Elements vs lightroom

Question

I am a long time user of elements- an amatuer photographer, and I shoot in RAW. I am trying to figure out if it is a worthwhile investment to use lightroom in addition to elements, but I can't really figure out what lightroom does- organize photos? somehow processes them in a way elements doesn't? Any explanation and advice would be great.

Answer 1

I might be answering my own question here, but in reading the older posts about this my basic understanding of the differences are below. So I will try and refine my question- it is worthwhile to use lightroom as well as elements in processing pictures- I am very used to the tools used in elements and don't want to learn new tricks if there is no major advantage to it. If I use both, do I open my pictures first in lightroom and only use elements if I cannot adjust the lighting, exposure, etc as I need, or if I want to clone, remove objects, etc? Would it be better to upgrade to CS, or does lightroom still stand alone?
Oct 14, 2009 9:57 PM (in response to Ron_XSi)
Helpful AnswerRe: What is the difference between Lightroom and Elements?
Ligtroom is far more like a cross between Bridge and Camera RAW than anything like Elements. LR is designed to work with and process larger quantities of RAW files. It also works with TIFF and jpeg but these are secondary to RAW. LR has some local adjustment ability, with limited brushes and tools. LR has sophistocated databased library structure that allows search and keywording functions even when images are off line. LR allows easy batch editing and synching of RAW settings to multiple files and the creation of multiple 'recipies" in RAW conversion without the need to create multiple files. You don't need to make jpegs to create a simple web page or print files from LR. It will do these directly from the RAW files. LR is completely non-destructive. Exporting an image will make a new file with the changes you specify. Nothing you do will alter the original file.
Elements is for pixel pushing. It allows far more local controls, and manipulation at a pixel level compared to the mostly global controls of LR. In other words it's easier to work on individual parts of an image in Elements. Elements is designed for you to spend more time on an individual file compared to LR which is designed to work on larger quantities of files in a less intricate manner. Cloning, etc are easier/more powerful in Elements. Elements supports stitching and layers. Elements lets you work with text and images. LR does not in any meaningful way (except maybe adding a watermark). Making changes in Elements and then saving the file will permanently change it.
In a nutshell if you're working with larger quantities of images you may prefer LR. However you'll probably still need a pixel editor (like Elements) occasionally. If you work in lower image quantities then Elements is the way to go. You'll still have Bridge to find files/process raw files, but not files that are *offline*. I would suggest Elements first and then add LR when you need its powerfull organisational/search/RAW conversion/non-destructive workflow abilities.
Gordon