Import speed test of various programmes - Spoiler LR is embarrassingly slow.

[Ann JS]

If Smart Previews satisfy your needs, I think that you will find that doing the RAW editing in ACR and then hitting Done to save those edits and the Preview in the metadata will speed up your Importation and Preview-building in Lr.

I certainly find the Bridge/ACR method a lot faster and more controllable than using the Lr Import directly from the camera cards — and especially so if the diabolical changes to Import in Lr 6.2.1 are to remain in subsequent versions.

If you absolutely need 1:1 Previews in Lr, the Bridge/ACR route may not help you so much.

[ButchM]

If Smart Previews satisfy your needs, I think that you will find that doing the RAW editing in ACR and then hitting Done to save those edits and the Preview in the metadata will speed up your Importation and Preview-building in Lr.

I certainly find the Bridge/ACR method a lot faster and more controllable than using the Lr Import directly from the camera cards — and especially so if the diabolical changes to Import in Lr 6.2.1 are to remain in subsequent versions.

If you absolutely need 1:1 Previews in Lr, the Bridge/ACR route may not help you so much.

I absolutely hate working in Bridge/ACR. I did that for quite some time before Lr came along and it really always felt like going around the block just to get across the street by comparison ... Once I get images into Lr, for a high volume workflow, it's quite nice.

I don't think the changes to import are staying ... at least not without an option to go to the legacy functions .... Fogarty said there would be an update later this week.

[Damon Lynch]

The basic import itself is slow see times in bold below. Nothing to do with rendering of anything.

I don't know about your system & workflow, but i seem to recall that LR on my system starts generating previews well before the file import process has completed. In other words, you with LR you cannot separate "bringing in the photos" and "preview generation", because they happen in parallel (at least on my system). I don't know if the video mentions that -- I haven't watched it as Youtube is censored where I'm at.

[fdisilvestro]

I don't know about your system & workflow, but i seem to recall that LR on my system starts generating previews well before the file import process has completed. In other words, you with LR you cannot separate "bringing in the photos" and "preview generation", because they happen in parallel (at least on my system). I don't know if the video mentions that -- I haven't watched it as Youtube is censored where I'm at.

Interesting, I have never seen the behaviour you describe. In my case preview generation starts after the import process has completed.

[jpegman]

Beyond the applications mentioned in the video and in this forum, QImage has a pretty fast RAW import algorithm and the new On1 Photo 10 browser coming out later this month is supposed to be significantly improved over the already fast On1 9.5 browser!

Either of these programs can be used to cull through the total import very rapidly after which the "selects" (keepers & maybe's) only need be imported into the LR database much as PM can be used. This way LR is not wasting large amounts of time dealing with "non-selects" (aka rejects).

Jpegman

[jjj]

Interesting, I have never seen the behaviour you describe. In my case preview generation starts after the import process has completed.

Same here. I don't even see any thumbnails until after import has finished. Only then does the 'building standard previews' countdown at top left start.
Took just over a minute to import 306 images.

[jjj]

As an aside I cull very few images. So see no point in culling before a tedious import.

[ButchM]

As an aside I cull very few images. So see no point in culling before a tedious import.

For me, it is not necessarily a 'culling' task because I'm not going to likely ultimately delete or eventually not import most of the images from a shoot ... it's more like choosing to import only the premium, primary select images I need to process for immediate delivery ... then re-visit the remainder of the batch after deadline obligations have been met.

Aperture 3 accomplished this with aplomb. It could import your select images (tagged in camera during the shoot) and also had an option for revisiting the import process and skip previously imported images. Very functional and customizable feature set as well as time saving effort.

[Alan Goldhammer]

Same here. I don't even see any thumbnails until after import has finished. Only then does the 'building standard previews' countdown at top left start.
Took just over a minute to import 306 images.

This is my experience and I think this is the capacity of my 16GB CF card.  I don't mind this speed at all as I'm usually doing other things during the download.

[Damon Lynch]

Oh yes, my mistake -- it doesn't start building the previews until it's done the import. I guess my memory of how it works was confused by the fact I sometimes import several folders in a row, one after the other, in which case it will be building previews for an earlier folder as it imports a later folder. That's obviously not germane to our discussion. Apologies for the confusion.

[Ann JS]

Those who think that they hate working through Bridge-hosted ACR 9.2 might want to take another look at it. Most of those who dislike Bridge, don't seem to realise that all the Panels can be rearranged, re-sized or grouped in one Panel/Window in Tabs.

I use the whole middle column (spread-out to fill about 3/4 of my screen) for Thumbnails and don't make space for a Preview Panel at all because I can use the Space bar to go instantly into full-screen Previews.

The ACR 9.2 Interface is so much less cluttered than is the one in Lr; and the way in which ACR handles multiple files and Batch synchronization is far faster and easier than Lr.

For me, Bridge and ACR are the perfect gateway to the Import routine for Lightroom should I need or want to use Lr for anything.

[ButchM]

Those who think that they hate working through Bridge-hosted ACR 9.2 might want to Take another look at it. Most of those who dislike bridge, don't seem to realise that all the Panels can be rearranged, re-sized or grouped in one Panel/Window in Tabs.

Some people don't 'think' they dislike working with Bridge ... they 'know' because they use it often for tasks to work with other apps like using it to 'bridge' workflow between Photoshop and InDesign ... as the utility was intended.

When comparing the ease of progressing from capture to delivery strictly working with RAW camera image files, Lr is just as capable ... especially utilizing Develop, Print and Export presets ... not to mention the benefits of live Auto-sync in the Develop module for batch processing, Collections, Smart Collections for Publishing services ... some may also 'think' they don't like Lightroom because they have not delved deeply enough into these aspects to see the value. Tis view is not mutually exclusive.

The preference of one solution is not any better than the other ... it's purely a matter of subjective preference ... not inherit superiority of choice.

[jjj]

Those who think that they hate working through Bridge-hosted ACR 9.2 might want to take another look at it. Most of those who dislike Bridge, don't seem to realise that all the Panels can be rearranged, re-sized or grouped in one Panel/Window in Tabs.

I use the whole middle column (spread-out to fill about 3/4 of my screen) for Thumbnails and don't make space for a Preview Panel at all because I can use the Space bar to go instantly into full-screen Previews.

The ACR 9.2 Interface is so much less cluttered than is the one in Lr; and the way in which ACR handles multiple files and Batch synchronization is far faster and easier than Lr.

For me, Bridge and ACR are the perfect gateway to the Import routine for Lightroom should I need or want to use Lr for anything.

When I used to be an Adobe beta tester, one of the things I tried to suggest regarding Bridge was that the default layout was a major part of why Bridge had a low uptake.
That and the archaic, modal and very clunky ACR interface didn't endear people to the software.

This is how I used Bridge on a single or double monitor setup.

[jjj]

Some people don't 'think' they dislike working with Bridge ... they 'know' because they use it often for tasks to work with other apps like using it to 'bridge' workflow between Photoshop and InDesign ... as the utility was intended.

When comparing the ease of progressing from capture to delivery strictly working with RAW camera image files, Lr is just as capable ... especially utilizing Develop, Print and Export presets ... not to mention the benefits of live Auto-sync in the Develop module for batch processing, Collections, Smart Collections for Publishing services ... some may also 'think' they don't like Lightroom because they have not delved deeply enough into these aspects to see the value. Tis view is not mutually exclusive.

The preference of one solution is not any better than the other ... it's purely a matter of subjective preference ... not inherit superiority of choice.

Pretty sure all the bolded is also in ACR/Bridge. Maybe you haven't delved deeply enough.
Bridge also has something that I find frustrating that LR doesn't and that is being able to run actions on a bunch of images images in PS. So easy in Bridge.
Sadly Adobe gave up on progressing Bridge several PS iterations ago and barely bothered to work on improving ACR's clumsy interface from the original version and just keep bolting things onto it.  No to mention the fact that it's modal means many people don't even realise it's there or what it does.

[Ann JS]

one of the things I tried to suggest regarding Bridge was that the default layout was a major part of why Bridge had a low uptake.

I am convinced of it: the Default Layout in Bridge is abysmal and many people never dig deeper.

I have heard that a new team is working on Bridge so perhaps we will see good things evolve before too long.

But, for me, the ACR 9.2 panel runs rings around the Lr tools: spacious, clean, clear, fast and incredibly efficient. Multiple-selecting a swathe of images in Bridge and hitting Cmd R to open the whole lot in Slide-mode, I can access and work on several hundred images simultaneously. With the KBSCs and Synchronising, I can process over 1000 RAW images a day in ACR.

I open the entire shoot in Bridge-hosted ACR and do a preliminary previewing of each frame in the ACR Panel (zooming as needed) and rate and discard files from there. A second run of the high-star files through ACR then provides more-refined and polished edits for archiving.

I find that I can only do one tenth of that number in Lr because of its excruciatingly slow Previewing and Processing and the cramped way in which the Develop Module has been designed. This cramping is exacerbated when I am working on my small MBPr.

To me, the only way to make Lr bearable, is to Rate and pre-process all of my RAW files in ACR before I import them into Lr!

[jjj]

I am convinced of it: the Default Layout in Bridge is abysmal and many people never dig deeper.

I have heard that a new team is working on Bridge so perhaps we will see good things evolve before too long.

Long overdue. They dropped beta testing of Bridge years back.

But, for me, the ACR 9.2 panel runs rings around the Lr tools: spacious, clean, clear, fast and incredibly efficient.

Old fashioned and clunky is how I would describe it. Poor layout, mouse dependent, terrible preset workings and not being able to quickly reset local tools are some of the things I find frustrating with the antiquated programme. Br/ACR/PS used to be my workflow for a long time but LR improved on it so much. I gave up on Br.
The current abysmally slow previewing in LR however is well abyssmal. But Br hasn't changed at all since it was last part of my workflow and that was 4 versions of LR back. But it's previewing is certainly way faster than LR on a quick test. But it still seems to have a bug I reported years back with 100% previews sometimes not quite rendering. 

[Ann JS]

Mouse-dependent?

Only for moving the Sliders or selecting one of my pre-saved Presets from the list (same as in Lr!). I never need to Mouse-around (or Wacom-Stylus around!) for anything else

I select each Tool and change between the different Panels by using KBSCs.

Part of the problem is that I don't think anyone has ever publicized that Cmd Option 1 (through 9) will open each of the Task Panels (Cmd Option 1 opens "Basic");

that Cmd Shift S will save A Snapshot (an Instance) of any current Edit;
 
and Cmd Option S syncs any (or all) of your pre-selected Settings to the currently first-chosen image in the group;

and that multi-selected images will self-sync simultaneously to a particular setting if you move an editing slider.

I find these short-cuts are pretty easy to remember and they very quickly become second nature.

[David Mantripp]

Sadly Adobe ... barely bothered to work on improving Lightrooms's clumsy interface from the original version and just keep bolting things onto it. 

There, fixed that for you  .   But, frankly, bolting stuff on and plugging stuff in has been Adobe's modus operandi for a very, very, very long time (actually since they absorbed Macromedia's DNA).   They really don't excel in UI / usability (e.g LR's new HDR and Pano tools - direct from butt-ugly engineering proof of concept to production release).  Functionality, yes, but (good) user experience seems to be a very low priority, Fireworks being probably the nadir. Ironic, really, as UX designers tend to work a lot with Adobe tools.

[graeme]

Those who think that they hate working through Bridge-hosted ACR 9.2 might want to take another look at it. Most of those who dislike Bridge, don't seem to realise that all the Panels can be rearranged, re-sized or grouped in one Panel/Window in Tabs.

I use the whole middle column (spread-out to fill about 3/4 of my screen) for Thumbnails and don't make space for a Preview Panel at all because I can use the Space bar to go instantly into full-screen Previews.

The ACR 9.2 Interface is so much less cluttered than is the one in Lr; and the way in which ACR handles multiple files and Batch synchronization is far faster and easier than Lr.

For me, Bridge and ACR are the perfect gateway to the Import routine for Lightroom should I need or want to use Lr for anything.

I used Bridge/ ACR for about 7 years but I now prefer Lightroom for photo import,organising, processing, export & printing ( esp printing ). I just wish it's performance was better. & yes I know you can reorganise the Bridge interface - I'm not a total idiot.

[graeme]

Bridge also has something that I find frustrating that LR doesn't and that is being able to run actions on a bunch of images images in PS.

Now that would be useful.