Lightroom 2.6 AND Picasa 3

  • Thread starter Thread starter billp545
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

billp545

Guest
Hi there,

I am finally learning Lightroom 2.6 with more confidence than I had in the fall after months of ups and downs in the Library (Catalog/Folders/Collections) and recently the Develop module--that I'm learning little-by-little, but it is coming along nicely.

Initially I worked on my images in the Picasa 3 program, and although I have no regrets about gravitating to the Adobe Photoshop camp, there things I liked (and miss) in Picasa 3.

Is it possible to work on about 2'-25% of my images in Picasa 3 after I have brought them into LR 2 and have them in my 'real' or permanent folders and collections?

I am NOT talking about using Picasa as a secondary editor with Lightroom (as people do with Elements 7 , or CS 4); what I have in mind is working with the same images in the two programs seperately--neither program would know of the others existance.

My big fear is having everything that I have organized perfectly in Lightroom 2.6 (which it finally is) then messing the up the hard-to-finally-get order with my Picasa 3 idea.

Hope this is clear, and thank you.

Bill Powers

Buffalo, NY (less snow that DC, Baltimore, Philly, NY, and Boston...),
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
While I realize there are some things you like in Picasa that aren't in Lightroom, I think you are just asking for trouble by using both programs to work on your photos.

But without more details about what you are planning to do, I would have to say that it is very UNclear what you are trying to do.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hey Bill,

I have to agree with Paige, and say that I’m not really clear as to what you are exactly trying to achieve. I can think of two possible scenarios:

1. You want to import ALL of your pictures into Lightroom, but only do development work on 75-8'%. Then additionally import the ‘undeveloped’ 2'-25% into Picasa3 so that you can develop them there. Well, yes of course you can do that but my instincts would be that it will quickly get very messy trying to keep tabs on both ‘catalogs’....to be honest if you are trying to split the development workload in that way I would split my pictures folders as well and would NOT import 1''% into Lightroom. Keep everything separate until you are confident that you can do all the development work in Lightroom.
2. Or, you want to do ALL the development work in Lightroom, but then want a subset of your images to be put into Picasa3 so that you can use the additional features available there. For this you want to import 1''% of your pictures into Lightroom and additionally import 2'-25% of the SAME images into Picasa3? Again, yes of course you can do this, the only risk to your LR catalog would be if you started to move folders around within Picasa...this would cause ‘missing files/folders’ to be reported by Lightroom.

A question though....why would you want to import your original images into Picasa after you have spent all that time carefully editing them in Lighroom? Reason for the question is that when you subsequently import them into Picasa after working on them in Lightroom you will NOT see the edited image, merely the image as it was when first uploaded from your camera. Irrespective of whether you shoot in raw or jpeg, or convert to dng, you simply cannot import the edited image into Picasa UNTIL you have exported it from Lightroom with edits applied.

That is exactly what I do....import to Lightroom, develop and catalog as necessary, then export a low quality jpeg (5'%) with reduced image size (i.e. same size as my monitor). This creates a jpeg file size usually less than 3''KB from an initial raw image of circa 3'MB. I do NOT add these exported low-res jpegs back into Lightroom, they are kept apart and organised in a completely different set of folders from which I can then import into Picasa3 for uploading to a web gallery for friends to view. I can (and do) also put these jpegs into the ‘shared pictures’ folder on my NAS drive so that I can make my family look at them on their own laptops whenever they’ve done something to annoy me. :) :)

Probably sounds more complicated than it actually is, but it works for me and allows me to use the free Picasa3 features without risk of compromise to the precious original images or the equally precious Lightroom catalog.

Hope that my answer has been helpful. If I have totally misunderstood your requirement, no doubt you'll let me know....
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hi Paige & TNG,

I think I should have said that the aspects of the Picasa 3 program that I prefer to LR 2.6 are those that make the post, post-processing elements (perhaps the wrong word!) easier. The more I learn in Lightroom the more comfortable I am with the program (watch: as soon as I feel competent in all aspects of LR 2--Adobe will announce the unveiling of Lightroom 3 the next day...), but there are things in Picasa 3 that superior in the ease they deliver.

LR 2 sends images to Shutterfly to be printed (and I have good results from them), but Picasa 3 sends images to Kodak, CVS, and or a slew of others--that's one thing I miss in Picasa. I prefer Kodak to Shutterfly, so that is one I had in mind: ordering prints cataloged (catalogued) and edited in Lightroom from Kodak.

Another advantage for Picasa is the ease of getting one's photos to Flickr--one click in Picasa 3 and that's it, the photos are uploaded and delivered. LR 2 we need a plug-in to do the same thing I believe (something (plug-ins) I don't even know how to download--let alone use). I posted my question in the LR 2 Forum in Flickr and the first advice was to learn Lightroom more thoroughly--a good point, but there may be simply be things that Picasa can do that Lightroom can't.

As TNG alluded to, Picasa has an Albums component that is so easy to use to share one's images with and it is difficult to let go of--and that is another way I hoped to use Picasa 3. I admit not studying the Web Gallery component of LR 2 though--it is probably better than Picasa's but I haven't gotten around to looking at it closely yet.

The 'Nikonians' group recently (two weeks ago) started a new post-processing Forum devoted exclusively to Adobe Photoshop software (there is almost friction on the site between Photoshop users and the Nikon Capture NX 2 devotees) and I posted my question there as well.

Thanks again for your response; I hope this clarifies things a bit.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Bill, I tend to agree with the others. There's nothing you've mentioned that isn't relatively easy to accomplish thru Lr and its plug-ins etc. The problem is that WE know how, and YOU don't (at present).

Here's the tradeoff, certainly you can juggle files over to Picasa for your needs, but as the others have pointed out, it's going to become a snarl pretty quickly. So do you want to do something hard, and learn more about Lr, or do something hard and continue to use Picasa in a pretty complicated workflow? It comes down to pay me now, or pay me later. :) Only you can make the call, but I think only one of those choices is forward-looking.

We're here to hold your hand, so if you want to work thru each of those post-post-processes, one by one, we'll all be glad to pitch in.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hi Brad,

I should have emphasized that the only reason for wanting to cotinue with Picasa is because of "the ease factor." Of course I would like to do everything in Lightroom 2; indeed I have gone so far as disabling the Elements 7 program so that there is absolutely no reason for my images/photos to be anywhere other than on my exterrnal Hard Drive, and the LR 2.6 Catalog (Folders; then Collections).

The Picasa idea arose when I thought about three things:

1.) Sending my images out to be printed by someone other than Shutterfly, e.g., Kodak
Any suggestions?

2.) Sending my photos to Flickr. Yes, I am aware of the Flickr plug-in, but I simply don't know how to
Download the program; let alone use it. I have gotten to 'Jeffrey Friedl's Blog', and I even went to
and downloaded 'flickr--2'1''21'.157. zip BUT THEN WHAT?

3.) I will look into Lightroom's Web Gallery feature next, and I will get back to you if I hit a stumbling
block to my progress. In the meantime, I hope we can get through issues 1 and 2.

Thank you.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You can export any photo to your hard disk, and then upload to Kodak or whatever other service you like. I would image this is easier than exporting your Lightroom photos to Picasa, and then use Picasa to send the photos to Kodak (or wherever), but that's just me.

To install Jeffrey Friedl's (and all other) plug-ins in Lightroom, please read http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/plugin-installation

Also, while I have never used Picasa's Albums that you like so much, Lightroom has collections, and that seems to me to be an equivalent feature.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
[quote author=billp545 link=topic=917'.msg61786#msg61786 date=12661''711]
I should have emphasized that the only reason for wanting to cotinue with Picasa is because of "the ease factor." Of course I would like to do everything in Lightroom 2; indeed I have gone so far as disabling the Elements 7 program so that there is absolutely no reason for my images/photos to be anywhere other than on my exterrnal Hard Drive, and the LR 2.6 Catalog (Folders; then Collections).
[/quote]

Your photos are NOT in the Lightroom catalog. They are on one of your hard disks — only. Lightroom contains a preview (or thumbnail) of your photo, and a link to the actual photo.

I also recommend you consider using Lightroom keywords as your primary organizing tool, not collections and definitely not folders.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Paige,

Thanks for your wise advice. Next time I have something I want to send to Kodak I'll try your method; it will far easier than risking disorder among my images if I tried Picasa.

Your tip on Jeffrey Friedl's Plug-in application is just what I needed, and I printed out pp.1-4 (pp. 5-22 are extraneous) and will use it soon for working in or with Flickr.

Question: If my actual photos are on my external HD (Seagate: 'J' Drive), and the images in LR 2 aren't the actual photos (therefore not taking up much space or room) is it OK if I make a New Folder, e.g., 'LR 2 Backup' on my actual HD, 'C' and use it for backup? It makes so much sense to me it probably isn't a good idea.

The more I look closely at the Web Module in Lightroom 2, the better I like the program, particularly now that I have my Folders/Collections in such good shape.

Thank you again.

PS btw The key to my success in getting the Library in LR 2 in such good shape was getting the photos in the External HD in good order (and that took days); after that, everything has gone well.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Bill, Think of the Lr catalog not as a database of your images, but a database *about* your images. At its simplest, there are two main components of Lr's catalog. Your actual image files, which can be on any drive your computer can read, and the catalog database which must be on a local (non-network) drive. The image files, just more or less sit inertly where you have them stored, and the catalog database tracks their physical locations and any adjustments (image or data) that you make to them. (There's lots of plumbing and glue that I haven't explained, but it's not pertinent at this point in the discussion)

The point being that these two things, the actual files, and the catalog database file(s) (*.LRCAT) need to be backed up. Lr's internal backup routine will make a copy of the catalog file, but not your image files. That is an important separate step that you need to take.

If your working Lr catalog is on your internal C: drive, then it's not a good idea to put the catalog backups on that same drive, because a hardware failure will put both at risk together. Any backup is better than none, but it really should be on a separate hardware device. The actual photo files however take up however much room they take up, and the vital backup process will take up just as much room again. Again, a separate physical device is better.

So if you have your catalog on C: and the photos on J:, you could back them up conversely, by putting the backup catalog file on J:, and copies of the image files on C:, but they will take up a lot of space.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
[quote author=billp545 link=topic=917'.msg6182'#msg6182' date=1266169'87]
Thanks for your wise advice. Next time I have something I want to send to Kodak I'll try your method; it will far easier than risking disorder among my images if I tried Picasa.[/quote]

I have written elsewhere that using two organizers, when you don't completely understand how both work, is likely going to cause trouble in the future. Add that to the fact that many many people start using Lightroom and don't understand how LR works, and you can understand my concern. If I were you, I would commit yourself to using Lightroom only, and not Picasa, for at least a month to see if you can learn to have Lightroom do what you want.

[quote author=billp545 link=topic=917'.msg6182'#msg6182' date=1266169'87]Your tip on Jeffrey Friedl's Plug-in application is just what I needed, and I printed out pp.1-4 (pp. 5-22 are extraneous) and will use it soon for working in or with Flickr.[/quote]

Paper is so last-century. You are joking about printing it out, right? You could have simply bookmarked the page in your browser and saved a tree.

[quote author=billp545 link=topic=917'.msg6182'#msg6182' date=1266169'87]PS btw The key to my success in getting the Library in LR 2 in such good shape was getting the photos in the External HD in good order (and that took days); after that, everything has gone well. [/quote]

This makes me sad. I feel that you have spent time "getting the photos in the External HD in good order" and you have used the most inefficient tools you have available — folders in your operating system. You could have used tools that I think are orders of magnitude more powerful than folders; tools that you paid a lot of money to obtain. In my opinion, you should have not spent a minute organizing your folders, and spent your time applying Keywords in Lightroom; and metadata (captions, titles, etc.) in Lightroom. IMO, this gives you an organization that is more flexible and powerful than anything you can do with folders. Why? A photo can be in only one folder at any time, and in one folder hierarchy at any time. However, a photo can have many many keywords and exist in many different keyword hierarchies. Furthermore, using keywords and metadata, Lightroom has powerful search capabilities that blow away any searching you can do with (or in) folders.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I know where your coming from Paige with the folder thing but.... I think it is still good practice to have a folder 'system' that is logical. I would agree though that you could have used LR to move/sort them as it imported which would have been much easier and quicker. When I first moved to LR I used the store by date option so that all my images were moved into a logical date hierarchy on the disk as they were imported.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Brad,

Yes, LR 2 is on my computer's 'C' Drive, while my pictures ('My Pictures' btw) are on the external Seagate HD. Your explanation is clear, but I'm afraid I am not the best at expressing myself in these matters.

Regarding 'Backup' I was referring to the 'Back Up Catalog' screen that appears immediately before I get into Lightroom. When I scroll the 'Choose' option I thought selecting the 'C' Drive was a good choice because the pictures are already on the 'J' Drive--now if I understand this right I'm supposed to Back Up the catalog, and the pictures?

I'll read up on it some more, and will just take the 'Skip Now' option until I figure it out.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yes, you need to backup the catalog as well as your photos. You need to make sure the backup of the catalog is on a different drive to the original catalog. This can be the same drive you backup your photos too if you only have one backup drive.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Paige,

The first of your three points was unnecessary. I started this Forum ASKING if it were practical to use both LR 2 and Picasa 3 (separately). Brad, TNG, and you have said it wouldn't be a smart thing to do so I am not using both programs; and I made it clear in earlier posts on this Forum I want to do everything I can in Lightroom 2.

Your second point is flippant--I don't like it, and I feel above responding to it.

Your third point overloooks completely a very important issue: most people, especially in photography, work in different ways--perhaps even unorthodox ways. As early as it is in my "DSLR life" I think one of the most overlooked things in digital photography might be the importance of organizing one's photos wherever they are stored--an issue that is ignored completely by Photoshop, Picasa, Aperture, etc. I did not waste time nor money (the college where I teach enabled me to get LR 2 for $99 btw) , so I have no regrets about getting my pictures (and they were a mess) in order before I entered the LR 2 world in a more serious vein.

For now at least, I'm just not "a Keyword Guy" (too 21st Century for me?). I do use a few of them after Importing folders, but that's about the extent of it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
billp545, keywording is probably the least favourite part of most photographers workflow :'( but I would encourage you to try it when you have time as the rewards are definitely worth it even if your keywording 'system' is very simple. It took me a while to get into a routine with keywords myself but they really can make life much easier in the future.
Good luck with the LR learning curve, it's pretty steep but you'll not regret it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
[quote author=billp545 link=topic=917'.msg61768#msg61768 date=1266'89768]
...
As TNG alluded to, Picasa has an Albums component that is so easy to use to share one's images with and it is difficult to let go of--and that is another way I hoped to use Picasa 3. I admit not studying the Web Gallery component of LR 2 though--it is probably better than Picasa's but I haven't gotten around to looking at it closely yet....
[/quote]

billp545,

I use Picasa web albums to share photos with friends and family, but I long ago abandoned Picasa for processing photos. I use Lightroom almost exclusively for processing (occasionally send a photo to CS4) and use Jeffrey Friedl's plugin to export directly to Picasa web albums. Works seamlessly, and I think I've found the best of both worlds.

Tom
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top