Although it's not quite--well--nothing like layers--LR4 has a very layer-like
capacity in the brush function. So many elements of the image can be adjusted
with brushes using masks that the subsequent "pins" on the image become a lot
like layers. Each is independently adjustable without affecting the others.
Less elegant than layers for sure, but for the bulk of us, perfectly
satisfactory. (Note I said for the bulk of us; resident Moose not under this
umbrella. <g>) Now, if you want to undertake complicated contrast masking or
fiddling with different color channels, well, layers is now it's done.
I find myself hitting Command-E fewer and fewer times these days. Sometimes CS6
isn't even running. (All of that said, LR still doesn't have anything like
Content-Aware Fill, at least not as variable and subtle as Photoshops. That
alone will keep CS6 on my machine long after I've quit using it for anything
else.
--Bob
On May 13, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I think you may be correct. PhotoShop has always been a graphics arts
> tool with a lot of overkill for photographers. It wouldn't take much to
> make Elements yield everything that's required. And Lightroom already
> does that (I think) for those that don't edit with layers.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|