Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: dwswager on May 23, 2016, 11:05:14 am
-
Desperately trying to learn Lightroom and failing miserably.
Is there a way to have a filmstrip view while in the develop module? Going back and forth between the Library and Develop modules is killing me.
(http://slrcamera.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/NIK38.zone_6.bridge_Step001.jpg)
Having worked for years in Bridge, I can select the image from the filmstrip, see a big preview and decide if it is something I want to develop, open the image in ACR where I "develop" it. Clicking done in ACR brings you back to the same spot in Bridge. I would like to be able to do this in LR so I am not forever going back and forth from the develop and Library modules. A shortcut key to hide the filmstrip while "developing" would be the great too.
Thanks!
-
Filmstrip is available at the bottom of the screen in the Develop Module. If it's missing then look for an arrow at the bottom of the screen in the center and click it. That should bring up the filmstrip.
-
A shortcut key to hide the filmstrip while "developing" would be the great too.
F6.
See Help > Develop Module Shortcuts. There are similar panels in the other modules.
-
Thanks.
But can someone tell me how to select 20 files and apply or remove an attribute to all 20? When I select them in the film strip and hit say the flag attribute, it only applies it to the first file and I have to hit the flag 20 times.
-
Try switching to the grid view. Then the change should apply to all the selected images
MDIJB
-
Thanks.
But can someone tell me how to select 20 files and apply or remove an attribute to all 20? When I select them in the film strip and hit say the flag attribute, it only applies it to the first file and I have to hit the flag 20 times.
The default logic is that when you have one image in the central area (known as "loupe view" in Library) any metadata changes or adjustments only apply to that one image. Otherwise, people easily forget they have 20 images selected. So you generally switch to Grid view (G) to apply metadata to multiple images.
There is also an option to change the behaviour to "AutoSync mode" so that changes do apply to all the selected images. In Library you switch it on by the menu Metadata > Enable Auto Sync, though I wouldn't recommend it because of the above risk. In Develop it's enabled by a button in the right hand panel and I'd recommend it to some people, but not to others. It's the fastest way to process large numbers of images, but you do need to concentrate and be aware at all times of how many images you have selected. Some people can work that way, some can't.
-
The default logic is that when you have one image in the central area (known as "loupe view" in Library) any metadata changes or adjustments only apply to that one image. Otherwise, people easily forget they have 20 images selected. So you generally switch to Grid view (G) to apply metadata to multiple images.
There is also an option to change the behaviour to "AutoSync mode" so that changes do apply to all the selected images. In Library you switch it on by the menu Metadata > Enable Auto Sync, though I wouldn't recommend it because of the above risk. In Develop it's enabled by a button in the right hand panel and I'd recommend it to some people, but not to others. It's the fastest way to process large numbers of images, but you do need to concentrate and be aware at all times of how many images you have selected. Some people can work that way, some can't.
Having done Human Interface Design and Human Reliability Analysis, there is often not a single solution which is correct. However, I am at a loss to think of a situation in which you would select several images and then "do something" and only wish to do that something on the first selected image. And that is the normal convention...select what is to be acted upon and then take the action.
These are the quirks of Lightroom that make it so much less productive and so frustrating to learn.
Question: Is the Auto-Sync retroactive? That is if I have two images rated 3 stars and 4 stars respectively and I select both and then apply a "Red" color label, does it try to retroactively sync the star ratings and all the metadata or only the ones that I apply while they are selected? If it is the latter, then that is how it should operate out of the box. I'm all for protecting people from their own incompetence, but when you select a group of files, you should be intending to operate on a group of files!
BTW, I'm very appreciative of all the help. I didn't realize how awesome Bridge was until I've tried to replace it. LR is like Bridge on Quaaludes! Unfortunately, Bridge does not scale appropriately on a 4K screens so it is somewhat less effective than it could be.
-
You'll soon grow used to the selection logic, and you can change it if you want. But don't underestimate users' incompetence - some users can certainly work in AutoSync all the time, for others it's counterproductive.
AutoSync doesn't work the way you want. It doesn't group images or lock their metadata together.
Bridge? Not used it for years (semi-joking)
-
You'll soon grow used to the selection logic, and you can change it if you want. But don't underestimate users' incompetence - some users can certainly work in AutoSync all the time, for others it's counterproductive.
AutoSync doesn't work the way you want. It doesn't group images or lock their metadata together.
Bridge? Not used it for years (semi-joking)
I would never grow used to the selection logic because I almost never use GRID view. It is almost a pointless view of the data. Neither big enough for evaluative purposes, nor dense enough for selections. I generally always work in a filmstrip view so I can select and evaluate simultaneously. Or, I'm in a metadata view where I'm working with metadata and not the image. And most of my selections are CTRL/CMD - A (select all) following filtering on some sort of data/attributes.
From Adobe Website on Metadata:
"5.(Optional) Choose Metadata > Enable Auto Sync or click the Enable Auto Sync switch on the Sync button to automatically apply metadata changes to all selected photos as you edit."
This should be the standard behavior. I'm actually at a loss to come up with a scenario in which a user would select a group of files and then take an action and not intend for the action to apply to the entire group. They may make a mistake and wish they hadn't, but it was their intent when they took the action. I'm fine with providing an option to put the program in dumbed down kiddie training wheel mode, but don't hobble the program out of the box!
-
In grid view (G) use the + key or the slider in the toolbar (T), and it can be as big or small as people need. Hit E to get to a single image.
The selection logic is important to understand. Yes, the logic could be different, and in Develop I only work in AutoSync mode. But once people do get the concept, it works fine, and they probably don't bother selecting stuff in the filmstrip as much you want to do.
-
In grid view (G) use the + key or the slider in the toolbar (T), and it can be as big or small as people need. Hit E to get to a single image.
The selection logic is important to understand. Yes, the logic could be different, and in Develop I only work in AutoSync mode. But once people do, it works fine, and they probably don't bother selecting stuff in the filmstrip as much you want to do.
Thanks! I'll continue to plug along to try and make lightroom work. I'm just struggling to see the benefit of LR. I want to like it, but other than collections, I just don't see the benefit over Br/ACR. And the computer code itself runs slower and the interface quirks trip me up. But with 4K screens on my desktop and laptop and Br not able to do interface scaling, I really need to find an alternative.
Bridge has grids and the thumbnails can be expanded or shrunk. But my point is that if I shrink them I can't evaluate and if I expand them to a size useful to say choose this one versus that, it is no longer useful for selection because only a few or so are on screen. The filmstrip view gives you both. And since it can be hidden or shown with F6, it makes it pretty handy.
-
You seem to be wanting to do library jobs (labeling, rating) in the develop module. That's like wanting to do cooking in the bedroom (the opposite, though, doesn't sound that impossible ;) )
-
I'm just struggling to see the benefit of LR.
OK, for example, let's imagine I want to find all photos of a scene I've visited a few times, and they're scattered across 3-4 drives. I'm not sure if Bridge even lets me search by keyword across multiple drives, but it's not very quick for it to interrogate thousands of files. A few seconds in Lightroom. Then I want to find another group of pictures, it's back to square one in Bridge, another trivial task in Lightroom. Push your picture archive up to 6 figures, Lightroom's still happy. So that's tasks like finding, sorting, categorising that Lr does so much better. Save time organising, use it on creative tasks.
Then consider physical safe-keeping. Let's complicate things by keeping some of the photos on a drive that's switched off or otherwise unavailable. Not a chance of finding them in Bridge as it doesn't know the drive ever existed but the photos are all recorded in Lightroom's catalogue. So imagine the drive had crashed, or some folders are missing because someone accidentally deleted them. Lightroom tells you something should be there and helps you verify the restoration task. In other words, it has a role in safeguarding your work.
And so one can go on. Virtual copies mean you can do alternative versions of even duplicate entire shoots (eg b&w versions of a wedding shot) with no disc space. Look at Develop and its History panel which records what you did to an image and allows you to undo work even in later sessions. Map allows you to visualise where you took shots, maybe plan return visits. Print doesn't exist in Bridge, nor does the mobile workflow.
So what you're doing is comparing a glorified version of Explorer/Finder that's designed for anyone, with a tool that's designed to be an integrated self-sufficient environment for managing and processing large numbers of photographs.
-
You seem to be wanting to do library jobs (labeling, rating) in the develop module. That's like wanting to do cooking in the bedroom (the opposite, though, doesn't sound that impossible ;) )
You have it backwards. LR makes you go into 2 different modes to do similar things. That is, it has partitioned the kitchen so to stir the pot while cutting vegetables, you have to go into a different room.
You look old enough from your photo to remember software MODES! They were the bane of our existence and LR brought them back for a redo! My frustration is that LR is trying to enforce a predetermined workflow while I'm used to having tools and the ability to establish the workflow that is best for me in each situation.
-
So what you're doing is comparing a glorified version of Explorer/Finder that's designed for anyone, with a tool that's designed to be an integrated self-sufficient environment for managing and processing large numbers of photographs.
I'm comparing Br/Ps/ACR to Lr. I'm trying to replace Br/ACR with Lr. If we grant that Lr has better file handling and data virtualization functionality and that Ps has a pixel based back end that Lr doesn't, we are left with the stuff in the middle. ACR duplicates the functionality of the develop module. I want the ease of virtual copies, collections and the ability to take with me the previews to edit while away from the real files. Other than that, I got the file handling and data virtualization part handled on my server.
Anyone that denigrates Br, does not understand the power, efficiency and flexibility of it.
-
... LR makes you go into 2 different modes to do similar things. That is, it has partitioned the kitchen so to stir the pot while cutting vegetables, you have to go into a different room..
LR is basing its software on science:
Multitasking lowers your work quality and efficiency (http://www.inc.com/larry-kim/why-multi-tasking-is-killing-your-brain.html)
Among safety warnings:
Multitasking men have it the worst
The damage could be permanent
;)
In other words, pick a task and concentrate on it.
-
LR is basing its software on science:
Multitasking lowers your work quality and efficiency (http://www.inc.com/larry-kim/why-multi-tasking-is-killing-your-brain.html)
Among safety warnings:
Multitasking men have it the worst
The damage could be permanent
;)
In other words, pick a task and concentrate on it.
I agree, in principle. It is much better to design a workflow that concentrates on one task at a time...to completion if possible. However, when I'm editing an image, it would be nice to simply be able to make metadata or attribute adjustments on the fly.
I'm just frustrated trying to use Lr. I did a job this weekend. Got home with over 1800 frames shot and started working them in Lr. Got about 1/4 of the way through them and looked at my wife and said "this is taking forever!" Even the previews seem to draw slower in Lr. Using the error keys to step through the images, there is a notable pause before anything displays, let alone the high resolution preview. And these were 20MP 12bit RAW from a D500 and not the 36MP 14bit from the D810. In Br, it previews low res immediately while it build the high resolution preview. Usually enough for a first cut decision between frames, depending on the subject.
-
In terms of auto sync on multiple images, it's important to know that Grid/Library using Quick Develop and Develop have different approaches to this; Relative vs Absolute settings! QD is Relative. Develop is Absolute. AFAIK, Bridge is Absolute with no options otherwise. Say you have 5 bracketed images and use the Exposure button in QD. ALL five images will be adjusted relative to that one click rather than synchronizing all the photo’s with the same exposure value. Useful for batch processing the same relative correction to many images. Say 1 image has a setting or 5, the other 6 (the edit isn't important, the value is). Now you add 1 relative to those images. The image that was 5 jumps to 6. The image that was 6 jumps to 7 and so on. Maybe what you want, maybe not.
LR has some significant advantages over Bridge/ACR for editing: Virtual Copies, Proof Copies, unlimited History states.
-
In terms of auto sync on multiple images, it's important to know that Grid/Library using Quick Develop and Develop have different approaches to this; Relative vs Absolute settings! QD is Relative. Develop is Absolute. AFAIK, Bridge is Absolute with no options otherwise. Say you have 5 bracketed images and use the Exposure button in QD. ALL five images will be adjusted relative to that one click rather than synchronizing all the photo’s with the same exposure value. Useful for batch processing the same relative correction to many images. Say 1 image has a setting or 5, the other 6 (the edit isn't important, the value is). Now you add 1 relative to those images. The image that was 5 jumps to 6. The image that was 6 jumps to 7 and so on. Maybe what you want, maybe not.
LR has some significant advantages over Bridge/ACR for editing: Virtual Copies, Proof Copies, unlimited History states.
That is cool!
-
Ok, so I've climbed down off the ledge a little thanks to some help here and some more time poking around the interface and Googling for answers.
The default logic is that when you have one image in the central area (known as "loupe view" in Library) any metadata changes or adjustments only apply to that one image. Otherwise, people easily forget they have 20 images selected. So you generally switch to Grid view (G) to apply metadata to multiple images.
The reason people easily forget they have 20 images selected is because LR violates standard conventions for clearing selections!
In every graphical interface that I have ever used (I do Human Reliability Analysis for military weapon systems), when a selection is active and the mouse is clicked anywhere in the frame (not the window) hosting the items, the selection is cleared. If the click occurs on an actual item, it becomes the new selection. If it occurs in null space, then focus of the window may change to a specific item, but no items will be selected.
In LR, when a selection is active and the mouse is clicked on an item within the selection, the selection is maintained and only the focus of the interface is switched to the item which was clicked. I believe Adobe calls this the "active" image. It requires a click outside the selection to clear the previous selection. I know Br does not work this way, nor any other application or OS I've ever worked with.
I'm not debating the merits of one method versus the other, only pointing out that LR is the oddball and violates the user's innate and learned expectations. This is similar to building a car and switching the positions and shapes of the gas and brake pedals.
-
... LR is the oddball and violates the user's innate and learned expectations...
Not for reasonable people, who have learned, through politics, that while we are all equal, some are more equal than the others ;)
In LR, with multiple images selected, one is always "more selected" than the others. This comes handy for stacking, for instance, as the one "more selected" becomes the image representing the collapsed stack. Or when Auto Sync is used, changed on the "more selected" image determine the changes for the other, also selected images.
-
Try switching to the grid view. Then the change should apply to all the selected images
MDIJB
Unfortunately in Develop you can’t.
-
If you want to apply the changes to all selected images in the Develop Module you need to activate Auto-Syng as it has been mentioned before.
Using the Second monitor function, which you can use even if you have only one monitor, you can use the grid view while in the develop module, but again, changes to multiple images require the auto-sync enabled.
-
The reason people easily forget they have 20 images selected is because LR violates standard conventions for clearing selections!
In every graphical interface that I have ever used (I do Human Reliability Analysis for military weapon systems), when a selection is active and the mouse is clicked anywhere in the frame (not the window) hosting the items, the selection is cleared. If the click occurs on an actual item, it becomes the new selection
I totally agree and it's confusing until you 'learn' to do it 'their way'. They (Adobe) use the term "Most Selected*" which again, is an odd term and behavior! But it's how it works and once you learn this rather odd behavior, what else can you do but work with it?
* http://digital-photography-school.com/lightroom’s-selected-and-most-selected-images/
-
In LR, with multiple images selected, one is always "more selected" than the others. This comes handy for stacking, for instance, as the one "more selected" becomes the image representing the collapsed stack. Or when Auto Sync is used, changed on the "more selected" image determine the changes for the other, also selected images.
As I said before, I do not debate the benefits of being able to change the focus within an active selection. No other application or OS has that ability that I know of.
This selection behavior was tested in GRID view of Lightroom Library. And it is precisely why Adobe designed the program not do apply actions following a selection automatically to all items in a selection and only apply them to the image that had the focus. And then gave the ability to change that behavior. They knew it would screw people up. That people would assume they had changed the selection and not just the focus.
I'd be willing to bet, every other application on your system works as the attached image shows and not the way LR does it. While there are clearly benefits to what LR is doing, there are also seen and unseen penalties, the magnitude of which depending on the user's situation.
-
The reason people easily forget they have 20 images selected is because LR violates standard conventions for clearing selections!
No, it's because they can easily hide the film strip and often concentrate so much on the current image that is occupying the majority of the screen.
I'm not debating the merits of one method versus the other, only pointing out that LR is the oddball and violates the user's innate and learned expectations.
Yes, Lr is an oddball and Adobe have taken a conservative approach. In Develop I'm actually a big advocate of AutoSync being the default (or even the only way to work), and I might have liked Library to be the same. A bit of "moral hazard" is good for you, isn't it? But I'm sure Adobe are right not to go that way - too many users fail to concentrate sufficiently to be aware how many images they've selected.
-
I totally agree and it's confusing until you 'learn' to do it 'their way'. They (Adobe) use the term "Most Selected*" which again, is an odd term and behavior! But it's how it works and once you learn this rather odd behavior, what else can you do but work with it?
* http://digital-photography-school.com/lightroom’s-selected-and-most-selected-images/
I agree, it is what it is. One should try to maximize the benefits of the capability to change focus within a selection while minimizing the penalty.
However, Adobe should have a clear statement up front in the manual that they have changed the nature and before of selections within LR. I've now reviewed 2 different paid video courses on lightroom and neither of them brought this fact up! This should probably be the first thing out of an instructors mouth in an introductory course. This information is fundamental to using LR. It is different than Ps, Br, ACR and any other application a user might have ever used.
-
However, Adobe should have a clear statement up front in the manual that they have changed the nature and before of selections within LR.
What manual ;D
They (Adobe) used to produce them, they were pretty good. At least that's how I had to teach myself Photoshop 1.0.7; no other alternative.
-
From Lightroom's FAQ (https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/faq.html), "Where can I find the user's manual?" "You can find web and PDF versions of the Lightroom manual on the Lightroom Help page (https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/topics.html)."
-
Personally, I think you'll find more and more easily organized by visiting Julianne's LR blog
http://blogs.adobe.com/jkost/lightroom-training-videos
Other pay sources are KelbyOne and Lynda.com
-
From Lightroom's FAQ (https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/faq.html), "Where can I find the user's manual?" "You can find web and PDF versions of the Lightroom manual on the Lightroom Help page (https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/topics.html)."
You probably haven’t been an Adobe customer long enough (like me) to have seen a real, Adobe manual.
Photoshop's 1.0.7 book (yes, it was printed and pretty large) was good enough for those of us who had nothing else to learn by, to figure out how to operate the app.
The last printed manual I can find is Photoshop 5.0 which was 384 pages!
BTW, the PDF is Adobe® Photoshop® Lightroom® CC Help
-
From Lightroom's FAQ, "Where can I find the user's manual?" "You can find web and PDF versions of the Lightroom manual on the Lightroom Help page."
-
From Lightroom's FAQ, "Where can I find the user's manual?" "You can find web and PDF versions of the Lightroom manual on the Lightroom Help page."
MUCH, much better (and over 700 pages rather than 284 page PDF called Adobe® Photoshop® Lightroom® CC Help)by Victoria Bampton http://www.lightroomqueen.com (http://www.lightroomqueen.com) :
-
From Lightroom's FAQ (https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/faq.html), "Where can I find the user's manual?" "You can find web and PDF versions of the Lightroom manual on the Lightroom Help page (https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/topics.html)."
I actually have some old Photoshop Manuals on my bookshelf. And I reviewed this PDF before installing Lr. On Page 98 in a section titled Select photos in the Grid view and the Filmstrip, it even discusses how selections work. It tells you how it violates standard conventions without first highlighting that it does so.
When you have several photos selected, you can click any selected photo to make it active without deselecting the other photos.(pg98 Adobe Lr Help PDF)
Of course, I glossed over this section because having decades of experience using software, I know how to make and change selections with a mouse and keyboard. I would have expected a prominent caution statement explaining that they were deviating from how selections are handled in Lr, versus all other software in the known world, including all other Adobe products.
-
And I reviewed this PDF before installing Lr. On Page 98 in a section titled Select photos in the Grid view and the Filmstrip, it even discusses how selections work. It tells you how it violates standard conventions without first highlighting that it does so.
Here's just some of how Victoria explains what I think we're talking about (and her ebook at $32 is worth every penny):
SELECTIONS
When you select multiple photos in Lightroom’s Grid view or in the Filmstrip, you’ll notice that the cell border displays in three different shades of gray.
Because Lightroom allows you to synchronize settings across multiple photos, there needs to be a way of choosing the source of the settings as well as the target photos, so Lightroom has three different levels of selection (or two levels of selection plus a deselected state, depending on how you look at it). (Figure 6.10)
• Active—The lightest shade of gray is the active photo. That’s the single photo that would be shown in Loupe view or Develop module.
• Selected—The mid gray is also selected, but it isn’t the active photo.
• Not Selected—The darkest shade of gray isn’t selected.
Anything you do in Grid view on the primary monitor, such as adding star ratings or keywords, applies to all the selected photos, whereas other views only affect the active or most-selected photo.
When applying settings, or especially when deleting photos, double check how many photos are selected, otherwise you could accidentally apply a command to all of them.
If you’re synchronizing settings across multiple photos, Lightroom takes the settings from the active photo and applies it to the other selected photos.
To select a single photo, you simply click on it. To select non- contiguous photos—ones that aren’t grouped together—click the rst photo and then hold down the Ctrl key (Windows) / Cmd key (Mac) while clicking on the other photos. To select sequential photos, click on the rst photo, but this time hold down the Shift key while you click on the last photo, and the photos in between will also be selected.
There’s also a trick to deselecting photos. Clicking on the thumbnail itself retains your current selection and makes that the active photo, leaving the others selected too. But if you click on the cell border surrounding the thumbnail, the other photos are deselected, leaving just that single photo selected.
The thumbnails give you a good overview, but they’re a little too small to see the detail in your photos, so Lightroom offers three further view modes—Loupe, Compare and Survey—each with different strengths.
-
Of course, I glossed over this section because having decades of experience using software, I know how to make and change selections with a mouse and keyboard. I would have expected a prominent caution statement explaining that they were deviating from how selections are handled in Lr, versus all other software in the known world, including all other Adobe products.
As you say, it is explained. It's pretty clear too. Lightroom has differences from whatever other programs people came from, and no doubt many other prominent caution statements could be slapped across the text. But who reads manuals anyway, or pays sufficient attention to the details? So Adobe have adopted a conservative approach in the UI itself. You'll soon adjust to this, and if you don't you can switch both Library and Develop to AutoSync.
-
As you say, it is explained. It's pretty clear too. Lightroom has differences from whatever other programs people came from, and no doubt many other prominent caution statements could be slapped across the text. But who reads manuals anyway, or pays sufficient attention to the details? So Adobe have adopted a conservative approach in the UI itself. You'll soon adjust to this, and if you don't you can switch both Library and Develop to AutoSync.
How items are selected and deselected and how the program handles those selections is fundamental to operating any software! And since Lr totally violates normal convention on both sides of the equation, this should be the 1st thing discussed with any new user to the software. No user can be successful with the software without understanding this. I'm hard pressed to think of a piece of information about the software that a new user might require more than this one! I've been on message boards for months and this is the first discussion I've been involved in that mentioned this little tid bit!
Hell, just knowing this moved me from beginner to intermediate (expert in the develop module functionality)!
-
How items are selected and deselected and how the program handles those selections is fundamental to operating any software! And since Lr totally violates normal convention on both sides of the equation, this should be the 1st thing discussed with any new user to the software. No user can be successful with the software without understanding this. I'm hard pressed to think of a piece of information about the software that a new user might require more than this one! I've been on message boards for months and this is the first discussion I've been involved in that mentioned this little tid bit!
Probably because Adobe's conservative approach is in tune with how most users think? Yes, it's odd, but it's also pretty obvious once you start using the software.
-
... Lr totally violates normal convention...
I think you got carried away with that logic. In other programs, when you make a selection, you are supposed to do only one thing WITH it, collectively: move it, copy it, trash it, etc. LR provides additional functionality, to do things WITHIN the selection.
-
Of course, I glossed over this section because having decades of experience using software, I know how to make and change selections with a mouse and keyboard. I would have expected a prominent caution statement explaining that they were deviating from how selections are handled in Lr, versus all other software in the known world, including all other Adobe products.
I guess you have not used AutoCAD ;D . Having said that, I consider you raise an important issue that any tutorial, video or instructions should address in a prominent way (as it is usually the first lesson in any AutoCAD tutorial).
The contributors to this thread are long time expert users of LR for whom the way to handle selections is in their blood, so they (we) may not be the best reference for this issue and the usual response you get is RTFM.
The same issue happens with the import dialog, where it is not straightforward how to make selections of multiple images or group of images.
BTW, I do agree that once you know how to use it and having the option to use auto-sync or not (regardless of the default setting), it becomes straightforward an powerful.
-
of course if they'd just made it non-modal they could have avoided tying themselves in all these bizarre knots... like Quick Develop in Library, the Collections/Folders panel in Develop, etc etc. I loathe it SO MUCH when, in Develop Mode, suddenly I realise what I want the image title to be, but have to switch to Library to enter it.
Really, Lightroom is pretty much unavoidable, both only an engineer could love it.
-
Their mistake was to use the word "module" and big obvious tabs, allowing some folk to label Lr as "modal" - doubleplusgood in Macspeak. It's better to see Lightroom's modules as "workspaces" dedicated to particular tasks, just like other Adobe apps except locked down. This encourages a more orderly workflow where you do your keywording etc in bulk, more efficiently and concentrating on that job, instead of flipping back and forth to keywording when you're supposed to be working on the images' appearance.
-
... I loathe it SO MUCH when, in Develop Mode, suddenly I realise what I want the image title to be, but have to switch to Library to enter it...
Ah, those tragic first-world problems ;)
-
I think you got carried away with that logic. In other programs, when you make a selection, you are supposed to do only one thing WITH it, collectively: move it, copy it, trash it, etc. LR provides additional functionality, to do things WITHIN the selection.
Not really. In Br, you can do multiple actions with a selection. In Powerpoint, I can do multiple things with a selection of items.
I agree the functionality provides some benefits and opens the possibility to even more functionality added later. I probably would have implemented it via keyboard modification rather than standard behavior. Say ALT+Click to change the active image within a selection. Then it doesn't change normal convention to select and unselect, it just adds additional functionality to change focus within a selection. And the key is clicking an item doesn't make a new selection. If you have 40 images selected and some of them are not on screen, it is easy to click an item and assume that is the new selection because every other program works that way.
Again, my point isn't that this methodology is good or bad, but that it should have been shouted from the rooftops. In the U.S. Military, it is called a FOOT STOMPER! A military instructor would stomp his foot 3 times before discussing this to signal it as primary importance.
-
of course if they'd just made it non-modal they could have avoided tying themselves in all these bizarre knots... like Quick Develop in Library, the Collections/Folders panel in Develop, etc etc. I loathe it SO MUCH when, in Develop Mode, suddenly I realise what I want the image title to be, but have to switch to Library to enter it.
Really, Lightroom is pretty much unavoidable, both only an engineer could love it.
Hey now, I'm a nuclear engineer and I hate modal software. I suspect the Lr development team was divided into functional areas (Library, Develop, Print...) and each got a module and then they cobbled it together. All they needed to do is implement Br workspaces and let you associate a saved workspace configuration as a default for particular tasks but alow full functionality within any workspace.
BTW, if you have the Photography Extortion Plan, then you have access to Br and ACR. If you don't need some of the functionality that Lr brings for file handling, then it is identical functionality for tagging, key wording, developing. I suspect I will use both as necessary. I still do a first cull in Br. I see no reason to import 2000 images into the catalog just to delete 1600 of them an hour later!
-
I still do a first cull in Br. I see no reason to import 2000 images into the catalog just to delete 1600 of them an hour later!
Why is it easier to load the images to the hard drive then use Bridge to view them and then delete 1600 images than accomplish the same thing using Lightroom?
-
It is much faster
-
Why is it easier to load the images to the hard drive then use Bridge to view them and then delete 1600 images than accomplish the same thing using Lightroom?
1. Br can read the files directly from the XQD or SD card and does not have to move them.
2. Br does not have to create and populate the entries for each file into the catalog.
3. Br itself runs faster the Lr.
Hence, I never have to load those 1,600 once I have done the first cull through card and I only load the remaining 400.
People not using Br for the tasks at which it excels are missing out. In the last 5 years or so, it has gone from a mediocre file viewer to a great tool.
-
People not using Br for the tasks at which it excels are missing out. In the last 5 years or so, it has gone from a mediocre file viewer to a great tool.
I was pleasantly surprised on how Br has improved after not using it for many years. I remember it being slow and mediocre as dwswager says, but now it is a fast and useful tool. I have to admit that it was this thread what made me try Br again.
-
I was pleasantly surprised on how Br has improved after not using it for many years. I remember it being slow and mediocre as dwswager says, but now it is a fast and useful tool. I have to admit that it was this thread what made me try Br again.
Unfortunately, Br, unlike Ps and Lr, has not yet been updated with interface scaling for 4K screens. On Windows, you can use a manifest file to force Windows to scale the application, but you loose the benefit of the 4K resolution because the image area is also scaled. This includes the Br version of ACR. So if using Br on a high resolution monitor, open the image in ACR in Ps and not ACR in Br.
-
Personally, I think you'll find more and more easily organized by visiting Julianne's LR blog
http://blogs.adobe.com/jkost/lightroom-training-videos
Indeed, Julianne has saved me hundreds of dollars and thousands of hours learning Lr and Ps.
-
Hey now, I'm a nuclear engineer and I hate modal software.
Well, maybe Lr is not for you. That isn't an insult or an attempt to belittle your POV ... however, millions of users spanning the past decade ... (over 500,000 participated in the first public beta of Lr) ... have adopted Lr without too many issues. At some point you have to wonder if your expectations are possibly out of step with the app in general.
The Library Module in Lr is NOT Bridge ... nor was ever intended to be so.
I am by no means coming from a place where I think Lr is perfect .... my views on where the app falls short are well documented, here and elsewhere ... but as a general RAW image workflow solution ... one has to wonder is Lr the odd duck ... or is your perception of Lr out of step.
Again, I offer that view as possible food for thought, not as an insult with derogatory intent.
-
Well, maybe Lr is not for you. That isn't an insult or an attempt to belittle your POV ... however, millions of users spanning the past decade ... (over 500,000 participated in the first public beta of Lr) ... have adopted Lr without too many issues. At some point you have to wonder if your expectations are possibly out of step with the app in general.
That is what I am trying to figure out. It is not that I dislike Lr, just not sure I can be boxed into a forced workflow. Same reason I have owned a large position in Apple since Steve Jobs went back to the company, but use absolutely no Apple products.
I actually think it could be beneficial, but I know that it could be so much more efficient if it was not modal! In the early days of PCs, almost all software was modal by design. Almost no software is modal now because we learned it is more productive to allow users options.
-
That is what I am trying to figure out. It is not that I dislike Lr, just not sure I can be boxed into a forced workflow. Same reason I have owned a large position in Apple since Steve Jobs went back to the company, but use absolutely no Apple products.
I'm exactly the opposite. I own no Apple stock ... but I have not owned a computer that was not manufactured by Apple since i purchased my Commodore 64 in 1982/83. Though I have never considered the use of Apple hardware and/or software or Lightroom as being "boxed in" ... except for maybe the Book module in Lr ... but that is another topic that Beardy would appreciate I not venture forth in ... :)
I actually think it could be beneficial, but I know that it could be so much more efficient if it was not modal! In the early days of PCs, almost all software was modal by design. Almost no software is modal now because we learned it is more productive to allow users options.
Yes, there is something to that philosophy. I always thought Aperture was much more efficient and less modal in many respects ... though, Lr is, what it is ... and that isn't a bad thing.
I doubt we'll see much change in function or philosophy for quite some time as Adobe seems to have lost the pulse of their user base of late and have taken up guessing, rather than seeking definitive data from their users ... but I digress ...
That aside, I am so much more efficient with a large volume workflow using Lr than I ever could have been with Bridge/ACR/Ps workflow. It may not be perfect or as complete as it should be by now, but the vast majority of users who have taken the time to delve into the details, have achieved a definite comfort level with the workflow that can enhance efficiency to a point worth the investment of that effort.
-
1. Br can read the files directly from the XQD or SD card and does not have to move them.
2. Br does not have to create and populate the entries for each file into the catalog.
3. Br itself runs faster the Lr.
First, I want you to understand I don't really care if you use Br, Lr or any other tool. That's your choice, not mine.
1. Lr can read the files directly from the XQD or SD card and does not need to move them. I often cull on the Import by deselecting files before actually telling Lr move them to disk and create catalog entries.
2. Lr doesn't create catalog entries until you tell it to.
3. Br doesn't do everything Lr does. I'd be shocked if Br was slower.
I used Br and BreezeBrowser for years before adopting Lr. When I shoot 1600 photos of a sporting event I can edit them more quickly and then export them to my website more easily than I can with Br/ACR/PS. YMMV
That's just my $0.02. YMMV and you're welcome to your opinions. Choose what works best for you.
-
newbie here, so take what I say with a grain of salt or a shot of you favorite beverage or both- Longtime LR user and certified- I almost forgot LR is modular, I have been using the keyboard shortcuts of so long- G, E, D, N, C, R,……..
and I do like a browser such as bridge or photomechanic to cull rate and label before adding to my LR library it has been proven in my workflow to be faster.
-
On the subject of synching adjustments - auto-synching is quite sensible for batches of similar pictures. I do a lot of school photography and although I shoot individual portraits outdoors (therefore subtle changes in lighting across a time frame) I can usually synch settings across small batches of pictures. However it still surprises me how often I clone out a piece of snot around the nose of a three-year old, only to accidentally synch the same setting across another 20 pictures. The other surprising thing is that it takes me some time to realise the error until I notice a child has a slightly distorted nose or eye........
Jim
-
On the subject of synching adjustments - auto-synching is quite sensible for batches of similar pictures. I do a lot of school photography and although I shoot individual portraits outdoors (therefore subtle changes in lighting across a time frame) I can usually synch settings across small batches of pictures. However it still surprises me how often I clone out a piece of snot around the nose of a three-year old, only to accidentally synch the same setting across another 20 pictures. The other surprising thing is that it takes me some time to realise the error until I notice a child has a slightly distorted nose or eye........
Jim
Oddly enough, for me, this is peculiar to Lr! I just did this. I made a local adjustment to slightly desaturate and brighten teeth and of course, the size, shape and position moves slightly from image to image.
I have done this in ACR for years and never had that problem. Mainly because of the difference in how images are handled. I'm hoping as I work more in Lr, I will get accustomed to the non standard nature of selections and how it handle them.
BTW, in Br/ACR you copy all the settings and then choose what to apply to each image. In Lr, it appears you choose what to copy and then it applies those to every image. The other major difference is in how "Previous" is handled. Because Br/ACR separate the viewing/selection and adjustment functions, merely selecting and viewing files does not change what the "previous" file was. Only when you go to ACR does it pick up a new "previous" and only if you actually apply the adjustments. If you cancel out, it still keeps the last accepted adjustments as "Previous". In Lr, it appears, merely viewing another image makes that the "Previous" image from which adjustments are copied.
Scenario: You have 10 images that are variations of a studio portrait. You select the first image and make adjustments. You then view the next 3 and decide to work the last of those(#4). In ACR, applying adjustments from "Previous", it applies the adjustments from image 1 (the previous image on which adjustments were made). In Lr, it applies the adjustments from image 3 (no adjustments). This is part of Lr trying to enforce it's expected workflow. It is assuming if you are going to develop, you intend to develop all images that you are viewing. That you have culled out all that are not going to be developed.
I won't say one is better than the other, just that it would be better over all if they worked the same way!
QUESTION: Is there a mechanism in Lr to filter images to only those that have custom crops or custom settings (or no custom crop or custom settings)? I don't see that in the filter bar, but was wondering if I can either put it there or execute that filtering in some other manner.
-
QUESTION: Is there a mechanism in Lr to filter images to only those that have custom crops or custom settings (or no custom crop or custom settings)? I don't see that in the filter bar, but was wondering if I can either put it there or execute that filtering in some other manner.
You can build a smart collection and find all images that have been cropped. Develop>Cropped is true or Cropped is false.
WHY such attributes for searching are found in smart collections and not the filter bar, and vise versa is another annoying issue with LR for me.
-
You can build a smart collection and find all images that have been cropped. Develop>Cropped is true or Cropped is false.
WHY such attributes for searching are found in smart collections and not the filter bar, and vise versa is another annoying issue with LR for me.
Dog, you're killing me! I assume building 4 smart collections for Cropped, Not Cropped, Develop Settings and No Develop Settings would slow Lr down? You guys are supposed to be talking me into Lr, not talking me out of it.
That might be a reasonable way for those with Lr perpetual license and not the photography plan, but it is much simpler to just open the folder in Br and click the "Cropped", "Custom Settings", "No Custom Settings" or "Not Cropped" item in the "Camera RAW" setting area of the filter panel. Especially since the filter panel is content aware and only shows options where there are difference among the images in the content window. While forcing myself to learn Lr, I've actually done this, then tagged the files with a blue label and then gone back to Lr, resynchronized the folder and been able to find them in Lr using the blue color label. The Rube Goldberg solution!
-
Dog, you're killing me! I assume building 4 smart collections for Cropped, Not Cropped, Develop Settings and No Develop Settings would slow Lr down? You guys are supposed to be talking me into Lr, not talking me out of it.
No it will not. Smart Collections rock (Dumb collections are dumb). A Smart Collection is just like a smart playlist in iTunes. And VERY powerful.
-
No it will not. Smart Collections rock (Dumb collections are dumb). A Smart Collection is just like a smart playlist in iTunes. And VERY powerful.
Cool. I've used collections in Br, but not the smart collection feature. Always thought of collections being more of similarities in content (lighthouses, soccer, etc.) and not attributes, but will give it a go!
Thanks!
-
.....You guys are supposed to be talking me into Lr, not talking me out of it.
After 60 some posts on your topic, it is obvious that it would have been far easier to talk you out of it. ;)
-
After 60 some posts on your topic, it is obvious that it would have been far easier to talk you out of it. ;)
LOL Unfortunately!
I was putting off learning Lr just because of the initial productivity hit that one expects. But it was always my expectation that Lr would be better having been designed for photographers. It has been quite shocking to learn that while there are a number of new features versus Photoshop and the Bridge and camera Raw helper apps for those that don't need the "painting" part of Photoshop, how poorly Lr was executed. It is not that Lr is bad, but that it could have been SO much better!
-
It is not that Lr is bad, but that it could have been SO much better!
Too bad your insight and sage wisdom wasn't on hand during the original public beta for Lr back in 2006 ... you could have saved us all from a decade of doing everything wrong.
-
Too bad your insight and sage wisdom wasn't on hand during the original public beta for Lr back in 2006 ... you could have saved us all from a decade of doing everything wrong.
Apparently!
Look, if you do something one way for an extended period of time, then that way seems natural and appropriate. But if you already know a better way, or a more efficient way or a more productive way, then it no longer looks the same to you. I would have never picked up Texting unless someone else showed me texting. It isn't that I couldn't evaluate it and find it beneficial. It was that I was ignorant of it and therefore had no opportunity to find it beneficial.
If someone wants to argue that the Lr way is better in some way or in some cases, I'm fine with that. If you think it is better to copy a specific set of develop settings for every single combination of setting you wish to paste versus being able to copy once and paste any number or variation then I'm listening. But to defend poor execution out of ownership, laziness or ignorance is foolish. Do long time Lr users not want the program to get better (not just different, but more productive and effective)?
-
If someone wants to argue that the Lr way is better in some way or in some cases, I'm fine with that. If you think it is better to copy a specific set of develop settings for every single combination of setting you wish to paste versus being able to copy once and paste any number or variation then I'm listening. But to defend poor execution out of ownership, laziness or ignorance is foolish. Do long time Lr users not want the program to get better (not just different, but more productive and effective)?
I'd argue you are wrong about Lightroom's non-standard selection method, since Adobe needed to be conservative, but I agree about the non-standard Copy routine. I've often questioned why we should be forced to choose which Develop settings to copy? It's forcing you to think ahead to how the copied settings will be applied, which might work fine for the next photo, but soon breaks down.
I've always wanted Copy to be like most apps' Copy methods, copying everything. You'd then have a Paste and a Paste Special where you decide which settings to paste. But it's unlikely to change now, and is less relevant if you always work in AutoSync mode.
-
I'd argue you are wrong about Lightroom's non-standard selection method, since Adobe needed to be conservative, but I agree about the non-standard Copy routine. I've often questioned why we should be forced to choose which Develop settings to copy? It's forcing you to think ahead to how the copied settings will be applied, which might work fine for the next photo, but soon breaks down.
I've always wanted Copy to be like most apps' Copy methods, copying everything. You'd then have a Paste and a Paste Special where you decide which settings to paste. But it's unlikely to change now, and is less relevant if you always work in AutoSync mode.
I didn't think it up, but in Bridge, You copy everything in one click of "Copy Setting". It is when you paste that it brings up the dialog to ask what is to be pasted. In this manner, you can use 1 copy and past one combination to any number of files and then paste a different combination to any number of other files ad infinitum. I would love to hear the Lr team's explanation for why they do it backwards.
I want to like Lr. I want it to be the best damn non destructive image editor possible. I knew I would have to change some aspects of my workflow, but was hoping to keep it to a minimum. What I don't accept is being forced into less efficient methods and giving up functionality. There is no question that LR should be able to drop color sample points, for example. It is implemented in ACR and would be extremely beneficial in Lr! Few people correct totally by the numbers anymore, but color reference points are still vital.
-
QUESTION: Is there a mechanism in Lr to filter images to only those that have custom crops or custom settings (or no custom crop or custom settings)? I don't see that in the filter bar, but was wondering if I can either put it there or execute that filtering in some other manner.
Not natively in LR but using the plugin Any Filter (http://www.johnrellis.com/lightroom/anyfilter.htm), you can filter based on an extensive selection criteria and even create a collection with the results if you want.
It is not that Lr is bad, but that it could have been SO much better!
Even though I like and use several Adobe products, it seems that the criteria for LR is good at everything, excel at nothing.
-
the plugin Any Filter (http://www.johnrellis.com/lightroom/anyfilter.htm), you can filter based on an extensive selection criteria and even create a collection with the results if you want.
Thanks for mentioning that plugin, I hadn't seen it before. Very useful and reasonably priced.
-
Not natively in LR but using the plugin Any Filter (http://www.johnrellis.com/lightroom/anyfilter.htm), you can filter based on an extensive selection criteria and even create a collection with the results if you want.
Even though I like and use several Adobe products, it seems that the criteria for LR is good at everything, excel at nothing.
Thanks. That appears useful, but truthfully, I probably just work it in Bridge. No wonder Adobe bundles Lr and Br/ACR/Ps into the Photography Plan!
This is the type of stuff that perplexes me about Lr. How can an application developed by the same company, following a prior application (Br) that is given away for free at this point, not have incorporated that previously developed functionality?
In Br, there is a filter panel that can be part of any workspace (think module in Lr) and arranged in any size/configuration with other panels. It is context sensitive such that if the files are all the same type, for example, file type is not shown so as not to clutter the panel. It takes one click to filter all NEF files. You can combine any combination of file attribute or keyword you want. But the best part, is that it shows the total number of images in the group, how many images in the group have a particular attribute, and how many are currently selected! I can't begin to explain how handy that is. It is a real sanity check to open a folder and know there are 342 images with 1 star, 37 with 2 stars, 12 with 3 stars and 3 with 4 stars. Or there are 400 NEF, 162 JPG, and 11 TIF files. Or 112 images are from the D810 and 267 are from the D500.
-
In Br, there is a filter panel that can be part of any workspace (think module in Lr) and arranged in any size/configuration with other panels. It is context sensitive such that if the files are all the same type, for example, file type is not shown so as not to clutter the panel. It takes one click to filter all NEF files. You can combine any combination of file attribute or keyword you want. But the best part, is that it shows the total number of images in the group, how many images in the group have a particular attribute, and how many are currently selected! I can't begin to explain how handy that is. It is a real sanity check to open a folder and know there are 342 images with 1 star, 37 with 2 stars, 12 with 3 stars and 3 with 4 stars. Or there are 400 NEF, 162 JPG, and 11 TIF files. Or 112 images are from the D810 and 267 are from the D500.
There is a way (with limitations) to do a similar thing in LR using the Metadata filter. It only works in grid view in the Library and you can select up to 8 criteria. You can even lock it so any time you select the grid view the metadata filter is visible. After you customize it, you will get the same information you mention. It takes one click to filter by any value ad you can combine all 8 criteria.
The attached images show the metadata bar on top of the screen and the second image shows the information in the status bar, including how many images are filtered an how many has the user selected
-
Now, dwswager, I understand your growing pains with LR, but you seem to be doing much better than this guy for instance: :D
-
Now, dwswager, I understand your growing pains with LR, but you seem to be doing much better than this guy for instance: :D
LOL. Actually, you are better off coming to Lr blind instead of with long history with Br/ACR. Then everything seems magical rather than limited or misplaced. I'm still undecided if I like ACR's tabbed interface for the tools or Lr Develop Module's scrolling strip. Sixes I guess.
-
I have skimmed thru most of this thread and can tell you from my experience , I would never ever use LR if I had the choice to do it over again. But I'm stuck until I figure out how to use bridge properly with regards to key wording like LR does and plugins. Capture one is great but all my previous work will not read properly according to their knowledge base.
LR is not the be all end all software program. There were problems with version 5 and constant slow down of software, then there was the dumb down version for non photographers until pro's revolted and it was restored. There have been countless other bugs in the software. Tons of growing pains over the years and it will continue to have them( my prediction).
The only positives I see now are the key wording, Pano And HDR algorithm, and the plugin interaction.
I do all heavy lifting in LR but ACR can do most of that and then I do all fine detailed work in CC. I never ever convert to BW in LR. It is ok but lacks the control and finesse of CC( reference fromVincent Versace Oz to Kansas) .
-
I have skimmed thru most of this thread and can tell you from my experience , I would never ever use LR if I had the choice to do it over again. But I'm stuck until I figure out how to use bridge properly with regards to key wording like LR does and plugins. Capture one is great but all my previous work will not read properly according to their knowledge base.
LR is not the be all end all software program. There were problems with version 5 and constant slow down of software, then there was the dumb down version for non photographers until pro's revolted and it was restored. There have been countless other bugs in the software. Tons of growing pains over the years and it will continue to have them( my prediction).
The only positives I see now are the key wording, Pano And HDR algorithm, and the plugin interaction.
I do all heavy lifting in LR but ACR can do most of that and then I do all fine detailed work in CC. I never ever convert to BW in LR. It is ok but lacks the control and finesse of CC( reference fromVincent Versace Oz to Kansas) .
Bottom line is there are some work flow items best done in Lr and some best done in Br/ACR. There is also functionality only available in Lr and some others only available in Br. The key is to figure out which tool is best for what and when. Hopefully, someday, the Lr team will make it a true one stop shop until you really need to go to Ps for bitmapped images.
But you are correct, Lr is not the be all, end all some people keep praising it as. In fact, I read a quote from Scott Kelby where he compared Br to the kit lens that comes with a camera. To be fair to Kelby, this quote was written when Lr was in V3 and Br was fairly weak. But there are ignorant users running around thinking Lr is some unrivalled killer app when FOR SOME TASKS, Br/ACR runs rings around it.
-
Well, what are those tasks.... Viewing all types of files - that's important. File renaming is another, but for rare requirements, and examination of xmp metadata, if you ever really need that. I think that's about all. And let's not rewrite history - Bridge has barely changed since Lr1.0.
-
Well, what are those tasks.... Viewing all types of files - that's important. File renaming is another, but for rare requirements, and examination of xmp metadata, if you ever really need that. I think that's about all. And let's not rewrite history - Bridge has barely changed since Lr1.0.
ROTFLMAO! If you don't KNOW that Br/ACR has changed in the last 9 years, you have no basis for discussion! Not sure when Br added Collections and Smart Collections, but pretty confident it was not there in 2007.
One of the biggest benefits is the infinite customization of the interface which can be saved into individual WORKSPACES. One can group tools (Tabs in attached image) into any configuration of frames and then resize and position those frames however the user deems best for the particular task they are trying to execute. I have several different workspaces saved for different tasks. For example, being able to search on ANY attribute or metadata is not even possible in Lr without doing some sort of backflips.
I like Lr. I just wish the Br/ACR team and Lr team would get together and make Lr Pro!
-
I have used Bridge continually ever since it was introduced, it has barely changed since Lightroom, and it's about time that you were called out on your assertions. Half of the changes since Lightroom are things they added and then removed (eg the Output panel) or where they've changed the underpinnings but left the UI unchanged (eg 64 bit, scripting, definition of File Info panels). Fiddling with panel layouts or "workspace customisation" was there when it started, as were collections, though I'm not sure when smart collections were added - or why, given their problems with scalability or limitations (eg with offline files). Even if they are post-Lightroom, Bridge's smart collections are comfortably in my "barely".
Bridge remains just a glorified Finder/Explorer shackled to demands from its legacy of photographic users and failing to satisfy its ambition to be a bridge between Adobe's non-photographic applications. Lightroom does much more but is dedicated to typical photographic workflows, has built-in workspaces dedicated to those workflows, and safeguards your pictures and work in ways that Bridge, as a Finder/Explorer substitute, cannot.
All I would take from Bridge is the ability to catalogue all types of assets, and a couple of obscure details from the rename panel (string substitution and changing the extension case).
-
I have used Bridge continually ever since it was introduced, it has barely changed since Lightroom, ...
I agree, I also have used Bridge and Lightroom since their respective introduction. Though I do not consider myself a complete exert in either, my experience is Bridge has it's place, but it too is not 'all that.'
Ignorance, and the historical perspective of Bridge/ACR vs Lr RAW image workflow options can be a two-way street. While they both have their issues as well as their distractions and shortcomings ... evaluation of these options and assessing one is superior over the other is purely subjective opinion and not empirical fact.
That is why I pointed out earlier in this discussion if perhaps dwswager had been around during Lightroom's formative stages, he would not be ignorant as to why certain tools and workflow adoptions were implemented in the manner they were in Lightroom. While I would never begrudge anyone the freedom to express their opinion on such matters, it would be helpful to all concerned, if that appraisal was tempered by experience and perspective formed by long term use of the both options and not short term evaluation of one, trying to force the competing solutions to behave identically. Lightroom was never intended to be Bridge II. While not perfect in any way, Lr is it's own entity and has it's own goals and pathway.
Bridge/ACR and Lightroom, while similar in the end goals, for many users, they are entirely two different methods for achieving those ends. They never were, nor are they likely to ever be, identical in form and function.
For me, that's a good thing.
-
All I would take from Bridge is the ability to catalogue all types of assets, and a couple of obscure details from the rename panel (string substitution and changing the extension case).
I would add the entire Filter panel from Bridge to allow slicing and dicing your collection in any way with a few simple clicks of the mouse, Reconfigurable and saveable workspaces, ability to fully view and develop assets directly and not included in a catalog, Bridge's copy all settings and choose what to paste as opposed to recopy every time, Bridge's intelligent understanding of previous settings being the previous changed settings and not just the last viewed file...
Generally, when you have to go through a kabuki dance to do something with an application, especially something routine/obvious, then there is a fix to be made.
Ignorance, and the historical perspective of Bridge/ACR vs Lr RAW image workflow options can be a two-way street. While they both have their issues as well as their distractions and shortcomings ... evaluation of these options and assessing one is superior over the other is purely subjective opinion and not empirical fact.
My point all along is not that Bridge/ACR is better than Lr, but that Lr is not as good as it could be. I was hoping to dump Bridge/ACR when I picked up Lr and I have found it not advantageous to do so. There is nothing inherently impossible about improving Lr making that possible.
-
I would add the entire Filter panel from Bridge to allow slicing and dicing your collection in any way with a few simple clicks of the mouse
You should look closer at the Library Filter as it has that drill down capability. Ctrl F in Library, then click Metadata. You can add extra columns, make more than one instance of the same column (esp keywords), save the filter as a preset, "lock" it so it stays applied as you move from folder to collection etc.
The only reason you're doing a kabuki dance is because you're pretending Lightroom is Bridge. Within its narrower focus, Lightroom does a wider range of things. In part, it exists because of Bridge's failings for photographers.
-
Well said, John.
At its heart Bridge is a file browser.
At its heart Lightroom is a content management system.
-
You should look closer at the Library Filter as it has that drill down capability. Ctrl F in Library, then click Metadata. You can add extra columns, make more than one instance of the same column (esp keywords), save the filter as a preset, "lock" it so it stays applied as you move from folder to collection etc.
The only reason you're doing a kabuki dance is because you're pretending Lightroom is Bridge. Within its narrower focus, Lightroom does a wider range of things. In part, it exists because of Bridge's failings for photographers.
I'll take a look at that and see. I don't do super complex searches and filtering. Just stuff like all the images that are .NEF from the D810 with label YELLOW and are not cropped and don't have custom settings. So five clicks and I got em!
-
If that's something you do often save that as a PRESET and the next time it will be one click!
-
Here's another thing I would steal from Bridge (and most 21st century software) is being able to rename folders and collections without opening a Rename dialog box. So that makes about 4 things.