RE: Lightroom (was Re: Adobe Photoshop CS3 update)
I suppose that I work in a different world than you. Yes, LR does allow you to process RAW, and it interfaces with PS very well. What it doesn't do very well is act as a data base archive for your images, specifically your large image files. When I say sRGB, I am not specifically targeting that color space, but more a workflow; One that is intended for quick cheap output to RA4 process prints and typified by a small sRGB file format for output. It still can't read non maximized PSD files or large TIF files. At least it does now give you a way to export to txt file a list of those that didn't import. Peter, I have based my comments on use from beta two through the 1.2 release as 1.3 is just too early in release to completely comment on. If you are thinking of using LR as a data base to manage your archive, you may want to seriously consider another program. If you are using it to process your RAW files and interface with PS it mostly works fine. I have had major time used up by Adobes' lack of skills in data management. They may know how to process an image, but when they try to handle files like with the browser in PS7, life gets sticky quick. Perhaps they'll come out with a FINE ART version but I am not holding my breath. Eric Eric Neilsen Photography 4101 Commerce Street Suite 9 Dallas, TX 75226 http://e.neilsen.home.att.net http://ericneilsenphotography.com Skype ejprinter > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Marshall [mailto:petermarshall@cix.co.uk] > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 3:29 AM > To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca > Subject: Re: Lightroom (was Re: Adobe Photoshop CS3 update) > > Ryuki, I agree entirely. > > LR allows you to set up presets for processing RAW files for use with > files from different cameras (and different conditions/purposing) as > well as export presets to write out jpegs in sRGB, Pro Photo RGB or > Adobe RGB and to choose file sizes and file types, as well as > simplifying the adding of metadata such as keywords, copyright > information and captions. > > If you shoot RAW you should definitely consider buying it. Nikon users > may prefer the Nikon software, which is going to be provided - at last - > free with the D3 and D300, and may give better quality conversions, > though I think it is considerably less convenient. > > Even if you want to continue to use other software for cataloguing your > images, LR will in many cases be worth using to input IPTC data so long > as your other software can then import this. (If it can't it may not be > the best choice in any case.) > > I've reviewed most of the well-known and some obscure raw conversion > programs in the past and their are others that have some advantages, but > LR is the outstanding overall package for overall workflow so far as I'm > concerned - and the software I use for virtually all my raw conversions. > (Mac users should also consider Aperture.) I still use Photoshop, but > mainly for special purposes such as removing image distortion with the > PTLens plugin and 'dodging' and 'burning' those images that require this > treatment. There are also plugins for noise reduction and sharpening > that do a better job than those built in to LR. > > LR 1.3 looks a little better organised in some respects. I can only > think that the orginal adverse comments must have been based on a very > early beta version of the software - which I didn't use. They are > certainly not relevant to the current software. > > As for screens, you are so right that a good one makes all the > difference. My work has improved significantly since I got an Eizo > ColorEdge CE210W. Its often hard to find what kind of panel type is > used, but I'm told S-IPS are the best. > > Regards > > Peter > > Peter Marshall - Photographer, Writer: NUJ > petermarshall@cix.co.uk +44 (0)1784 456474 > 31 Budebury Rd, STAINES, Middx, TW18 2AZ, UK > _________________________________________________________________ > >Re:PHOTO http://re-photo.co.uk > My London Diary http://mylondondiary.co.uk/ > London's Industrial Heritage: http://petermarshallphotos.co.uk/ > The Buildings of London etc: http://londonphotographs.co.uk/ > and elsewhere...... > > > > Ryuji Suzuki wrote: > > From: Eric Neilsen <ejnphoto@sbcglobal.net> > > Subject: RE: Adobe Photoshop CS3 update > > Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 21:02:48 -0600 > > > > > >> For those that have not bought LR, Don't! > >> > >> Many here are not simply sRGB type users where we are > >> processing RAW file for quick use, but rather processing RAW > >> and using them in a large format way. LR is not designed for > >> fine art, but quick use as a RAW to Web/Lab output. From > >> what I gather, it has great failing in digital asset > >> management ( the ability to log and track your files). > >> > > > > Why do you say that? I can seem to work with Lightroom and > > color space other than sRGB... I'm using one of the PVA panels > > (not those cheap TN panels--there really is a difference) with > > wide-gamut backlight, and I really see the difference. > > > > I don't think anyone thinks Lightroom is a Photoshop > > replacement; people use them together. It's just a way to > > organize images and apply "RAW processing" to the > > file. Indeed, people frequently edit images using PS from > > within LR and keep the original and edit copy together. > > > > What I wish Adobe did to LR is to add functions oriented to > > image files from film scanning. This includes photomerge > > automation in 16-bit color within Lightroom. > > > > -- > > Ryuji Suzuki > > http://silvergrain.org > > > > > >
|