Posted by Arthur Lund on July 23, 2006 at 12:37 PM
To those of you trying to determine if Lightroom has
any benefits to you and your workflow, I recommend
Scott Kelby's E-Book. It can be had for about $15
on Amazon.
Note the beta download link also includes a features overview tutorial and a getting started tutorial for the develop module.
From what I've seen so far, I plan to wait for version 1 release before spending any more time with this software. The interface looks slick, but the beta is SLOW, even with 2 GIG ram. Rather than allowing you to browse your own file structure, it forces you to import everything into a database. It iwll be interesting to see what they do with the user feedback. At the moment I prefer my ACR/CS2 workflow for RAW processing.
Can someone tell me briefly what Lightroom does for you that Bridge/ACR do not?
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on July 23, 2006 at 10:39 PM
Tony,
LR has a slideshow module, a print module, and a "Library" that lets you organize the imported images.
When it comes to RAW conversions, some feel LR organizes the operations in a more logical, better interface. I do like the ability to compare zoomed versions of images before final conversions or deletion. With Bridge/ACR I can only open the images in ACR sequentially. Unless I fully import into Photoshop, I can't view the zoomed versions simultaneously.
I understand more tonal adjustment features will be added to the next Beta release.
Some feel the features in LR could replace PS entirely in their workflow.
I'm sure it won't fill that role for me.
Posted by Arthur Lund on July 23, 2006 at 11:34 PM
Bill, the program does not require you to import your files into the lightroom database. It offers you the option to import or to access your pictures where they reside on your disk.
That is one of the 1st things that I learned from the E-Book I recommended.
Art Lund
Posted by Arthur Lund on July 23, 2006 at 11:39 PM
Tony:
One feature that appealed to me, is the ability to do the exact same non destructive adjustments to jpeg, tiff, pdf, DNG, as ACR now does to raw files. It treats them all the same.
Art Lund
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on July 24, 2006 at 12:18 AM
Art,
Yes, you have the option of not importing the originals into the Adobe database, however,
I understand all of the settings are still stored in a database. NO option to store as sidecar files in the origiinal file folders,as ACR permits. Try moving or renaming a folder in Explorer and see if the Adobe database can find them.
Single, central database files make me very nervous. Maybe Adobe will listen to all of the complaints in their forum and provide a sidecar file settings equivalent in the final release. Image asset management is simply too complex deal with in what should be an image browser / raw convertor.
Are the keywords assigned to the images in the Lightroom database writen to the sidecar files, or are they simply in the database? That would be a drawback (and probably would be fixed in a later Beta).
I like the Library mode, reminds me of iView, and the ability to compare images is certainly a plus over bridge. I think another benefit of the Develop mode is the ability to see before and after images side by side.
Just my 0.02,
Cheers,
Alex
Posted by Fred Stearns on July 24, 2006 at 10:36 PM
This Lighhtroom stuff is really strange. First, Adobe had a good product in Bridge-ACR-CS2. Then they bought their biggest competor to get RSP. What would have made sense was to have used the good points in RSP and incorporate them into ACR to further improve their own product. What did they do? From what I can see, the had this sort of program that they called Lightroom. They are trying to make it saleable. I get the impression that RSP is supposed to be rolled into Lightroom, but that hasn't happened yet, if it ever will. Yes, Lightroom has some neat features. But like other programs that I have looked at, it constrains you to their way of doing business. That I do not agree with. I also went to the link that Rick listed. From their, I went to Adobe's own forum. I read nothing their that would make me want to buy this product. I did download it, but will probably not load is as it appears to be a memory as well as a CPU HOG!
A few questions that I have and were also asked by beta users of the software. Why would any one want to print from a raw processor. The picture is at best half done. The same question with the slide show. If I am going to finish the picture in CS2 and want to save the layers, why can't I go to PSD instead of through another file TIFF. Memory may be cheap, but get a life! I start with a 14 MB raw file, create a 74 MB TIFF then end up with a 200+MB file with a couple of layers saved. There goes my 160 GB disc in no time.
Oh well. I will stay with Bridge-ACR-CS2 and hope that some of the better parts of RSP get integrated into ACR.
Discussion
9 repliesany benefits to you and your workflow, I recommend
Scott Kelby's E-Book. It can be had for about $15
on Amazon.
Art Lund
From what I've seen so far, I plan to wait for version 1 release before spending any more time with this software. The interface looks slick, but the beta is SLOW, even with 2 GIG ram. Rather than allowing you to browse your own file structure, it forces you to import everything into a database. It iwll be interesting to see what they do with the user feedback. At the moment I prefer my ACR/CS2 workflow for RAW processing.
LR has a slideshow module, a print module, and a "Library" that lets you organize the imported images.
When it comes to RAW conversions, some feel LR organizes the operations in a more logical, better interface. I do like the ability to compare zoomed versions of images before final conversions or deletion. With Bridge/ACR I can only open the images in ACR sequentially. Unless I fully import into Photoshop, I can't view the zoomed versions simultaneously.
I understand more tonal adjustment features will be added to the next Beta release.
Some feel the features in LR could replace PS entirely in their workflow.
I'm sure it won't fill that role for me.
That is one of the 1st things that I learned from the E-Book I recommended.
Art Lund
One feature that appealed to me, is the ability to do the exact same non destructive adjustments to jpeg, tiff, pdf, DNG, as ACR now does to raw files. It treats them all the same.
Art Lund
Yes, you have the option of not importing the originals into the Adobe database, however,
I understand all of the settings are still stored in a database. NO option to store as sidecar files in the origiinal file folders,as ACR permits. Try moving or renaming a folder in Explorer and see if the Adobe database can find them.
Single, central database files make me very nervous. Maybe Adobe will listen to all of the complaints in their forum and provide a sidecar file settings equivalent in the final release. Image asset management is simply too complex deal with in what should be an image browser / raw convertor.
Are the keywords assigned to the images in the Lightroom database writen to the sidecar files, or are they simply in the database? That would be a drawback (and probably would be fixed in a later Beta).
I like the Library mode, reminds me of iView, and the ability to compare images is certainly a plus over bridge. I think another benefit of the Develop mode is the ability to see before and after images side by side.
Just my 0.02,
Cheers,
Alex
A few questions that I have and were also asked by beta users of the software. Why would any one want to print from a raw processor. The picture is at best half done. The same question with the slide show. If I am going to finish the picture in CS2 and want to save the layers, why can't I go to PSD instead of through another file TIFF. Memory may be cheap, but get a life! I start with a 14 MB raw file, create a 74 MB TIFF then end up with a 200+MB file with a couple of layers saved. There goes my 160 GB disc in no time.
Oh well. I will stay with Bridge-ACR-CS2 and hope that some of the better parts of RSP get integrated into ACR.