lightroom ? Photoshop ? anyone ?

[proenca]

Hi there,

I had a M7 and now a MP. I have no digital camera,. but I had quite a few for a long years.. Whilst I try to make the picture as perfect as possible in camera, film obliges you too and you think much more about composition and exposure,scan the pictures and i catalogue my pictures in Lightroom and tweak them a bit here and there in Photoshop (sometimes on lightroom only, since the adjustments are mainly colour casts)- mainly sharpen and colour casts when to print them, a crop here and there. nothing near the amount of work that a digital only file would though.

Anyone uses a similar or different approach ? Or here is just hard core people that print directly from slides and dont care about the computer for nothing else than use the forum and check emails ? :)

[BigSteveG]

Recently started using Lightroom. Haven't printed any manipulated pix yet, but I will. I'm shooting both Dig and film now so the prgram comes in extremely handy.

[AusDLK]

I find Lightroom VERY disappointing.

It runs like a DOG on a very high-end PC (ie., it just locks up, scroll bars don't move, get the notorious "not responding" message). It comes back eventually but it should behave this way in the first place.

And I've found importing a bunch of scanned files in numerous folders to be unreliable (ie., files in some folders not appearing in Lightroom).

I'm not giving up on it (yet) but it is definitely not the photo organization nirvana that I was hoping it would be.

[dspeltz]

I have been using Lightroom on a PC and it worked well with some minor important problems. I now have it on a MacBook Pro and it works like a charm. It allows for a great deal of manipulation and the workflow is terrific.

[Doug]

Is Lightroom primarily a file-management program, then, cataloging and all that? If so I have that part of the workflow already well in hand, and would be interested more in "digital darkroom" functions. Photoshop is intimidatingly complex, and not specifically attuned to "unmanipulated" type file editing. Maybe Aperture?

[BigSteveG]

I find Lightroom VERY disappointing.

It runs like a DOG on a very high-end PC (ie., it just locks up, scroll bars don't move, get the notorious "not responding" message). It comes back eventually but it should behave this way in the first place.

And I've found importing a bunch of scanned files in numerous folders to be unreliable (ie., files in some folders not appearing in Lightroom).

I'm not giving up on it (yet) but it is definitely not the photo organization nirvana that I was hoping it would be.

problems at all. It runs fluently in my PC (double core pentium processor) and performs all chores exactly as expected. After two days of using the trial, I've ordered the boxed version.

[BigSteveG]

Is Lightroom primarily a file-management program, then, cataloging and all that? If so I have that part of the workflow already well in hand, and would be interested more in "digital darkroom" functions. Photoshop is intimidatingly complex, and not specifically attuned to "unmanipulated" type file editing. Maybe Aperture?

LR is both a managment and manipulation program. It does not ( and quite happily) offer some of the more advanced functions of Photoshop, i.e., layers,etc., but that's fine because I don't need or want all that. It offer basic manipulation, i.e., exposure, contrast, sharpening, very good color channeling. It works great with my Nikon's Raw files (much better than the Nikon software) as well as scanned negs/positives. Highly user friendly. Try the trial version, it's free for the downloading!!!!

[AusDLK]

>Maybe Aperture?

Reported by some LR fans, Aperture is TRULY a dog. Likened as one of Apple's few product failures...

(Don't flame me, I just repeating what I was told by some peeps much more in the know then I.)

[mc_vancouver]

Even if you're not entirely sure if you will use LIghtroom, I'd advise you to check it out now (http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshoplightroom/) while it's one hundred dollars off the full retail price. I bought it although I have yet to get myself a digital camera or start digitizing my negs, because it's a good deal, and looks like it was really well thought out, by photographers, over manymonths of beta testing. In fact I was one of those who learned on the trial version before the first stable release. It is not for effects like Photoshop, but for rapid assessment of pictures and then making adjustments to overall contrast, color, and other parameters, I think it's a way better tool than Photoshop.

[Doug]

Thanks... I'd be looking for something that can eliminate barrel distortion and pincushion distortion, as well as dealing with common perspective distortion ("keystoning"). Dirt/lint spotting, color balance, curves, levels, etc seems to be covered ok with both Lightroom and Aperture?

[IGMeanwell]

Capture NX has a great tool for fixing distortion

also it has that great color point (or U-point) system for selective image enhancement...

However does not have any sort of masking tool for dust spots or blemishes

and for organization you have to rely on its batch processes

[amateriat]

I'd sort of been under the impression (without looking into it myself) that Lightroom was really aimed at digital-capture folks, rather than scanned-film-workflow people like me, but now it sounds like it might be an interesting alternative to PS (I'm using the original CS), although I'll have to see bow it flies on an older (sub-1GhZ) Mac G4 tower.


- Barrett

[jobo]

And I've found importing a bunch of scanned files in numerous folders to be unreliable (ie., files in some folders not appearing in Lightroom).

I had the same problem, in my case due to leaving the box "detect duplicates" checked. Just in case...

2c, /J

[Kin Lau]

Thanks... I'd be looking for something that can eliminate barrel distortion and pincushion distortion, as well as dealing with common perspective distortion ("keystoning"). Dirt/lint spotting, color balance, curves, levels, etc seems to be covered ok with both Lightroom and Aperture?

There's a simpler tool for that... PSE 5.0 does all that now and is cheaper.

[hofrench@mac.co]

I've been using LR from the very first beta, and I think it is a fantastic program.
I use it for digital and scans, and have 13,000 images under its management, very happily, I might add.
I think the Develop module in the latest version is particularly well thought out. The Slideshow and Web functions are quite nice, too.
I run it on ore-Intel Macs, an IMac G5 and a G4 Powerbook, each of which has 2 gig of ram.
On the former, if I'm running it side by side with PS, it purrs.

[kaiyen]

I think the key aspect of LR in terms of people who are working with scanned images at all is that...yes, it is targeted towards digital shooters producing large collections of images at once. Photojournalists, sports photographers, wedding photographers, etc. However, it has a lot of asset management tools, and it has some basic tweaking tools...and it's one application!

For me, since I do both digital and scan all kinds of stuff, it works great. If I were only working with scanned film images, I might not get it.

allan

[boilerdoc2]

It has an ass kicking RAW developer especially if wanting to convert to B&W! Thumbnail building is fast. Very sweet. The beta version crashed my PC so I was really leery. But now is all good! Check out Luminous Landscapes tutorials for all of $12 total!
Steve

[dcsang]

I find Lightroom VERY disappointing.

It runs like a DOG on a very high-end PC (ie., it just locks up, scroll bars don't move, get the notorious "not responding" message). It comes back eventually but it should behave this way in the first place.

And I've found importing a bunch of scanned files in numerous folders to be unreliable (ie., files in some folders not appearing in Lightroom).

I'm not giving up on it (yet) but it is definitely not the photo organization nirvana that I was hoping it would be.

I'm guessing you're using either the beta or the 30 day trial?
What constitutes "high-end" PC to you?

I ran Light Room (BETA) on a P-IV 2.8E 2GB RAM XP system and had minor issues such as the scroll bar problem but since moving to the full release I've had no issues. That said.. I'm now on a MAC and it runs flawlessly.

It does do very well with my RAW files from the Canons and seems to do ok with the JPEGS as well.

I personally like it as a converter more than as a library/database tool however I can see how people will like it for its ability to do the latter.

When comparing it to Aperture; LightRoom runs circles around it wrt speed.

Dave

[proenca]

well, i had mac's for the recent years and I love digital manipulation - had digital cameras for ages, quite photoshop savvy, but i enjoy film more and more (heck, i sold all my digital cameras ) since I like doing things right in the first place (less margin for adjustments with a picture taken in film than in digital, with digital you have a huge safety net, you can recover horrible photos and manipulate them to good ones.. that makes you sloppy )

Point taken, I hate aperture. I tried to ( when it came out, I had a Canon 1Ds), i honestly did. In theory its a fantastic program, but its DAMN slow. I love almost all Apple products but this on is a dog. I bought a Aperture guide. Yes, I can do very nice things in Aperture, they just take TIME. loads of time. Once I got the opportunity, I upgraded my mac, which is a fairly quick one by today standards : Core Due 2ghz, 2gb ram, 256 video card... still Aperture is a dog. Takes ages for that thing to do anything. With a combo of Photoshop + iViewMedia i do whatever I want in 1/10 of the time.

I was just wondering about Lightroom.. Seems a nice product ( allows basic image manipulation, should be fine for most of the scan negs , other t han that , Photoshop ) I just wanted to hear from other fellow film users.

Thank you all

[P C Headland]

If you primarily shot film, I don't think Lightroom would be that useful. It does come into its own if you are largely a digital shooter though.

What you may like to experiment with is Lightzone. I've been playing around with this on a Linux box (the Linux version is free, Windows and Mac versions cost money), and have to say I'm impressed. If nothing else, it's helped me understand some of the Photoshop tools a little better. There is a free trial version for Windows and Mac.

[stumar]

I am really likeing LR, using it with no proplems on PC. Its nice and quick! and have enjoyed using it so far. Its far less comlex than photoshop and does exactly what i need. search around the net and you will find some very intresting plug ins for it!

[OurManInTangier]

I run Photoshop CS2 at home and work. For work it does all of my digital work and at home, well...it does alot of my work that I didn't get done during the day and had to do at home until the wee small hours...but also my film stuff.

Having given up my darkroom a few years back with the pressures of digital and client expectations I now put all my home processed films (taken for my pleasure not work) through PS. I love it, I can scan and then do all my old darkroom processes without being in a tiny, unventilated room in nothing more than my shorts. I prefer to just use the same tools that I used in the darkroom so as to keep the feeling of the old times...I kind of see too much PS as cheating, but thats just a rule I go by for myself.

One day, if I have the space and time, I'd like to go back to a true wet darkroom but only to tinker...I was never a master printer!!

[Ronald M]

Nikon NX runs fast on my pc with JPEGS. NEF RAW is a dog.

So maybe those who think Lightroom is ok are using JPEGS or those who think it is slow use RAW.

RAW runs fine in CS2 ACR at my house. I will eventually erase NX as it is to imprecise for me. Control points are quick, but you can`t precisely set the area covered. Multiple ones are overlapping nightmares in eventoned areas.

[Ted Witcher]

I just want to put this out into the universe: Apple or Adobe should really just buy the Lightzone folks and include it as a tool in either Aperture or Lightroom. Localized adjustment (in such an intuitive fashion) is the only thing missing from both programs. Actually, Aperture really would have an edge on LR if it had this ability -- Adobe probably wouldn't want to cannibalize sales of their other programs.

[robert blu]

I m not planning to go digital for shooting in a short time. But I'm planning to go on scanning (Nikon 5000ED just arrived) and try to inkjet printing. I do not make any real manipulation, sometimes cropping, little play with level to adjust contrast and brightness, dodging or burning trying to imitate my (old) procedure of a real darkroom. For this I think sw like CS3 is too much: too expensive and will be only partially used. I think a combination of PS Elements and Lightroom (maybe my wife will go digital!) shoul be ok.
The Lightroom preset mentioned in the venchka thread a few days ago are very impressive, at least my opinon.
robert