Re: Lightroom (was Re: Adobe Photoshop CS3 update)
Eric,
I think you may be condemning it mainly for not being something it never
set out to be. It is a program for importing and processing RAW files,
and creating a simple database of them.
It can create 16 bit per channel TIFF files from these - which is the
largest format needed. I regularly use it to create 50Mb '8 bit' TIFFs,
as well as 'full size' very high quality jpegs at around 5-10Mb (both
Adobe RGB for repro use and also for my own printing) and of course
small sRGB jpegs for web use. It does these things several times faster
than other software I own, and rather more conveniently. I just can't
imagine what else you might want it to make from RAW files.
I do think it has limitations as a database and I've had a few problems
with very large databases, though it is currently doing fine with well
over 50,000 images. But I suspect some of the problems I've had were of
my own making and I think I really need to work out more how to use this
aspect of the program rather than blame it. I can live with it as it is.
But it is great to be able to add IPTC data including keywords
automatically on input, and it can make getting your images catalogued
by other software more or less automatic.
There are other features that I'd like to see in LR, and the release
last week of a preview SDK to enable developers to work on plugins is
great news for LR users - more significant than the relatively minor
interface improvements in 1.3.
The file browser in PS7 was useless - and I soon disabled it, though I
understand it is better in later versions, so perhaps Adobe have learnt
from their experience.
I'd still advise any photographer using a camera that can shoot RAW to
get LR.
Regards,
Peter
Peter Marshall - Photographer, Writer: NUJ
petermarshall@cix.co.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......
Eric Neilsen wrote:
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
|