A workflow question, LR>PS, duplicating PS workflow from one file to another?

[dunker56]

Ok, I'll jump right in with the question first and then back paddle with some background info afterwards to help explain things.
First up, I am a 'professional' photographer, taking payments from clients for various work such as shop commissions, weddings and studio. Because its paid work I tend to prioritise the time I take to finalise a job to being pretty important.
I used inverted commas around 'professional' because I also recognise this industry has a massive variance between skill levels, I consider myself an early professional, still in my first 1-2yrs of offering services and thus my speed in post processing pretty immature.
Ok, so now onto the question;

In PS, is there a way to have two 'semi' identical files open (same image, but different rendering, such as a mono and colour version of the same file) and for the treatment/brush work used on one file to being easily synced/duplicated/ported to the other file (in PS)?

So here is the workflow issue. With LR, I have bought many presets and 3DLUTs for my work. All of them need to support the camera model no. and work with the cameras RAW file in order to best generate its preset/LUT accurately.
If you take the RAW file (DNG in my case) and then visit PS with it first to do some destructive retouching (frequency separation/stray hair removal etc), then when that file comes back to LR it is a .PNG or .TIFF file and the renderers (Presets/LUTS) although will apply do not corresponde very accurately with their DNG (RAW) counterparts.

Thus I'm left with a connundrum with client work. If I choose a render first in LR (Preset/LUT), mono for example, then I get an accurate and true render for which to complete the rest of my PS workflow (skin retouching/stray hair removal). But what if after the advanced work in PS the client changes their mind and now want a colour version or a different render than the one I chose. It basically means advanced retouching all over again 😞
So currently my workflow goes > LR>basic adjustments>PS>Advanced destructive editing>LR>Render.
The issue is that after the Advanced destructive editing in PS, the LR render is simply not as good as doing the following;

LR>basic adjustments>Render>PS>Advanced destructive editing.

(here's a small video to give you an idea of that work render workflow. It does seem that most professionals do the render and adjustments first before heading off to PS for the more advanced and destructive retouching; https://youtu.be/DAZRwQB2erY)

So I got thinking... what if I could kill two birds with one stone? What if I could (in LR) create a virtual copy, render one of the copies with a preset/LUT and the other without. Take both files too PS and do the destructive work, but instead of having to do the brushwork twice, do it on one file only, but have those changes applied to the other image/file in PS as well.
This might provide me with a kind of failsafe. If the client did not like my render approach/direction (fairly rare), then I could at least use the other file and that has had the PS treatment without the LR render to go another route. Despite it being a TIFF and not as 'pliable' as it's DNG counterpart, its better than nothing.

TIA

dunker.

[dunker56]

After posting this, I've had a thought.

Lets say I did the following;

LR>DNG>Rendered Mono (with a preset from a bought for package)>Edit in PS>Apply Frequency Separation and stray hair removal>Save/Export

Could I 'save' the layer work on the file, regardless of the Background Layer?

Meaning... if for example the client decided mono was not the best choice after all and wants colour, I could then do the following;

LR>DNG>Render Colour this time>Edit in PS>Load the layers and work I had previously done on the mono version and apply>Save/Export

Thus... the work that has been done can be redone/applied quickly regardless of the background layer used?

Would that work?

[jazz-y]

From my point of view, you need to try to completely transfer your workflow to Photoshop. It has all the necessary tools for your work, including non-destructive corrections (adjustment layers). 

As I understand it, LUT does not apply to the entire RAW (DNG) color range, but to the rendered image in its current state. Smoothness of colors can be achieved due to an extended color space and an increased color depth used in intermediate calculations (before the export stage). You can apply the same LUT in Photoshop. 

Most of the workflows I'm familiar with boil down to pre-normalizing the RAW image (that is, bringing it to a state from which you can get most of the corrections you need), then it goes into a fixed color depth mode (16 bit for intermediate processing and creative tasks, 8 bits for most other cases), then destructive processing and at the final stage non-destructive corrections are carried out using adjustment layers, layers with different blending modes.

Leave Lightroom only as a file manager, you can also use Bridge instead.

[dunker56]

Thanks for your reply.

LR vs PS is pros and cons. Not always do I need to visit PS for advanced destructive work. Weddings and events for example typically do not require PS destructive work, at least not on many shots (perhaps 10%), thus LR is incredibly useful as a synchronisation application to render many images in succession to looking like an edit you're currently working on. So LR has its uses. I am not aware of Camera Raw or Bridge having this Synchronisation capability, but perhaps I am wrong?
Weddings & Event work I have typically more scope for changing the art direction for the client (due to not visiting PS as much). If the render I have chosen in LR is not to the clients liking then I can pretty easily choose another without losing the various soft retouches and radial filters etc in LR.

So, your advice whilst welcome still does not really address the question at hand. This is about saving (potential) time, being able to perform 'destructive' layer work to an image file that has been rendered, but also is it possible to apply that same work just performed to another version of that image that has not yet been rendered, thus providing a kind of failsafe (although not ideal) should the rendered version deemed not suitable, without having to redo the destructive layering work all over again...

Can I for example have two files open in PS;

IMG1
IMG1VirtualCopy (rendered version)

The two files are indentical in terms of composition and crop, only difference is exposure, shadows, and render etc on the IMG1VirtualCopy (we could even pretend the IMG1VirtualCopy is a mono shot now and the original IMG1 still colour).
If I have these files open in PS, and I perform the destructive work as layers on the Img1VirtualCopy, can I then simply copy these layers into the IMG1 file? Would that work? Due to render and exposure differences would the destructive layer work just simply be ill advised due to native differences between the two files...?