Interoperability of LR and Bridge.Changes between LR and Bridge not always show

[JeffVo]

So, with two programs from Adobe with the same Engine I had the hope that if I made a change in one program it would be reflected in the other.  Not always the case it seems. For example, if I make some corrections in LR (with "automatically write changes into XMP" checked in catalog settings) and then open bridge I see the changes. Perfect.  However, if I open an image in Bridge and tweak then that change wont reflect the next time i open LR (lr still uses its database I guess).  I know I can go into the "photo" menu in LR and "read meta data from file", but that seems clunky and inefficient.  I'm in a situation in which someone else may make changes in bridge to a file and I wont know it when I go into LR.  Is there a switch I'm not flipping?

[john beardsworth]

No.

It's your expectations that need calibrating. They are different programs, not part of a suite, different types of program. Lightroom is a database-powered catalogue and the exchange of data is not intended to be immediate. Bridge is a browser, a glorified version of Finder/Explorer that reads what's there.

[JeffVo]

No.

It's your expectations that need calibrating. They are different programs, not part of a suite, different types of program.

 You are right they aren't in the same "suite", but Lightroom's full name is Adobe PHOTOSHOP Lightroom.  So it is born from the same program!  I expect very tight integration in that case.  Heck, on the Adobe website in the "about LR" section they tout integration with PS, and bridge was born out of PS originally. So then, is it crazy to assume that they might play nice together?  How hard would it be for there to be a switch that says" Uses newest XMP values" so that what ever program you use they both see the same thing? Adobe needs calibrating if there really isn't a way to do this...

[john beardsworth]

Just because it's got Photoshop in the title doesn't mean all of Photoshop is automatically in there. Ever heard of the power of the brand? What's more, Lightroom has always been advertised as having a streamlined ground-up design specifically for photographers. And if you've any experience of computing, you'll know that any "integration" between separate products is always measured in shades of grey. Here it is integrated and plays nicely together - just the bit you want is a manually-initiated process. Once you're using Lightroom as it's designed, as an end to end  workflow, Bridge is more or less irrelevant and there's really no good reason to have Lightroom reading external xmp all the time, and plenty of good reasons why not.

[Schewe]

...but Lightroom's full name is Adobe PHOTOSHOP Lightroom.  So it is born from the same program!

Not really...if you are interesting in learning about the development of Lightroom and its anti-Photoshop beginnings, check HERE.

The integration between Lightroom and Photoshop proper is pretty good but Bridge isn't Photoshop. You'll need to understand the relationship between the LR database and the .xmp files that describe the image adjustments. You can pass them back and forth but it takes recognition of the process...

[JohnKoerner]

So, with two programs from Adobe with the same Engine I had the hope that if I made a change in one program it would be reflected in the other.  Not always the case it seems. For example, if I make some corrections in LR (with "automatically write changes into XMP" checked in catalog settings) and then open bridge I see the changes. Perfect.  However, if I open an image in Bridge and tweak then that change wont reflect the next time i open LR (lr still uses its database I guess).  I know I can go into the "photo" menu in LR and "read meta data from file", but that seems clunky and inefficient.  I'm in a situation in which someone else may make changes in bridge to a file and I wont know it when I go into LR.  Is there a switch I'm not flipping?

I don't think you're making changes in "Bridge," per se, but rather using Adobe Camera Raw accessed by Bridge.

It is my understanding that adjestments to raw images made in ACR actually affect the raw file ... while adjustments made in Lightroom do NOT actually affect the raw file, but in fact all changes are stored in separate files that are in relationship to the raw file, withOUT affecting it at all.

For this reason, when you make adjustments to the raw in LR you will not see the changes to the raw file in Bridge precisely because there were no actual changes made to the raw file by LR. Every "change" you see in LR is (in essence) a "filter file" through which Lightroom interprets the raw image, without actually touching it.

Only when you "export to .tiff" do you now have a new file, based on Lightroom's influence, but yet the raw file remains untouched. IMO, this is far preferable to actually altering the raw image.

Jack

.

[Schewe]

It is my understanding that adjestments to raw images made in ACR actually affect the raw file ... while adjustments made in Lightroom do NOT actually affect the raw file, but in fact all changes are stored in separate files that are in relationship to the raw file, withOUT affecting it at all.

Close but no cigar...neither Camera Raw nor Lightroom affect the raw file...the parametric adjustments are merely metadata. The differences between ACR & LR is that ACR will always write the metadata to a .xmp sidecar file (or into a DNG, JPEG or TIFF–but it's still only metadata) while Lightroom only writes stores the metadata in the catalog unless you explicitly save the .xmp metadata out. Also, LR doesn't know anything about changes made outside of LR unless you explicitly load the .xmp metadata from the file. LR has badges to indicate the metadata was been changed outside of LR and you have a choice to either use the LR metadata and ignore the outside changes or accept the outside changes to the file.

[JeffVo]

Not really...if you are interesting in learning about the development of Lightroom and its anti-Photoshop beginnings, check HERE.

Mr. Schewe,

         Thanks so much for responding! Its nice to hear it straight from the horses mouth so to speak.  Also, thanks for the link of LR's beginnings.  Its always nice to know the history of thing to better appreciate its feature set.  Don't misunderstand me I get how LR works with a DB and I like it.  If tethered support was a bit more rapid it might just be perfect.   My issue is that often Art directors or photo editors refuse to use anything but bridge, so it would be nice for there to be an option in LR to auto load XMP if desired if someone played around in bridge when I wasn't looking.

[JohnKoerner]

Close but no cigar...neither Camera Raw nor Lightroom affect the raw file...the parametric adjustments are merely metadata. The differences between ACR & LR is that ACR will always write the metadata to a .xmp sidecar file (or into a DNG, JPEG or TIFF–but it's still only metadata) while Lightroom only writes stores the metadata in the catalog unless you explicitly save the .xmp metadata out. Also, LR doesn't know anything about changes made outside of LR unless you explicitly load the .xmp metadata from the file. LR has badges to indicate the metadata was been changed outside of LR and you have a choice to either use the LR metadata and ignore the outside changes or accept the outside changes to the file.

Okay, thanks for clarifying.

I do know that Lightroom pretty much doesn't recognize anything unless you either do it in Lightroom, or directly import changes/new files into Lightroom.

I also know that LR is so much nicer to work with then ACR that I do not bother to use ACR anymore.

Jack

.