Lightroom 3.5 - Here begins a journey ...

[Viana]

Colin - I'm new to Lightroom as well but Lightroom has a function to export your files to DNG format and I believe it will keep the changes you made from what I've read. What you may be able to once you've finished your edits on your Solid State Drive (assuming you're editing there for speed and performance purposes) is to export your updated files into DNG format on to your RAID array (create a Collection under Harddrive that's linked to your RAID File Structure, drop them in there and export to DNG.

Once there in there, I suspect you'll probably have to re-import them into the same or a separate catalog after you remove the originals from your solid state drive.

Again - not experienced with Lightroom - just with how computers and programs work so you might be able to give that a try without messing around with moving catalogs and sidecar files.

Sorry, Malcom but that information is incorrect. Please do not confuse poor Colin even more.

Let him learn to set up his Master Catalogue properly, then move on to Preferences and Catalogue Settings.

[Bear]

Colin, I doodled with Light Room 1, doodle-dawdled with Light Room 2, began using Light Room 3 parallel to PS CS5 and now use Light Room 3 for about everything, calling PS CS5 players from the bench when I need them, and am now happy for the benefits of the transition to LR3. Whether LR matured or it slowly gained my trust, dunno, but it takes time after years of the PS syndrome.

Take your time and use LR in parallel to your former workflow until you learn and trust it... and don't let any whipper-snappers rush you or dress you down. LR3 has tremendous benefits once you become more at home with it, but you don't need to jump boats in a scramble.

[Dizzy]

Take your time and use LR in parallel to your former workflow until you learn and trust it... and don't let any whipper-snappers rush you or dress you down. LR3 has tremendous benefits once you become more at home with it, but you don't need to jump boats in a scramble.

What he said..

Colin, I use Lightroom 3.5, and it's the only real processing program I've used aside from the
Nikon NX2. With LR 3.5 and the LR/Enfuse plug-in, I can do pretty much anything I need to do
with most images. With your experience with Photoshop, picking up on LR should be a walk in
the park.

[Colin Southern]

Hey guys, I'm sure there is a misunderstanding here. Lightroom does NOT create sidecar files for DNG format.

BINGO - Just as I suspected.

From what I can tell, it's nothing more than Bridge + ACR rolled into one, with metadata indexed into a database + a few other "bells and whistles" that may suit some, but be of little value for others.

[Colin Southern]

Colin, I doodled with Light Room 1, doodle-dawdled with Light Room 2, began using Light Room 3 parallel to PS CS5 and now use Light Room 3 for about everything, calling PS CS5 players from the bench when I need them, and am now happy for the benefits of the transition to LR3. Whether LR matured or it slowly gained my trust, dunno, but it takes time after years of the PS syndrome.

Take your time and use LR in parallel to your former workflow until you learn and trust it... and don't let any whipper-snappers rush you or dress you down. LR3 has tremendous benefits once you become more at home with it, but you don't need to jump boats in a scramble.

Hi John,

I don't think it's going to happen -- from what I've learned, LR isn't a substitute for Photoshop - it's just an image management program integrated with the ACR engine. If one was using Photoshop, but not Bridge or ACR then I can see how LR would streamline things -- but I do ALL of my initial processing in Bridge + ACR and to be honest, I'm really not seeing any additional functionality - in fact, it's a bit of a backward step in having to import the images into a catalog (that I don't need), before I can work on the image.

[Colin Southern]

Perhaps they are still in the original folder on your computer or you deleted them?

No. The answer is simply that LR does not create a sidecar file when the source image is DNG. I'm sure you'll be familiar with the following ...

“File information is stored using the Extensible Metadata Platform (XMP) standard. XMP is built on XML. In the case of camera raw files that have a proprietary file format, XMP isn’t written into the original files. To avoid file corruption, XMP metadata is stored in a separate file called a sidecar file. For all other file formats supported by Lightroom (JPEG, TIFF, PSD, and DNG), XMP metadata is written into the files in the location specified for that data. XMP facilitates the exchange of metadata between Adobe applications and across publishing workflows. For example, you can save metadata from one file as a template, and then import the metadata into other files.
Metadata that is stored in other formats, such as EXIF, IPTC (IIM), and TIFF, is synchronized and described with XMP so that it can be more easily viewed and managed."

In your mind only, Colin. I don’t know where you got that bit of misinformation. The DNG format is rather like a PDF file—theoretically, universally readable across platforms. However, it has nothing to do with LR adjustments and meta data. Those are contained in the data base and side-car XMP files.

I get my information straight from Adobe. I'm sorry, but to suggest that DNG files don't support XMP Metadata is just ridiculous. You might like to have a re-read of the DNG specification

[herbert]

[Duplicate post - deleted]

[herbert]

Hi Colin,

Welcome to the world of organising your photos. This is how I see Lightroom. Instead of having to remember where I put everything I now have Lightroom instead. This is how I suggest you do your workflow so to keep with your current workflow:

0. Copy files from camera to somewhere and convert to dng.
1. Open and edit files using raw and photoshop. Edits will be in the dng.
2. Delete the lame ducks
3. Open lightroom and import your photos. Lightroom will see all your edits since it can read the XMP data in the dng.

Now for something new:

4. Add keywords like client location, type of shoot, and object descriptions plus rate your photos.
5. Move the files within the Lightroom interface to where you want to store them. Lightroom sits on top of the file system so just drag stuff around. However if you do this outside of lightroom it gets confused as to where things have gone. Btw file copy is exactly the same speed so just remember to do it in Lightroom.

3 years later:

6. Open lightroom, type '2011 beach Kelly' (etc) to instantly locate that shoot you knew you did a long time ago.

There is a lot more to Lightroom than this but it is how I think you can start using it.

Note that you can edit files in Lightroom as if using camera raw. Any edits will be visible via bridge into photoshop. The reverse is true as well. Lightroom will tell you that it thinks the metadata of the file has changed and ask if you want to update or overwrite the changes with lightroom's version. If both Lightroom and photoshop have changed the file in different ways then it will tell you there is a conflict. You can decide which version to choose. This includes a conflict between keywords added in Lightroom and acr edits in photoshop so watch out.

One more thing. Lightroom supports tethered shooting. You may want to play with that given your studio work.

There is a lot of help on the web (and this site too). Try lightroomforums.net for starters.

If you cannot find a place for it in your workflow then I believe you can transfer adobe licenses to other people. Therefore you could sell it.

Good luck.

Alex

[Colin Southern]

Hi Colin,

Hi Alex.

Welcome to the world of organising your photos.

I don't think so

This is how I see Lightroom. Instead of having to remember where I put everything I now have Lightroom instead.

But ... I've never had a problem remembering where I put images - they're all in folders (that pertain to a given shoot), labeled, and dated.

This is how I suggest you do your workflow so to keep with your current workflow:

0. Copy files from camera to somewhere and convert to dng.

Bridge already does this for me when it transfers them from my card - renames them - and adds metadata.

1. Open and edit files using raw and photoshop. Edits will be in the dng.

Umm, you can't save Photoshop edits to DNG - only those from ACR (which is what I do)

2. Delete the lame ducks

Already done from Bridge, before I batch-process in ACR.

3. Open lightroom and import your photos. Lightroom will see all your edits since it can read the XML data in the dng.

Now for something new:

Ok ...

4. Add keywords like client location, type of shoot, and object descriptions plus rate your photos.

Already added by Bridge when imported from card ...

5. Move the files within the Lightroom interface to where you want to store them. Lightroom sits on top of the file system so just drag stuff around. However if you do this outside of lightroom it gets confused as to where things have gone. Btw file copy is exactly the same speed so just remember to do it in Lightroom.

No need to move them around, other than from the high-speed SSD to the low-tech RAID 1 HDD when finished editing - they're already in their folder with date and shoot name & description

3 years later:

6. Open lightroom, type '2011 beach Kelly' (etc) to instantly locate that shoot you knew you did a long time ago.

or just type 2011 beach kelly to have windows find the folder they're already stored in

There is a lot more to Lightroom than this but it is how I think you can start using it.

That's what I'm wondering, but all I'm seeing - essentially - is the same Bridge + ACR functionality I've always had. In some ways it's a little more streamlined in that the Bridge + ACR functionality is rolled into one program, and yet in other ways, it's not as efficient in that I'm having to import images into a catalog to be able to use them (and re-import them into another catalog on another PC if I want to process images , say, at home as well).

Note that you can edit files in Lightroom as if using camera raw. Any edits will be visible via bridge into photoshop.

So long as the edits are written to XMP.

One more thing. Lightroom supports tethered shooting. You may want to play with that given your studio work.

I shoot tethered all the time using the Canon EOS utility

Not sure if this is still a problem or not, but when we used LR2 in the studio it would display the multiple images ... until the window filled up (ypically about 8 images) but from that point wouldn't scroll to the latest images automatically.

There is a lot of help on the web (and this site too). Try lightroomforums.net for starters.

Good luck.

Alex

To be honest, it's really just an experiment to see if it's all that it's hyped up to be. At the moment - since the bulk of just about every photographers baseline edits can be done in ACR (aka LR3 Develop Module!) - I can see it being an inexpensive entry into the full power of ACR (with image management thrown in for good measure) - but for someone who already uses Bridge + ACR, I don't think that the advantages are by any means guaranteed. I don't think it's any worse for the most part, I'm just not finding any real-world functionality that's particularly compelling. In Bridge I can copy them off the card - add metadata - convert to tDNG and rename as a batch process - make initial selects - sort - rate - delete - move (and all without having to worry about what's in the database -v- what's in the DNG - or backing up databases - or any portability issues). I can open up to about 250 at a time in ACR - and apply changes to all files at once (like white balance) - or change one image in a variety of ways and then ripple those changes back to any or all other files open - then pop back into Bridge (or even from ACR) export / save them in one of a variety of formats.

So I really can't think of anything that it can do for me - that I need - that I can't do now.

[Mark von Kanel]

Hi Colin,

Hows the headache? stick with it mate youll love it once it clicks as i understand it there is no sidecar to a dng unless you ask LR to do one the idea being that you wont ever have the risk of separating the 2 files. My Lr backs up every time i shut down and the the PC backs up in its normal way creating an independent backup of the whole thing.

mark

[herbert]

Hi Colin,

I thought you were going to say that. You are a power user of Photoshop so I expected nothing less.

I started out using Lightroom and it now is my workflow. However I can see the advantages of Photoshop+Bridge for the speed at which you can get to single files, especially those that are not in your catalogue, e.g. just grabbed from the web for a quick CiC edit.

Now that I have Photoshop as well I have had a look at Bridge and it tried to move me out of my comfort zone without offering anything new. Basically the flip-side of your coin.

I am interested in what will be in LR 4 and PS 6. Given all the discounts around at the moment I am expecting new versions within 6 months (or a bit after Christmas). I think that LR will be beefed up to hit the market you suggest, i.e. people wanting ACR without having to pay for all of Photoshop. They will probably add more functionality for local adjustments, i.e. layers. I doubt they would add features not in ACR though. Just the ability to apply them to selections.

Anyway I think you've found out that Lightroom has an ardent fanbase. Adobe will try and say that you need both applications because then they get more money. I think that you can do with Photoshop on its own.

As for tethered shooting I suggested it because I know you have mentioned it before. However the only time I shoot tethered is when doing MFA on my lenses. In that case the Canon EOS utility is better because it supports Live View and remote focus adjustment (by clicks that correspond to the +1/-1 MFA steps).

Regards,

Alex

[Colin Southern]

Hi Alex,

Thanks for the reply.

It's been an interesting experience

I can see LR being advantageous for some (even some who have Photoshop), but by and large, my impression is that it's simply a low-cost alternative to Bridge + ACR; given that (in terms of "global per-editing") the rule is "anything you can do in your RAW converter you generally SHOULD do in your RAW converter, I can think of very little that I could do in LR that I would do in PS ... The more I played with it, the more it became evident that it's EXACTLY the same RAW engine as ACR, and thus has EXACTLY the same functionality, whereas the importing module of LR pretty much has EXACTLY the same functionality as Bridge - and the remaining modules are either covered in Bridge (exporting), or they're functionality that's of no use to me. I can now totally see why Julianne Kost refers to the approaches as either LR + Photoshop, or Bridge + Photoshop ... LR doesn't compete against PS per se, it only competes against Bridge + ACR (or put another way, if Bridge and ACR were sold separately, one would still have most of the functionality that I use, of LR).

Honestly, I think its good value for what it is, I just expected a lot more capability from all that I've heard ... I truly think that the vast vast vast majority that sing its praises simply either don't have Bridge + ACR, or simply don't know how to use it beyond handling just one image at a time.

Regardless, for me, having to import photos for no benefit - having to backup catalogs (or risk losing work) - having the unwanted catalogs chew up disk space - having additional issues when working from multiple PCs are just additional hassles that slow me down and complicate my workflow, all for not so much as a single benefit to me.

So as far as I'm concerned, as far as LR goes, ...

... Here ends a journey!

[Bear]

Hi Colin,

I thought you were going to say that. You are a power user of Photoshop so I expected nothing less.

I started out using Lightroom and it now is my workflow. However I can see the advantages of Photoshop+Bridge for the speed at which you can get to single files, especially those that are not in your catalogue, e.g. just grabbed from the web for a quick CiC edit.

Now that I have Photoshop as well I have had a look at Bridge and it tried to move me out of my comfort zone without offering anything new. Basically the flip-side of your coin.

I am interested in what will be in LR 4 and PS 6. Given all the discounts around at the moment I am expecting new versions within 6 months (or a bit after Christmas). I think that LR will be beefed up to hit the market you suggest, i.e. people wanting ACR without having to pay for all of Photoshop. They will probably add more functionality for local adjustments, i.e. layers. I doubt they would add features not in ACR though. Just the ability to apply them to selections.

Anyway I think you've found out that Lightroom has an ardent fanbase. Adobe will try and say that you need both applications because then they get more money. I think that you can do with Photoshop on its own.

As for tethered shooting I suggested it because I know you have mentioned it before. However the only time I shoot tethered is when doing MFA on my lenses. In that case the Canon EOS utility is better because it supports Live View and remote focus adjustment (by clicks that correspond to the +1/-1 MFA steps).

Regards,

Alex

I work with dual monitors, and what always frustrated me with Bridge was the cramped and busy work space and difficulty keeping an overview. What gradually won me to LR was having the LR workspace in grid view on the left screen and full screen real time viewing on the right screen, toggling between fit to screen and 1:1 with a mouse click. So easy to have a full overview for culling and editing.

...on another note, for MFA, still in the beta phase, but check this out: http://www.reikan.co.uk/photography/blog/?p=1526

[Colin Southern]

I work with dual monitors, and what always frustrated me with Bridge was the cramped and busy work space and difficulty keeping an overview. What gradually won me to LR was having the LR workspace in grid view on the left screen and full screen real time viewing on the right screen, toggling between fit to screen and 1:1 with a mouse click. So easy to have a full overview for culling and editing.

...on another note, for MFA, still in the beta phase, but check this out: http://www.reikan.co.uk/photography/blog/?p=1526

Hi John,

I work with dual monitors too - can't say I've ever had a problem. I normally use Bridge in filmstrip mode (where I can delete - reject - rate - sort), but for "closer inspection" a full screen view on a 24" monitor is only a press of the space bar away (where I can still delete - reject - rate - label etc).

[Bear]

Yes Colin, but, *sigh*, my frustration in Bridge is I can't simultaneously try some adjustment to see if I've got hidden treasure or a candidate for the guillotine. That's one of the things that defeated my reluctance to LR.

[Crovean]

Well they aren't there. I must admit to being at a complete loss as to why they'd use sidecar files when the originals are in a DNG format (which was created to get rid of sidecar files).

Once you have it on DNG there's no sidecar files. Just like what you said.

All I want to do is to store a bunch of DNGs on my SSD - edit them (as ACR would) - then be able to move them off the SSD to a HDD RAID array and have the photos & ACR edits go as 1 collection.

I believe on what you're trying to do is after you're done with your edits, just export them all out to your HDD as DNG files. On the export to DNG dialog make sure you check the box called "add to this catalog"

[Crovean]

It looks like from my previous reply was figured out already. And yes LR3 is just a Bridge + Adobe Camera Raw in a more compact and stand alone version. Or instead of paying for the whole photoshop which include bridge + ACR, your just paying the Bridge + ACR AKA Lightroom.

Lightroom is just better laid out i think and look cool with the dark theme ^_^

here's a link of a video about Bridge + Photoshop VS Lightroom + Photoshop.

[Colin Southern]

Yes Colin, but, *sigh*, my frustration in Bridge is I can't simultaneously try some adjustment to see if I've got hidden treasure or a candidate for the guillotine. That's one of the things that defeated my reluctance to LR.

Hi John,

I hear where you're coming from - personally though, I just open them up in ACR (only takes a couple of seconds to load). And if there are a bunch of them I usually just Ctrl+1 to give them 1 star - filter so only 1 stars show - Ctrl+A - enter to open all in ACR, and then either reject them or change the star rating whilst in ACR. Mostly my exposures are pretty close though, so it's usually an expression issue or focus issue that disqualifies an image, and both of those I can recognise whilst still in Bridge.

[Colin Southern]

Hi Chriss,

Once you have it on DNG there's no sidecar files. Just like what you said.

Thanks for that - took a while to figure that one out (the mis-information didn't help).

I believe on what you're trying to do is after you're done with your edits, just export them all out to your HDD as DNG files. On the export to DNG dialog make sure you check the box called "add to this catalog"

Problem is, once the edits are done in ACR (and exported as JPEGs) then 80% of the editing is done, and the images are ready to upload to one of my iPads to give to the customer to make their initial selects. So from that point, there's no need for lightroom. Once the customer comes back with their selects then those images are flagged in Bridge and opened directly in Photoshop for final processing.

[Colin Southern]

It looks like from my previous reply was figured out already. And yes LR3 is just a Bridge + Adobe Camera Raw in a more compact and stand alone version. Or instead of paying for the whole photoshop which include bridge + ACR, your just paying the Bridge + ACR AKA Lightroom.

Lightroom is just better laid out i think and look cool with the dark theme ^_^

LOL - I'm not even overly fussed on the "cool dark theme"!

here's a link of a video about Bridge + Photoshop VS Lightroom + Photoshop.

Already seen it thanks. In as much as I respect Julianne's presentation, I don't think it's quite that cut and dried for some professionals; I can see that for - for example - wedding photographers where they're more concerned with handling a large volume of data (and less concerned about quality) then it makes sense to use LR (and not buy Photoshop), but even from Juileanne's presentation, you'll note that the comparison was between "LR+PS" and "Bridge+PS" ... not LR -v- PS - so they're still saying you need both. I've noted her reasoning, but the LR argument just doesn't fit well with my requirements; a typical shoot will be anywhere from 6 or 8 sets all the way up to 20+ - with each set being 30 - 60 shots. Because each set has different lighting, it makes sense to open only 1 set at a time - weed out the duds - and pre-process the rest en-mass via ACR. LR could do it just fine, but I'm yet to find a single advantage in doing it that way (but several disadvantages).