Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
DPP does possibly the best conversion of any converter for colour quality. It is great for working on single images - but is not really suited for large volume.
--
tony
http://www.tphoto.ca
To be more precise, "localised adjustments, gradients, retouching, masking" are all available in ACR. "web galleries, slideshows, books, direct uploads and much more" are available in Bridge. The only difference is difference in the GUI presentation. The functionality and use of the tools are identically.
All of the things you mention are completely available in Bridge/ACR with the possible exception of "books", and "map" which is a new feature in Lightroom but may or may not be in the forthcoming release of CS6.
Maybe you should actually use the software before you make claims. I am still waiting for your explanation of why Lightroom is "far far better".
--No, I am not an expert in Lightroom. Please tell me in what way the converter/editing "Develop" module is BY FAR better than the editing features of ACR. The only editing feature I can think of that is interesting is the virtual copy - everything else can be done in almost exactly the same way in ACR with the same controls. Granted, the catalogue features are better than Bridge.Wow, you do have a high opinion of yourself and you obviously don't know Lightroom at all. It is BY FAR the most powerful and versatile converter package ever made and far far far more than an interface for camera raw
--
tony
http://www.tphoto.ca
tony
http://www.tphoto.ca
Well, seems like either you have never used Camera Raw or you have possibly the CS2 or earlier edition. ALL of the development module features of Lightroom are available in ACR.They're available in photoshop. not Camera RAW
Lighroom is very nice to use indeed. However, EVERYTING the Development module does in Lighroom can be virtually identically done in ACR. There is no operational speed advantage to Lightroom - but it is certainly prettier and less clunky than ACR.Tony, this is my experience as well, I process the vast majority in Lightroom due to the speed of cranking through a lot of photographs. You can do some light touch up on Lightroom easily enough as well, when I have a shot that needs more work Lightroom doesn't cut it, obviously, but it's a lot faster than using Photoshop for most of my photos.
Well, if you find it smooth operating for weddings, I guess I should revisit DPP. Previously, it was slow operating, had bugs, and was difficult to work with on my large volume shoots (sports, theatre, dance). Guess I will download the current edition and give it a fly. I did like the colour resulting from DPP.Sure it does! I use DPP exclusively for my wedding photography.
I have pre-defined sharpening, lens distortion, CA correction "recipes" for each of my cameras. I use the simplest filing system known to man -- each camera's output goes to its own directory, under the parent date directory. I then simply select all and apply the base receipe to the entire lot of images for that particular camera.
