I too have Adobe Lightroom Eric, and as you say it is an excellent product - good choice
You can also set it as the default application to download your photos from your camera when you connect it to your PC. It is a photo organiser so you can 'tag' your photos with specific keywords, so you can display sets of photos with just certain content. Great when you have thousands of photos stored on your PC and you want to view, or find, a specific one.
It does much more too, which I'm sure you will have fun finding out for yourself.
You'd be surprised at just how many professional photographers rely on software such as Photoshop to enhance their photos in post-production. It is extremely difficult at times to get the 'perfect' shot from just your camera, no matter how experienced you are. Especially if you're on a deadline and have to take many shots quickly, you can get exposure errors, objects creeping into the scene that are just plain ugly. Colour correction may be needed, one of the main reasons for this topic being set up, which is something you couldn't avoid in the original shoot.
I see Photoshop as a backup camera under these circumstances, there to assist you getting the best results possible. I personally don't see anything wrong in that and don't regard it as cheating. As long as you're not vastly altering the whole composition with the intention to deceive the viewer. For example cloning in elements or adding objects to a scene that were not actually there, and claiming you actually photographed them. Of course, being honest and qualifying that with a disclaimer when you post your photos online or whatever else you do with them, then gives credence to your efforts. It's all a matter of degrees in how far you go to enhance your photos.
But you are always going to get the other opinion that any form of software intervention is cheating. That's fine too. The main criteria here is that you, as the photographer, have a clear conscience with the final results. I have never deliberately 'altered' any of my photos to sensationalise them by adding objects that were never there. I do, however, use Photoshop to correct any colour aberrations, remove telephone wires, or other objects that mar the finished scene. I don't feel it necessary to state what I actually did for all my photos I put online, unless someone asks how I achieved the final result, or I'm doing a tutorial, but by not doing so is not to be cheating your viewers.
It's a commonly accepted practice by amateurs and professionals alike, so we just get on with it and try to show the best possible results for our 'audiences'.
It would be interesting to hear other members opinions on this. It's related to the original topic here, as we're trying to discover the best way to faithfully reproduce the colours of the flowers in our photos. If our cameras can't always get it right, no matter how many settings we alter, or we can't get the correct lighting conditions at the particular time, do we resort to software to finish the job.
Discussion is welcome people, so let us know your views.
