Leaving Lightroom

[genoph]

Hey Guys,

Well, First, and last post on this forum.

I've been using Lightroom for 4 months now, and I've been okay with it. Lightroom and I started having disagreements from the start and it hasn't ended, and so I've decided to end the relationship.

Only problem is, lightroom has 2''' photo's of mine which I kinda would like.

What's going to be my best exit strategy for leaving lightroom.

I plan on moving my workflow exlusively to Camera RAW and Photoshop, avec plugin's joining me.

Reasons? Flexibility mostly, it doesn't do everything I want.

Thanks

 

[Victoria Bampton]

Aw, that's a shame. Anything we can help with, before you throw in the towel? Maybe you and Lightroom just need to understand each other a little better..?

If you decide to leave Lightroom, select all and hit ctrl-S to write all of your settings to xmp, that camera raw will be able to read. The files are not wrapped up in any generic format, so it's just a case of finding them in Bridge then.

 

[davidmknoble]

genoph,

I started in Photoshop CS3 and then converted to lightroom. One of the great advantages of Lightroom is the infinitely better catalog storage than Bridge. A second is for essentially great photos, quick easy development and once printing is figured out, you never have to figure it out again, presets work wonders!

For those images that are troublesome, I export and work directly in photoshop with macros I have created and other tools I have purchased. Coming back into Lightroom works much better in 1.4.1 and I get to keep the great catalog. Also, I have setup my noise removal (neat image) to be a third party tool and I call it directly from Lightroom.

Lightroom won't every be the '1''% only use this and never anything else' but it has some great benefits.

I hope you stay.

 

[genoph]

My problems with lightroom are these:

- However many ways you cvan put a watermark on slideshows, web galleries, or printing, it will not allow me to do so when I export pictures.

- When I export to photoshop, it will not allow me to appy certain filters, like smart blur etc.

- The noise reduction is terrible

- When I do edit the picture, now I've got two!! and it just puts them side by side, ahhh!!

- I don't spend enough time with my pictures because I can group develop them, and opening up photoshop is such a hassle with the program.

anyways, if you have solutions, post them. Better yet, how can I export all my lovely pictures!!

 

[Victoria Bampton]

- However many ways you cvan put a watermark on slideshows, web galleries, or printing, it will not allow me to do so when I export pictures.

Take a close look at Tim Armes LR/Mogrify

Or how are you doing it in ACR at the moment - with a Photoshop Action? Try droplets http://www.victoriabampton.com/lightroom/droplets.htm

- When I export to photoshop, it will not allow me to appy certain filters, like smart blur etc.

Initial thought - export at 8-bit instead of 16-bit and it should work perfectly.

- The noise reduction is terrible

It's the same as ACR. How do you currently do your Noise Reduction? Something like Noise Ninja? Again, look at droplets (link above) as a good solution to that one.

- When I do edit the picture, now I've got two!! and it just puts them side by side, ahhh!!

How are you going about editing them? And are you SURE you'd prefer to overwrite your original? The whole point is that it doesn't damage your originals. (I guess we're talking jpegs here...?)

- I don't spend enough time with my pictures because I can group develop them, and opening up photoshop is such a hassle with the program.

You don't spend enough time.... erm..... shall we tie you to the chair?! :lol: The whole idea is that it's efficient workflow, so speed is a good part of that.

Better yet, how can I export all my lovely pictures!!

Can you explain a little further... are they raw or jpeg? Are you wanting to export them with your changes (creating new files) or save your changes so that you can open them in ACR in Bridge and still see those changes? Or something else entirely?

 

[genoph]

Actually, if those bits and pieces of advice work, I may not have to.

The one thing is sorting edited and unedited pieces of work away from eachother. I don't mind originals, but I want them somewhere else, a back closet perhaps.

I was just a tad fed up with a few things, and I just couldn't figure out what it was or how to. If these work, that would solve my problems

 

[genoph]

But just in case, it's all raw files

 

[Brad Snyder]

I'd have to say that we're all here, because we've chosen LR as the best path forward, but I'd also say every one of us has frustrations which we hope will be addressed as the program matures. Personally, the idea of going back to Canon DPP and Bridge/PS would drive me crazy. I hated that the first time I used it, and everytime thereafter. I understand the appeal, and the utility, but I personally get mad everytime I use it, due to the hindrances to productivity (in my perception.)

On the other hand, I completely understand your frustration with LR. Documentation is more menu/button oriented, addressing the "How", as opposed to strategic/workflow oriented addressing the "Why". Even the Kelby or Evening tutorials, sort of assume a workflow and explain it, as opposed to evaluating different strategies. There's a tremendous amount of talent and experience right here on this forum, and we're plenty willing to help if we're able.

When you talk of separating the originals from the derivatives, the edited from the unedited, what workflow issue specifically are you trying to address?

 

[Victoria Bampton]

The one thing is sorting edited and unedited pieces of work away from eachother. I don't mind originals, but I want them somewhere else, a back closet perhaps.

I'd love to give you the answer.... but I'm not quite following what you're trying to say, sorry! Say it again....? :?:

 

[rcannonp]

You could try stacking the edited files with the originals. You can set that as an option when you choose to edit in PS. I believe that the edited file shows up on top of the stack by default. You can collapse the stacks and you won't see the original.

 

[johnbeardy]

If you choose Edit, the derivative files are in the same folder as the originals. If you don't like that (some do, some don't), just move the derivatives into another folder afterwards. Alternatively, use Export instead of Edit and you can choose the folder at that time, and can also trigger Photoshop or droplets. Note that when the derivatives and originals are in separate folders, you lose the benefits of stacking, whatever they may be.

It does seem odd that your first post here is to announce you're dumping the program.... But hopefully you're getting helpful answers.

John

 

[Denis Pagé]

Actually, if those bits and pieces of advice work, I may not have to...

Welcome Genoph (is that your name? :roll

So, if you are thinking about giving Lightroom a second chance with the help of dozens of experts here ready to keep you on track, the first big help come from adding a signature to you messages. You can do so by clicking on "User CP" under the LR icon atop this page. After that, it is easier for us to give advice specific to your setup.

Before doing so, just look at different sigs of all us to give you an idea. Most important: OS used, Lightroom version (change your sig when upgrading), Camera model and at least a first name in case it is not Genoph

Welcome again,

 

[Ian Farlow]

Genoph, I understand the frustration as I've been there myself many times before. And as much as I don't like the phrase "this is a version 1 product," it's still true. There are certainly areas where Lightroom can improve, no doubt, but it has evolved very quickly, and Lightroom 2 is just around the corner. The features revealed in version 2 BETA are fantastic, and it has already been stated before that there is at least one more big feature (Adobe's wording) that will be revealed in version 2. What is it? We will just have to wait and see...

I am using Aperture 2.1 in an effort to understand the competition (as I see it) and gain a different perspective. I can tell you, though, that with the features that I find are better in Aperture, I still find Lightroom to be the overall better choice. It's just that good from my point of view. Lightroom will continue to grow and improve... I have no doubt about that.

It took me a while to get the swing of Lightroom, and I am sure there are things that I still do "wrong" or, at least, could be done better. But, I enjoy it, and with each release I enjoy it even more. Although I can't (and wouldn't) force you to stay with Lightroom, I would strongly suggest giving it just a bit longer. Ask questions here and on Adobe's own forums. There are a lot of people here willing to help with anything you find troublesome. In case you weren't aware, there are a lot of Lightroom experts here, including a few from Adobe.

Whichever route you decide on, we will help wherever we can.

 

[Katherine Mann]

genoph, I absolutely understand that you are frustrated with Lr in several ways. It is a deceptively simple program, but it is like photoshop: you think you know what you're doing and suddenly you realize how much more there is to know. For myself, having devoted 1' years to living with Photoshop, I find myself hanging out with her a lot, despite my developing (sorry for the pun) relationship with Lr.

What Ps doesn't do, and what Lr does really well, is Digital Asset Management. I have been keywording from the beginning, and, as my Lr archive approaches 13,''' shots I am very happy to have taken the time. My partner just asked me for a generic canoe shot for a composite he's doing. I gave him the choice of 168. It took 2 minutes. Try that in clunky old Bridge.

I use both programs all the time, for every shot. Lr takes care of my RAW files and I group the .psd file on the top after I have finished processing. Then I print in Lr. It works for me. The only thing I would love to see in Lr would be a print proofing facility. Still, the print module and my setup work fine.

I'm sorry that you are so uncomfortable with Lr. She's very nice once you put in the effort. Like any relationship - she needs some attention. Good luck.

 

[Anthony.Ralph]

Actually, if those bits and pieces of advice work, I may not have to.

The one thing is sorting edited and unedited pieces of work away from eachother. I don't mind originals, but I want them somewhere else, a back closet perhaps.

I was just a tad fed up with a few things, and I just couldn't figure out what it was or how to. If these work, that would solve my problems

I wonder if I can help?

First off, a note on how my folders are laid out on my PC so you can follow how I get the RAW/DNG/TIF organised. I have three folders: RAW DNG EDIT and under these main folders I have a series of folders titled using a sequential number and the opening date - example: RAW-251-'6'3'7, RAW-252-'6'712, RAW-253-'6'826, etc. Each time I download a shoot, I create a new folder under the latest sequence folder thus: 2''6-'9-'5-Cornwall. When the sequence folder reaches about 4Gb I burn off a copy to an archive DVD and start a new sequence folder.

When downloading, I now convert to DNG and send it to the appropriate folder and copy the orginal RAW into it's appropriate folder (on a side note all this gets copied off onto an external hard drive each night).

So: a set of 'do not touch' orginals (RAW) and a set of working files (DNG). After processing the DNGs using virtual copies if necessary I then export TIF files out to the appropriate folder in my main EDIT folder. All the folders are created as I go in Lightroom (previously Bridge) and it is all simpler than it appears to be if you have read through all this!

Much of what I have described can be traced directly back to the 'bucket' system as described by Peter Krogh in his DAM book which I thoroughly recommend- http://www.thedambook.com/

Please feel free to ask questions/challenge my methods...

Anthony.

 

[Petes]

more rant!

I also can fully understand your frustration with Lightroom at times. The flip side is printing (already mentioned), and especially exporting images for CD burning or websites. Those processes are infinitely easier in LR than in PS where such things have to be done via actions.

My beef is this. Those of us who like to use both LR and PS are now faced with a 1''% increase in upgrade costs every time a new release comes out. What used to be 2''.'' USD is now 4''.'' USD because Adobe drops a new release for both LR and PS at around the same cycle. I would much rather Adobe call it a day with bridge and incorporate the LR functionality into PS so we can go back to dealing with one product instead of two.

 

[Victoria Bampton]

The thing is Pete, Bridge is a browser for the whole suite - so it's not just photographers using it. So the likelihood of it being dropped any time soon is about, well, zero!

That said, if Lightroom covers the majority of what you need to do, you may decide to upgrade Lightroom every time, and only upgrade Photoshop every two or three upgrades. Whilst I upgrade my own Photoshop license every time, I've left all of the studio machines running CS or CS2 - there were no absolute must-have features for the studio.

 

[Petes]

That said, if Lightroom covers the majority of what you need to do, you may decide to upgrade Lightroom every time, and only upgrade Photoshop every two or three upgrades.

Sounds like an option. LR is extremely helpful in quickly processing the small amount of commercial work I do. On the other hand it seems to be overkill for my own personal stuff where I may choose 2 or 3 images out of a bunch for portfolio development, usually using layers. With any luck future changes to LR will close that gap!

 

[Braders]

Stick with it.

The paradigm for digital processing is changing and i believe LR is and will continue to lead the way.

 

[AJR]

Try Stars

When Import I give everything I keep one star. If I edit a shot I give it two stars. That way I can quickly decide what level of shot I want to view, should I have a reason to be selective.

Before you give up on LR, try organizing a few photo shoots with Bridge--you might might come running back!

AJR

 

[seejayess]

This really is a lovely forum!!, I've been around a few in my time but this beats all.
If Genoph stays with Lightroom it's because like-minded intelligent people have banded together with a common interest in keeping a fellow enthusiast interested in using what will undoubtably mature into a class-leading and desirable application.

 

[Victoria Bampton]

Aaaaw Chris, I couldn't agree with you more!

 

[Ian Farlow]

Thanks, and I agree.