Two For, One Against… Sort Of

Did you hear that Lightroom 2.0 came out this week? No? Have you been living under a photographic rock?

I am a LR geek. Totally. I’ve been using it since about Beta 2 of v1.0 and have never looked back. In the interest of fairness I have given Aperture a spin once or twice, checked under the hood, and kicked the tires, but I always go back to Lightroom with stars in my eyes and a song in my heart. We were meant for each other.

So this week LR v2.0 came out and I’m sitting here thinking how much I “need” it. But do I? Do I need it enough to justify the cost when I’m on my tightest budget in years and taking about 2 photos per month? (Yeah, I’m exaggerating, but not that much!)

Yes?

Convince me.  John Nack tried and Scott Kelby came close, but I still haven’t actually hit the BUY NOW button yet. What’s even more interesting is that so far even I haven’t been able to convince myself, and anyone who has known me for any length of time knows that that’s impressive!

If only they’d added the option to export slideshows to a QuickTime file… *sigh*

LISTENING TO: “Slave To Love” – Bryan Ferry

"Elements Adds Style" – Andy Ihnatko, Chicago Sun-Times

My thoughts exactly…

If I say “Henri Cartier-Bresson,” and you immediately think “Stoutish fellow jumping over a big puddle,” you’re the sort of high-minded photographer who needs to pop $650 for Photoshop. The remaining 99.98% of you will be more than adequately served by Photoshop Elements, which will run you only $99.

Lightroom Accolades

All I’m saying is that it’s winning major awards and it hasn’t even been released yet…

EUROPEAN PHOTO SOFTWARE
Adobe Lightroom

Adobe Lightroom features RAW conversion and high-speed handling of RAW files. The well-organized structure and the clear graphical interface makes working with large RAW files a breeze. The ease-of-use and the supreme quality of the output this software yields is unrivalled, and the expertise of Adobe in imaging is clearly visible in the end result.