I respectfully suggest that you are missing the point.
No I am not. Just because LR imports the files you use, doesn't mean it isn't crippled.
And I respectly suggest you read posts more carefully before replying in such a patronising manner.
LR is an image editing app designed to make dealing with a large number of files easier than it has previously been - its not a word processor and its not a video editor. There are other applications for that.
Yes - its a DAM. But its a DAM for simplifying photography from shoot to finish - unquote. Again, its designed to come back from a shoot with a large number of images, quickly sort them, process them and export as required. no more, no less.
And to simplify things, it needs to deal with all image files not some of them. Duh! As it stands it complicates
my workflow and gets sidelined as a result.
It doesnt get more fundamental - shoot images, import, process, export. If you dont understand that was and is LR's mantra then you need to go back and read listen to the shadowland [A.kA LR] design goals.
I have and they were not always perfectly realised and although trying different ways of doing things is good, realising a prior method is more effective is an even better way to improve. Are you also suggesting should one ignore some work produced previously to LR even exists or ignore the fact that times have changed? Again.
Video, for example is now a important part of many photographer's workflow. The Guardian Newpapers just bought a bunch of 5DIIs specifically as they have video, which they want their photographers
Several of LRs early design desicisions were seen to not work, such as ignoring folder structure and were then thanfully altered. But LR not moving forward as photography has, will render it as ineffective as the software that was struggling with the change from film to digital. The revolution in photography has not finished yet. If I'm going to add metadata to my stills, why would I repeat the process for say my movieclips in yet another programme which probably has a diferent interface and way of working, when it would be so much easier to do both together in LR? And LR uses sound in the slideshows, yet has a pathtic and very clumsy sound import function. Some Pro Cameras can record sound to makes notes about images, which LR halfheartedly acknowledges.
The fact that the slideshow and Web gallery are part of LR, show that photography is not just about prints anymore and multimedia issues like these need to be addressed. Software can be focused andyet still be open as well. They are not mutually exlcusive.
Who is to say what is relevant to photography? where does one draw the line in the sand? If I used my calculator to work out depth of field for my 355th frame and stored those calculations in a .xmp file - is that excel calculation meant to be ingested into LR; if so how is it to be stored, how is it to be referenced to the original file? and to what end? More importantly.. is LR crippled because the engineers didnt forsee my requirement to import a .xmp file? *shakes head*
LR does import .xmp files and is how it can read changes made to files in say, Bridge. Do you know how to use programme?
What you are asking for is LR, PS, Word and a Video editor (and who knows what else) all rolled into one - what an ugly monster that would be....
Try reading posts much more more carefully before replying. I specifically said, it was not important for LR to edit these files
, but merely to catalogue them, so I only had to use one DAM app not several. LR simply catalogues all my files relevant to photography and they get opened in the relevant programme, just like it does with PSD files and Photoshop for example. LR is not at present a usuable DAM app, as it can only catalogue RAW, Tiffs + JPEGs.
And although I tend to recommend LR over PS to people these days for most photographic work, I still think LR is deeply flawed and infuriatingly clumsy at times, but it's a lot better than it was. But Bridge is so much faster, less clumsy and more capable for DAM finding/sorting images than LR a lot of the time, so I use that instead. Less clicking and faffing needed.