas" to all the shots you snapped in the same place all at once, saving a ton of time vs. adjusting them all one-at-a-time.

I do plan to eventually get into the Elements, as I did pay good money for it, but I have just been so pleased with Lightroom and learning what it can do, I'm in no hurry.