Posted by Nat Coalson on October 20, 2006 at 10:04 AM
This is not an advertisement and I'm not paid by anyone for saying this, but...
RMNPers shooting lots of raw images should check out Adobe Lightroom Beta 4.
I've been using it a lot and believe that it completely streamlines the process of handling raw images.... jpg, tif, psd and dng files, too.
The image quality is excellent, and the application runs quickly. The Print and Web modules are fantastic, as are the Develop controls. Truly revolutionary interface design, too.
As Lightroom is currently still in beta development, just use it for learning on test files; there are still bugs to be worked out and you don't want to see your only files ruined by Beta software.
And always maintain an up-to-date backup of your image library.
Here's the link to the Adobe Labs site where you can download Lightroom for free.
http://labs.adobe.com/
Insiders are saying version 1 of Lightroom will be released by the end of 2006. Probably around $300.
Let me know if you have any questions about using Lightroom.
Have fun!
Posted by Erik Stensland on October 20, 2006 at 10:35 AM
Thanks for the input Nat. One thing I haven't figured out is how I output individual images for the web, say at 700 px on the longest side or how I output images that I want to have printed elsewhere (not on my printer). Any ideas? Thanks!
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on October 20, 2006 at 11:51 AM
$300. Ouch! That's in addition to the cost of Photoshop, which Lightroom does NOT replace.
For that price I'm perfectly happy with my Bridge/ACR/CS2 workflow and will live with whatever improvements are made to the next CS release.
That opinion could change if I needed the Library organizational features, but for my work, I much prefer a folder hierarchy.
Posted by Arthur Lund on October 20, 2006 at 9:26 PM
I follow several forums that discuss Lightroom. It is evident to me that most people
don't understand but a small portion of the features. I highly recommend that you
invest in Scott Kelby's E-Book. It seems to be a program that needs a printed
reference book for most people to understand more than a small portion of what
it is capable of doing.
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on October 20, 2006 at 9:48 PM
Art, I'm a book-aholic But buying books on BETA software is where I draw the line!
I will follow your excellent suggestion when the product finally ships.
Posted by Paul Beiser on October 20, 2006 at 10:25 PM
Eric,
File/Export, pick jpg and the apporpriate boxes.
Agree, I really like this software!
Posted by Nat Coalson on October 20, 2006 at 11:15 PM
Paul - thanks for following up on Erik's file export question.
Bill - I bought Kelby's book, and agree with Art that it's a worthwhile $20... the closest thing to a complete Lightroom primer available now though it's definitely intended for "early adopters".
I, for one, can't afford to wait till Lightroom goes mainstream; it is software designed precisely to meet my own needs.
True, Lightroom is not meant to replace Photoshop. It's a whole different animal, and one that may render Photoshop unneccessary for a large number of photographers. So I think the $300 price tag is quite reasonable.
Michael Tapes of Raw Workflow has a good set of intro videos:
Lightroom is poised to change everything when it comes to processing large volumes of digital photography....
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on October 20, 2006 at 11:49 PM
Nat,
Has there been a change in the philosphy of Lightroom The previously stated policy was NO pixel level editing in LR - i.e. cloning out dust spots, as a starter? You certainly don't need Photoshop just for that, but it is where I thought they had drawn the line to differentiate the two products. So Photoshop may not be necessary, but everyone will need something more than Lightroom.
Posted by Nat Coalson on October 21, 2006 at 12:52 AM
"Everyone will need something more than Lightroom"? I doubt that. For starters, if you don't have dust spots in your images, you don't need to clone them out.
I'm finding more and more shots that I literally don't need to do anything to in Photoshop. (This is surprising to me, too.... a combination of better cameras, more careful preparation, and a streamlined workflow.)
But for what it's worth, from what I've heard, I would not be at all surprised if LR eventually offers retouching tools too. And maybe even layers, or another new kind of compositing method.
As far I know, nobody within Adobe has drawn any lines of late. As a mater of fact, they have been careful not to do so. Photoshop is their flagship product, and has been for many years; nobody within wants to challenge that supremacy. It is difficult to suggest that another application could uproot that.... but times change, people change and needs change.
Photoshop is great at making a masterpiece from one individual image. Photoshop is not so great at processing large numbers of images, or for smoothly handling the transition from camera to computer. This is where Lightroom steps in. Superb raw conversion controls, efficient library management, and impressive presentation - these are Lightroom's main strengths, and Photoshop's weaknesses.
One significant example of Lightroom's push toward the future of digital image editing is in the revamping of the Tone Curve model.... way better than Photoshop. And in Lightroom, you can edit your image levels directly on the histogram, even using the keyboard. If nothing else, the advances in workflow and the significant improvements in the interface lead me to believe that Lightroom is the way of the future.
Now, I will be interested to see if they offer more control over the final output, like file size limits....
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on October 21, 2006 at 1:31 AM
Thanks, Nat. I really appreciate your time in sharing your impressions.
As far I know, nobody within Adobe has drawn any lines of late.
Well, that is a significant change from what was stated "officially" on the Adobe LR forum during the Beta 3 release.
if you don't have dust spots in your images, you don't need to clone them out.
Looks like I will need to work on my sensor cleaning technique.
Don't plan to change my camera any time soon.
It's good to hear your optimizm on this new processing paradigm.
Posted by Rick Dunn on October 21, 2006 at 6:44 AM
When the first official release comes out, any chance of a Nat Coalson workshop on Lightroom?
Posted by Nat Coalson on October 21, 2006 at 9:47 AM
Rick-Lightroom is one of the key components of a workshop I'm developing that presents an end-to-end digital photography workflow. LR is easy enough to use that a few hours might cover it. I am considering doing a LR only workshop. And maybe do the workshop via a podcast or streaming video. I'll keep you posted....
Bill-yes, it is a change and not even the Company's "official" position. It's the developers' themselves.
I've been listening to the podcasts that George Jardine has been recording with the people involved in Lightroom's development: software engineers and photographers. They talk amongst themselves about what they want, what they are planning etc. and so far they've covered most of the questions that any photographer might raise about LR. They really have this one figured out and it's Adobe's future for digital image processing. (Though Beta 4.1 is running less well for me than 4.0!)
You can download the podcasts via iTunes; search for Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Podcasts. I found them interesting.
Re: dust spots - if you have a Visible Dust brush, a SensorKlear by LensPen, and a Giottos Rocket Air blower, you can keep your sensor clean even in the field. It only takes a few minutes; sometimes I may clean my sensor 3 times a day. But I usually don't find dust spots to retouch anymore.
Posted by Paul Beiser on October 21, 2006 at 10:20 AM
Nat, great info thanks. I have almost exclusively moved to Lightroom for all of my processing (for things it doesnt do, pixel editing, dust removal, etc i use PS CS2), because it works so darn well! Clearly lots of work left to do, esp on performance, but the feature sets and workflow is just so good. Lots of resources are starting to appear on the web as well (http://photoshopnews.com/2006/01/10/lightroom-resources/, a good start).
Some of the new tools (Highlight Recovery, Fill Light) are phenomenal and so easy to use.
That being said, because it is Beta, I ALWAYS am working on duplicate copies of my images.
Posted by Ken Wyatt on October 21, 2006 at 2:17 PM
I had a chance to try out LR on my iMac and it's really superb! It's one of the first "workflow"-based image editing packages for photographers. I agree, it's not meant as a replacement for PS for those that need to go beyond the usual photo editing. But it may well suffice for those who simply want to create solid images quickly.
Discussion
13 repliesRMNPers shooting lots of raw images should check out Adobe Lightroom Beta 4.
I've been using it a lot and believe that it completely streamlines the process of handling raw images.... jpg, tif, psd and dng files, too.
The image quality is excellent, and the application runs quickly. The Print and Web modules are fantastic, as are the Develop controls. Truly revolutionary interface design, too.
As Lightroom is currently still in beta development, just use it for learning on test files; there are still bugs to be worked out and you don't want to see your only files ruined by Beta software.
And always maintain an up-to-date backup of your image library.
Here's the link to the Adobe Labs site where you can download Lightroom for free.
http://labs.adobe.com/
Insiders are saying version 1 of Lightroom will be released by the end of 2006. Probably around $300.
Let me know if you have any questions about using Lightroom.
Have fun!
For that price I'm perfectly happy with my Bridge/ACR/CS2 workflow and will live with whatever improvements are made to the next CS release.
That opinion could change if I needed the Library organizational features, but for my work, I much prefer a folder hierarchy.
don't understand but a small portion of the features. I highly recommend that you
invest in Scott Kelby's E-Book. It seems to be a program that needs a printed
reference book for most people to understand more than a small portion of what
it is capable of doing.
http://www.peachpit.com/lightroom
http://www.scottkelbybooks.com
Art L
I will follow your excellent suggestion when the product finally ships.
File/Export, pick jpg and the apporpriate boxes.
Agree, I really like this software!
Bill - I bought Kelby's book, and agree with Art that it's a worthwhile $20... the closest thing to a complete Lightroom primer available now though it's definitely intended for "early adopters".
I, for one, can't afford to wait till Lightroom goes mainstream; it is software designed precisely to meet my own needs.
True, Lightroom is not meant to replace Photoshop. It's a whole different animal, and one that may render Photoshop unneccessary for a large number of photographers. So I think the $300 price tag is quite reasonable.
Michael Tapes of Raw Workflow has a good set of intro videos:
http://tinyurl.com/yyv4ed
Lightroom is poised to change everything when it comes to processing large volumes of digital photography....
Has there been a change in the philosphy of Lightroom
I'm finding more and more shots that I literally don't need to do anything to in Photoshop. (This is surprising to me, too.... a combination of better cameras, more careful preparation, and a streamlined workflow.)
But for what it's worth, from what I've heard, I would not be at all surprised if LR eventually offers retouching tools too. And maybe even layers, or another new kind of compositing method.
As far I know, nobody within Adobe has drawn any lines of late. As a mater of fact, they have been careful not to do so. Photoshop is their flagship product, and has been for many years; nobody within wants to challenge that supremacy. It is difficult to suggest that another application could uproot that.... but times change, people change and needs change.
Photoshop is great at making a masterpiece from one individual image. Photoshop is not so great at processing large numbers of images, or for smoothly handling the transition from camera to computer. This is where Lightroom steps in. Superb raw conversion controls, efficient library management, and impressive presentation - these are Lightroom's main strengths, and Photoshop's weaknesses.
One significant example of Lightroom's push toward the future of digital image editing is in the revamping of the Tone Curve model.... way better than Photoshop. And in Lightroom, you can edit your image levels directly on the histogram, even using the keyboard. If nothing else, the advances in workflow and the significant improvements in the interface lead me to believe that Lightroom is the way of the future.
Now, I will be interested to see if they offer more control over the final output, like file size limits....
Well, that is a significant change from what was stated "officially" on the Adobe LR forum during the Beta 3 release.
Looks like I will need to work on my sensor cleaning technique.
Don't plan to change my camera any time soon.
It's good to hear your optimizm on this new processing paradigm.
Bill-yes, it is a change and not even the Company's "official" position. It's the developers' themselves.
I've been listening to the podcasts that George Jardine has been recording with the people involved in Lightroom's development: software engineers and photographers. They talk amongst themselves about what they want, what they are planning etc. and so far they've covered most of the questions that any photographer might raise about LR. They really have this one figured out and it's Adobe's future for digital image processing. (Though Beta 4.1 is running less well for me than 4.0!)
You can download the podcasts via iTunes; search for Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Podcasts. I found them interesting.
Re: dust spots - if you have a Visible Dust brush, a SensorKlear by LensPen, and a Giottos Rocket Air blower, you can keep your sensor clean even in the field. It only takes a few minutes; sometimes I may clean my sensor 3 times a day. But I usually don't find dust spots to retouch anymore.
Some of the new tools (Highlight Recovery, Fill Light) are phenomenal and so easy to use.
That being said, because it is Beta, I ALWAYS am working on duplicate copies of my images.
Ken