Or practical.
CS3 & Bridge possess many of Lightroom's features, and so much more.
Posted by Ernie Atkins on April 7, 2008 at 4:26 PM
Lightroom modules have everything you'll find in ACR & Bridge. The new release (v2.0) of LR has selective tools making it more likely that for any given photo you can do your complete image processing in LR. That's a real advantage given that 1) LR is designed specifically for photographers and isn't laden with graphics arts tools, 2) LR is a true database for cataloging your shots - if needed, 3) LR has a much more expansive print GUI. I have both CS2 and LR and each have their utility, If I have a well composed shot it sure is quicker to do things in LR and stay out of PS.
Matt K. at Kelby Training has a short video on the new features of LR 2.0. I'm hoping this new version will have some ability to run plug-ins like The Lights Right Studio sharpening. I'll be upgrading, without a doubt.
I have never had luck with Lightroom. It not only runs slow on my Pentium D with 2GB RAM but it also crashes on a regular basis. I reinstalled it recently (latest update version) and tried to import my batch of 7000+ photos (mostly DNG and JPG files) and it took 24 hours to import and to BEGIN creating thumbnails.
Seems to work pretty good on my significant other's machine (Core 2 Duo and 2 GB RAM) but she is using it to organize JPGs only.
Think I'll stick with Expession Media and CS3
Posted by Walter Rowe on April 16, 2008 at 4:25 PM
I've been playing with LR2 beta for a week now. I also own CS3 and iView Media Pro, and have used them for a couple of years now. LR2 looks to be an excellent upgrade from LR1. I do not feel it offers everything you find in CS3 + iVMP, but it seems quite powerful. I imported over 6000 music business photographs. It took quite some time (a few hours). Time to import is slower when your preferences are set to import 1:1 preview images. If you set the preferences to use the embedded previews (those that you created when you first created your DNG files - which for me are already full-size), then importing speeds up considerably.
I will not commit to LR2 until the production release is out there and I can test drive that thoroughly. One feature of CS3 that you can't do in LR is layers. Most quick, global edits (like all your raw settings) work perfectly well in LR2 just as they do in ACR4 in CS3. The raw engines are the same behind the scenes and offer all the same features - at least they do on my MacBook Pro running OS X 10.5.2.
Discussion
5 replieshttp://www.news.com/8301-13580_3-9908233-39.html?tag=nl.e703
Or practical.
CS3 & Bridge possess many of Lightroom's features, and so much more.
Matt K. at Kelby Training has a short video on the new features of LR 2.0. I'm hoping this new version will have some ability to run plug-ins like The Lights Right Studio sharpening. I'll be upgrading, without a doubt.
Seems to work pretty good on my significant other's machine (Core 2 Duo and 2 GB RAM) but she is using it to organize JPGs only.
Think I'll stick with Expession Media and CS3
I will not commit to LR2 until the production release is out there and I can test drive that thoroughly. One feature of CS3 that you can't do in LR is layers. Most quick, global edits (like all your raw settings) work perfectly well in LR2 just as they do in ACR4 in CS3. The raw engines are the same behind the scenes and offer all the same features - at least they do on my MacBook Pro running OS X 10.5.2.