I've been happily going along using PSCS3 (as I've used PS for years) and using Bridge much more than in the past--but with no keywords. I use PS for almost every image, so that seemed the reasonable way to go. However, I still often edit in RSP. I've used many RCs over the years---but really like ACR 4.1 so that's a given now. I've used Imatch for a DAM for quite awhile, but sometimes, for my usage, its more work than worth it--other than cataloging.
I've had LR since the beta--and since I'm an RSP license holder, got the final version too. I've upgraded to 1.1 also, but was not using it. However, after watching Camera to Print--I got curious. Then--to bring myself up to speed quickly, I got the LR tutorials. Now--I'm in a dilemma LOL--is it counterproductive to use both LR and PS??
I really like editing in LR--I like the ability to change to grid and one image quickly (Imatch user that I am--and in Bridge I created my own 'favorite' with large preview area and filmstrip at the bottom, etc) but I really like using keywords in LR--they are easy to apply (I'm experimenting with importing keywords from LR to Bridge--not sure I've 'got it' yet LOL), I like the UI of LR to view---BUT, and its a big but--I go into PS to process more for just about every image--and to print or prepare for the web. I tried the 'roundtrip' today--but it isn't totally satisfactory to me--other than it will assure that the newer processed versions will appear in the catalog without importing (I do like the ability in Imatch to just renew the folders without doing anything else when I change things in a folder). I"ve imported all my 2007 image files so that gives me a lot to work with--and I went back and watched the keyword section of the LR tute so that helped.
I do import and reference from my disks and one thing that kept me from embracing LR in the beginning was the fact I didn't understand that I could have the folders/catalogs show without the image files being present on that disk. I use a number of HD for archiving--and only have this year's photos on one of my HDs present on the comptuer. Everything else has to be hooked up. Michael made it clear that I could do that without any problem so that put aside one issue for me--having the 'unfound' folders in red alerts you quickly.
However, I actually prefer to do the RAW conversion in PS--I just find it easier to deal with the UI in ACR rather than LR--prefer tabs to scrolling, etc.
So--is it even reasonably productive, workflow wise, to use the 2? I don't know--I don't shoot huge amounts of files at a time normally, am no longer doing the parttime commercial work--maybe one here and there.
Looks to me as though I will have to work out a reasonable way to proceed if I'm going to do this. I've found that when I import from a card (or storage device) that I can import and copy to the folder of choice--I have my own organization---so that works fine. In essence, I suppose this is no different than using a 3rd party RC, then opening in PS for processing--except I will have to import 'final' versions I suppose.
Any thoughts?? Anyone else reconsidering workflow??
Addendum: Can anyone enlighten me on importing keywords to Bridge--if its totally possible to search there then. It appears that I did---but I'm not sure LOL. I did import a txt file--but, after reopening Bridge, it seems as though I have keywords for the one folder I exported from. I've never used keywords in Bridge, so don't know if they are even worth trying. Using keywords and searching in LR is so nice. Gosh--'twould be nice if it was all in one bundle--but I DO understand their differences--and the reasons therefore.
Diane