Why Lightroom?

[m_appeal]

a different circle every time? It's very annoying... the brush thing in Photoshop looks much easier to use. I don't expect miracles, but a tool that is easy to use and not torture.

 

[mjt]

I have PS CS4 & Bridge. I've read the dope sheets on lightroom, but
I'd like to hear from my fellow Nikon owners what you think of
lightroom and why.

It's interesting people need an answer, when
it's quite obvious - LR is a true workflow tool.

Photoshop is a glorified pixel-manipulation tool.

 

[Marshal]

CNX2 may have slightly better IQ, but the clunky way it was written and the frustrating complexity of it became a dealbreaker for me.

There are 2 things I like about NX2. Well, 3. The faster magnification, faster noise reduction and the clone tool. All those are significant improvements. I do like those.

Now what I absolutely hate and what negates all speed improvements of those features above is that every time you open a new image, the adjustment tool panes on the right immediately revert back to the default tool selection. NC 4+ let you keep all the panes on right exactly where they were, where I want them.

With NX2 I have to go searching and point & clicking them back in place EVERY time I open a new pic.

As if that weren't enough, if I make even one adjustment, say in WB, or D-Lighting or anything else, instead of adding to the progressive improvement of the image with each new adjustment, it screws up the other adjustments. Nullify would be a more accurate word. Well, I can do a USM adjustment and that won't affect all the others, but many other things will. The sheer # of adjustment panes and the fact that every one of those panes gets reset to the program's default absolutely kills my workflow & productivity! A program that was supposed to help speed up my work, compared to previous versions instead slowed it down to a glacial pace. It now takes about 10X longer to work on each pic. That's unacceptable! I called Nikon Tech Support and the guy agreed that they had heard similar complaints and that it can be frustrating, but at this time, no updates are available to remedy the complaint of it resetting all adjustment panes back to default.

And, no, batch processing won't help either if each of those pics are not similar to the others in brightness, WB, contrast, etc.

 

[Nikonworks]

Graduated Filter in Lightroom 2.

So easy to correct Flash lighting on subjects at varying distances from your flash.

This alone is worth the money.

Next is the Adjustment Brush.

They improve my photography.

 

[tony field]

I think that LR cache size may not be typical. You're at 3.4
megs/image, which is about ten times the average. I'm guessing your
cache is "fresh" and contains a bunch of 1:1 previews, in addition to
the "standard" 1440 pixel previews.

Based on you comments, I took a closer look at how the cache is created. It seems that, if you are processing raw files, two caches are generated. The first is the "relatively" small lightroom cache and the Camera Raw cache.

The lightroom cache size seems to be dependent upon how you do your file import and which options you select for cache image size. The "standard" option seems to generate a minimal cache where as other options such as "Embedded & sidecar" produce a very large cache. The Bridge cache is sort of "medium sized" - not as large as the cache created with "embedded & sidecar" but larger than that created by lightroom's "standard".

In addition, when processing the raw files, Lightroom creates a Camera Raw cache. which grows in size as images are processed. For example, if you do a "Develop", the images are added to the Raw cache. It also seems as though the "Slideshow" can add to this cache but I cannot figure out exactly how or when. The raw cache can become very large. However, I am sure that this is limited to a maximum value and the space is reused as needed. This makes sense considering that processing with CS4 and/or Bridge and Camera Raw also uses this cache space for it's nominal processing.

Thus Lightroom can have small or large caches depending upon which options you use to create the cache.
--
tony
http://www.tphoto.ca

 

[Simon Garrett]

It's interesting people need an answer, when
it's quite obvious - LR is a true workflow tool.

Photoshop is a glorified pixel-manipulation tool.

I agree, but "workflow" seems somehow obvious and trivial if you haven't used it. I mean: Bridge does workflow. When I first tried Lightroom I couldn't see the advantage over Bridge & Photoshop. It was only when I'd practised it on a few sessions of hundreds of photos - then I found out just how fast and effective it is.

Expanding what you say a little:
A lot of PP on a few photos: use Photoshop.

A lot of photos (hundreds or more) then you probably haven't time for so much PP, and Lightroom really comes into its own. And maybe use Photoshop on a few.

 

[tony field]

Expanding what you say a little:
A lot of PP on a few photos: use Photoshop.
A lot of photos (hundreds or more) then you probably haven't time for
so much PP, and Lightroom really comes into its own. And maybe use
Photoshop on a few.

You totally miss the value of Bridge CS4 - if you have the CS4 system, then Lightroom is probably not necessary at all. In fact, for processing one or two thousand images from a shoot, Bridge / ACR is at least as fast overall as using lightroom. I can often process a large shoot of 1500 images with necessary image editing entirely in Bridge / ACR and not need photoshop for any editing process at all. Essentially all features of Lightroom are in Bridge (but not all).

In other words, if you have CS4, then Lighroom is unnecessary.
--
tony
http://www.tphoto.ca

 

[Simon Garrett]

You totally miss the value of Bridge CS4 - if you have the CS4
system, then Lightroom is probably not necessary at all.

Well, I have CS3 not CS4, and I hear CS4 Bridge is somewhat improved. My comments relate to CS3 Bridge, which (in my opinion) does not match the workflow capabilities of Lightroom.

In fact, for processing one or two thousand images from a shoot, Bridge / ACR
is at least as fast overall as using lightroom.

As I say, not (in my circumstances) for CS3.

I can often process
a large shoot of 1500 images with necessary image editing entirely in
Bridge / ACR and not need photoshop for any editing process at all.
Essentially all features of Lightroom are in Bridge (but not all).

I agree with you: it really comes down to preference. I used to use CS3 Bridge/ACR for the workflow for which I now use Lightroom. I find Lightroom faster, but I could use Bridge.

In other words, if you have CS4, then Lighroom is unnecessary.

I would have to try CS4 to know whether I agree with that!

 

[Dan Desjardins]

Indeed - It's on my list. I'm currently going through Chris' Photoshop for Photographers and it's really excellent! I've been shooting for over 30 years (very casually - I'm more of a gearhead than artist) and his tutorial really explains a lot to me - it's very nice when a tutorial really starts with the basics - sure I may know them - but often there is a real gem that I never got. Kind of like a person I once met who never heard the word "snafu", or a friend from Green Bay who never heard of a Chicago Dog....

Des

 

[Dan Desjardins]

Unless you get a 64 bit edition then 4 gigs is the maximum amount of RAM that can be used by your windows machine (I don't know about Mac). That's 1 gig for the OS and 3 gigs for any single application. Windows 32 only knows about the 4 gigs. To maximize your performance make sure there is at least 3 gig free before you launch PS, or LR.

If you put 6 gig in your machine you might as well tape all the chips beyond 4 gig to the back of your computer - it will be as useful there as it would be plugged in (actually More useful since it won't be adding unnecessary heat to the system).

Des

 

[RedFox88]

to say the least. The circle thing is really not well implemented.

It wasn't meant to be true clone or heal, but to remove dust spots or a quick adjustment or 2. If you have significant editing to do, export it to a PS or PSE.

 

[RedFox88]

One thing I noticed is that Lightroom generates very large Cache
files if you shoot raw and select the "standard" cache options. For
example, one directory I have with 1450 raw images requires a cache
size of 5 GB whereas the same cache structure on Bridge is 600 MB -
this is almost 1/10 the cache space.

I'll take larger cache sizes if it allows me to switch between RAW files and have functions/adjustments be processed quicker! That's a no brainer!

And I'm able to have LR2 on vista64 with 4GB ram & quad-core run as the same times as a spybot can and have no trouble minimizing LR to use PSE without lag in either program when switching.

A large cache size is only a problem if you're worried about cache size or on a slow computer with limited resources.

 

[RLewis]

Unless you get a 64 bit edition then 4 gigs is the maximum amount of
RAM that can be used by your windows machine (I don't know about
Mac). That's 1 gig for the OS and 3 gigs for any single
application. Windows 32 only knows about the 4 gigs. >

Des

I was speaking of a Quad Core running Vista when I referred to 6 Gigs of Ram. I currently run the max (4 Gigs) on my single core 3 Ghz machine, which is running XP.

Rick
http://www.ricklewisphotography.com/

 

[RLewis]

CNX2 may have slightly better IQ, but the clunky way it was written
and the frustrating complexity of it became a dealbreaker for me.

As if that weren't enough, if I make even one adjustment, say in WB,
or D-Lighting or anything else, instead of adding to the progressive
improvement of the image with each new adjustment, it screws up the
other adjustments. Nullify would be a more accurate word. Well, I can
do a USM adjustment and that won't affect all the others, but many
other things will. The sheer # of adjustment panes and the fact that
every one of those panes gets reset to the program's default
absolutely kills my workflow & productivity! A program that was
supposed to help speed up my work, compared to previous versions
instead slowed it down to a glacial pace. It now takes about 10X
longer to work on each pic. That's unacceptable! I called Nikon Tech
Support and the guy agreed that they had heard similar complaints and
that it can be frustrating, but at this time, no updates are
available to remedy the complaint of it resetting all adjustment
panes back to default.

I'm not a PP wizard but don't some adjustments effect the overall image, and yes will "screw up" the other adjustments if not done in proper order? I start with what I believe is called "global" adjustments first then get down to "local" adjustments.

I guess I am not as affected by the speed because I usually do not have to PP more than about 40 or so images for a client. I can take more time with them. I shoot mostly portraits.

Rick
http://www.ricklewisphotography.com/

 

[Marshall189865]

D3 NEF file -> LR2 -> CS3. I love it.

 

[Kluso]

CNX2 may have slightly better IQ, but the clunky way it was written
and the frustrating complexity of it became a dealbreaker for me.

There are 2 things I like about NX2. Well, 3. The faster
magnification, faster noise reduction and the clone tool. All those
are significant improvements. I do like those.

Now what I absolutely hate and what negates all speed improvements of
those features above is that every time you open a new image, the
adjustment tool panes on the right immediately revert back to the
default tool selection. NC 4+ let you keep all the panes on right
exactly where they were, where I want them.

With NX2 I have to go searching and point & clicking them back in
place EVERY time I open a new pic.

You do need to read the help file and look at a few of the excellent NX2 tutorials on the net.

Maybe you are trying to use NX2 the way Capture 4 used to work, NX2 is very different needs a different approach.

As if that weren't enough, if I make even one adjustment, say in WB,
or D-Lighting or anything else, instead of adding to the progressive
improvement of the image with each new adjustment, it screws up the
other adjustments. Nullify would be a more accurate word. Well, I can
do a USM adjustment and that won't affect all the others, but many
other things will.

Try this only if you have a fast processor.

Click on Edit - Preferences - General

Under Edit List tick the box next to "Keep all steps active in edit list"

note in brackets the warning that this requires a fast processor, they do mean it.

now all your edit steps work all the time

Try the Help file Chapter 13 and you see this

"By modifying a previous step, you will temporarily disable all of the steps that occur after the current step you are modifying. Once you have completed any modification to that step, click on the "Apply" checkbox next to the last step that you want to reapply. Capture NX 2 will automatically apply all of the steps between the step you have just modified and the last step that you checked. To prevent this from happening, enable the Keep All Steps Active in Edit List (Requires Fast Processor) option in the "General" section of the "Preferences" dialog. "

By the way a fast processor is not just any CPU that is over 2 GHz, nearly all fast processors are between 2 and 3 GHz but new dual core and quad core processors of 2 to 3GHZ are much much much faster than a a processor of the same speed that is 4 or 5 years old, technology has moved ahead - the GHz speed number alone is NOT a good indicator of performance.

The sheer # of adjustment panes and the fact that
every one of those panes gets reset to the program's default
absolutely kills my workflow & productivity! A program that was
supposed to help speed up my work, compared to previous versions
instead slowed it down to a glacial pace. It now takes about 10X
longer to work on each pic.

You can easily Copy and Paste adjustments from one open image to another.

Search the NX2 Help file for 'Copy adjustment' and 'Paste adjustment'

Even if one image is different to the next Copying and Pasting adjustments then making a few changes is much quicker that starting each image from scratch.

You can also save your settings and use Batch - Paste Adjjustment into an open image, no it doesn't start a batch process it just pastes a saved adjusmnet from a list of saved adjustments, you can even manage that list to make it quicker to use.

That's unacceptable! I called Nikon Tech
Support and the guy agreed that they had heard similar complaints and
that it can be frustrating, but at this time, no updates are
available to remedy the complaint of it resetting all adjustment
panes back to default.

You probably got the correct yet misleading answers, sure there is no new update BUT NX2 already does all these things you just need to get familiar with NX2 and forget how Capture 4 worked.

And, no, batch processing won't help either if each of those pics are
not similar to the others in brightness, WB, contrast, etc.

--
Inspector Kluso

 

[tony field]

I'll take larger cache sizes if it allows me to switch between RAW
files and have functions/adjustments be processed quicker! That's a
no brainer!
...
A large cache size is only a problem if you're worried about cache
size or on a slow computer with limited resources.

The speed / smoothness of Bridge 4 is as good as Lightroom overall.

My present Bridge cache contains 410,000 images and is 150GB in size. I have not tried to use Lightroom for this process since Bridge 4 does virtually everything I need.

Thus, if you have CS4, there is no advantage to use Lightroom.
--
tony
http://www.tphoto.ca

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

I think that LR cache size may not be typical. You're at 3.4
megs/image, which is about ten times the average. I'm guessing your
cache is "fresh" and contains a bunch of 1:1 previews, in addition to
the "standard" 1440 pixel previews.

Based on you comments, I took a closer look at how the cache is
created.

Cool. What's interesting is that your observations differ so radically from mine that I had some trouble figuring out why, for a moment. I'm pretty sure everything you're objecting to is a side effect of using the "Embedded & Sidecar" previews (AKA "the Devil's own preview")...

It seems that, if you are processing raw files, two caches
are generated.

Not as far as I can determine.

The first is the "relatively" small lightroom cache
and the Camera Raw cache.

I can't see what Lightroom has to do with a "Camera Raw cache" at all...

But most of what you describe sounds like normal operation with "embedded & sidecar" previews.

The lightroom cache size seems to be dependent upon how you do your
file import and which options you select for cache image size.

Quite true.

The
"standard" option seems to generate a minimal cache where as other
options such as "Embedded & sidecar" produce a very large cache.

The "standard" option generates a JPEG in the "prophoto RGB" color space. You can select the size (1024, 1440, 1680, or 2048 pixels on the long edge) and the quality (low, medium, or high).

Embedded & sidecar is unpredictable.

The
Bridge cache is sort of "medium sized" - not as large as the cache
created with "embedded & sidecar" but larger than that created by
lightroom's "standard".

"Embedded & sidecar" produced the smallest initial cache, but hte greatest cache growth, because it generates 1:1 previews constantly. However, if you have Lightroom set to discard 1:1 previews after a certain time, this growth will taper off on longterm LR use. You're not giving it a chance.

E&S uses the embedded JPEG in the image as the initial view, then generates a 1:1 preview and switches to it when you browse the image in practically any LR module. Personally, I avoid it: the embedded preview (Nikon internal JPEG processing) looks so different from the LR previews that I find the constant changing of colors, detail, etc. to be very annoying.

"Standard" is very useful. It works quickly for any library view or slideshow less than the "standard" size. On a laptop, 1440 works even in "fit" mode when you have the sidebars collapsed. It's not enough for my 30 inch Dell, when I collapse menus, LR generates 1:1 previews. If I regenerate the standard previews at 2048, I won't see 1:1 previews generated until I zoom in on part of an image.

In addition, when processing the raw files, Lightroom creates a
Camera Raw cache.

I can't locate that cache.

But as I pointed out earlier, every time you go to the develop module with a particular image, a 1:1 (bloody big) preview is generated. So the LR cache grows. But it also shrinks, as the default setting is to discard the 1:1 previews after 30 days. You can set LightRoom to discard them after a shorter period, or not to discard them at all, which will result in the cache growing until every last image has a 1:1 preview.

Which is what you're already seeing with your "embedded & sidecar" mode.

which grows in size as images are processed. For
example, if you do a "Develop", the images are added to the Raw
cache.

You're naming an awful lot of caches. I think what you're seeing is the normal addition of a 1:1 image to the LR cache.

It also seems as though the "Slideshow" can add to this cache
but I cannot figure out exactly how or when.

A slideshow will use a "standard" preview if it is available and if you're slideshow is at a lower resolution than a standard preview. If I slideshow to our Canon projector, the 1440 resolution is enough (the projector is 1440 by 900). Since you're using "embedded & sidecar" you don't have the "standard" preview at all, so your Lightroom generates a 1:1 for every image.

My 30 inch Dell is a 2560 x 1600 monitor. If I do a slideshow right now, with my standard previews at 1440, that's not enough for either horizontal or vertical images, so 1:1 previews get generated for every image in the slideshow.

If I upped the standard mode to 1680 or 2048, I'd get 1:1 generated for landscape views, but not for portrait ones.

The raw cache can
become very large. However, I am sure that this is limited to a
maximum value

I don't know. I think reuse is regulated only on the basis of time.

and the space is reused as needed. This makes sense
considering that processing with CS4 and/or Bridge and Camera Raw
also uses this cache space for it's nominal processing.

I don't think LR and CS/Bridge/ACR share any caches.

Thus Lightroom can have small or large caches depending upon which
options you use to create the cache.

If I regenerate the standard previews for one of the higher resolutions (1680 or 2048) then any image in portrait orientation will show from the standard preview, but horizontal images will still need 1:1 previews generated to get them to 2560.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

I'll take larger cache sizes if it allows me to switch between RAW
files and have functions/adjustments be processed quicker! That's a
no brainer!
...
A large cache size is only a problem if you're worried about cache
size or on a slow computer with limited resources.

The speed / smoothness of Bridge 4 is as good as Lightroom overall.

Maybe so (I'm not that familiar with B4) but I can say that you've got your LR set to be very slow and awkward.

Use the "standard" previews, and set a resolution compatible with your monitor, and it will operate very quickly.

My present Bridge cache contains 410,000 images and is 150GB in size.
I have not tried to use Lightroom for this process since Bridge 4
does virtually everything I need.

Thus, if you have CS4, there is no advantage to use Lightroom.

So you maintain, based on a small LR experiment with really horrible settings.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[tony field]

It seems that, if you are processing raw files, two caches
are generated.

Not as far as I can determine.

The first is the "relatively" small lightroom cache
and the Camera Raw cache.

I can't see what Lightroom has to do with a "Camera Raw cache" at all...

ACR is used by lightroom to decode the raw files. You can see how this is created by lightroom in the Raw Cache file. The location can be found in Bridge by looking at "edit / Camera raw settings" menu item. On a windows system, this is in

Documents and settings/ Local Settings/Application Data/Adobe/Camera Raw/Cache.

It is convenient to delete the files in the Cache directory when playing around with how Lightroom uses it.

You can see files added with the name of "Cache000000nnn.dat" as Lightroom processes files. This will grow during "develop" and "Library" operations. In the slide show, you can see files added to this list if you click on various thumbs.
--
tony
http://www.tphoto.ca