1. Welcome to Cameraderie.org—a friendly camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Working with New Lightroom

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by Tim Williams, Nov 16, 2018.

  1. Tim Williams

    Tim Williams Top Veteran

    885
    May 31, 2017
    Central Florida
    Timothy Williams
    Been playing around with the New Lightroom and it's not all That bad. It"s a simple work flow and if there's any Heavy stuff to do it gets sent to Photoshop anyway even if I use Classic. Plus it's a ton faster. I'm thinking of staying with it for a bit and see how it goes. If I do my job correctly then there shouldn't be much left to do to an image anyway.
    Anyone else using it?
     
  2. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Top Veteran

    809
    Feb 6, 2015
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    I'm still fully in the Adobe camp.

    Right now I've got 110,000+ images in the catalog and it still hunt skiing quite nicely.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Not sure what you mean by "New Lightroom" but I've been using LR now for about 4 years. I'm using the Adobe for Photographers subscription plan, at $9.99 per month for the last 2+ years, so I always have the latest version available. That is until just recently.

    I saw a Youtube video that referenced a new update, so I logged onto the Creative Cloud to check and got an error message that said something about not being able to update because my version of Windows 10 wasn't up to date. I happen to have an unsupported disk layout for UEFI firmware that prevents the update to the latest version of Windows 10.

    So, I'm missing a few of the newest features in LR and PS, but it's not significantly different than the versions I'm using now. Prior to LR, I was using Corel Paintshop Pro to edit my photos. I thought LR was going to be a huge learning curve, but discovered there were so many Youtube videos on it and Photoshop that it was a pretty easy transition. It took me longer to begin using PS - it's a pretty intimidating program - but it's now an important part of my workflow. However, I don't use PS to its fullest potential because it has, like, a billion features and I'm only up to number 23 or so.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Mike G

    Mike G All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Oct 7, 2016
    West London
    Mike Gorman
    Just another reason not to use Windblows!
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Sad Sad x 1
  5. addieleman

    addieleman Regular

    112
    Oct 20, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Ad Dieleman
    I have used Lightroom for 8 years now, since V4 and at present I'm on Adobe's Photography subscription plan, which is € 12.09 per month here in The Netherlands. I use a Mac since 2016 and a Windows machine before that. My catalog contains around 60,000 raw files, which seems well below what Lightroom can handle. For the last few years I have toyed with other raw developers like Capture One, ON1, Iridient etc. but I invariably decided to stick with LR/PS (Lightroom/Photoshop): I'm used to it and am happy with the results, so these days I'll simply ignore other programs until I start to get uncomfortable with LR/PS. Processing in Lightroom suffices for over 95 % of my pictures, and only some of them are taken to Photoshop when I need something LR can't do; most of the time it is about color processing in selected areas which LR sadly lacks.

    Many people are strongly opposed against Adobe's subscription model. I'm OK with it, I pay € 150 per year and I'm always up-to-date. Many other raw developers aren't free either and often require you to update at a cost to get the latest features and raw compatibility for newer cameras. And I'm indifferent to the idea of owning software: it's an illusion to think it'll work forever, because a new computer with a newer operating system might break it.

    Switching to another raw developer is a painful process, if you have a lot of work done: the new program in general won't honor the processing you did in the old program, or at least not in exactly the same way. I don't look forward to having my work on 60,000 raws obsoleted, even if I can export them to jpegs before switching. So effectively you're locked in to the raw developer you have used and the question becomes which supplier has the best long-term business perspective. My bet is on Adobe (obviously), but in general you should choose a solid supplier with a proven track-record IMHO. As an illustration, I used Nikon's Capture NX in 2008 and 2009 and when I want to revisit raws from that time, I simply redo the processing in LR; I briefly tried the present version of Capture NX (or whatever it's called now) and wasn't successful at recovering my old work.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2018
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Tim Williams

    Tim Williams Top Veteran

    885
    May 31, 2017
    Central Florida
    Timothy Williams
    Well I'm staying with Adobe,, but there are two very different versions of Lightroom now, Lightroom CC Classic and Lightroom CC.. The new one is faster, not as complex on cataloging and I believe enhances images very well. I'll run some shots through it today and see if that holds up.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2018
  7. Mike G

    Mike G All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Oct 7, 2016
    West London
    Mike Gorman
    Tim, if you have an iPad or iPhone then there are Lr CC apps available that will sync your files across the devices. I use it nearly every day on an iPad 4 mini, and do most of my posting from it!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Tim Williams

    Tim Williams Top Veteran

    885
    May 31, 2017
    Central Florida
    Timothy Williams
    Yes Mike, and this is attractive for me as I shoot from three different platforms. Thanks. I now have it on my phone. Handy.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. bartjeej

    bartjeej Hall of Famer

    Nov 12, 2010
    bart
    I've been out of image processing for some time now, mainly due to time constraints. I'm not hugely fond of subscription model software but I've kind of come around on it... But I assume that LR is still catalogs only, that it doesnt allow you to just work from your own folder storage system? I find that a massive PITA.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. No, you can work from your own folder storage system, but you have to import it into LR before you can even see it. And importing the folder doesn't mean you will see the photos you add to it after the import. You have to do a new import every time you want to work on a new batch of photos in any folder. This is one of the things I find so irritating about LR, but the pluses far outweigh the minuses, so I keep using it.
     
  11. addieleman

    addieleman Regular

    112
    Oct 20, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Ad Dieleman
    Bridge CC is included in the Adobe Photography subscription plan. Bridge CC is an alternative for managing your photos and it works from your own folder storage system. Editing a file is then done via Camera Raw which offers the same editing functionality as Lightroom Classic CC. I've used Bridge for years before I started with Lightroom and it's a workable solution IMHO.
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  12. rayvonn

    rayvonn All-Pro

    Jan 19, 2015
    I have the subscription model but would rather not use LR. It's not LR's fault per se, but the fault of the old Apple Aperture software. That also required you to import files into it's own structure system too and that system keep getting corrupted. That hasn't happened with LR but then again I haven't given it the opportunity. The thought of that happening to say 4,000 images makes me sick. Far better for me is to use Adobe Bridge which then links straight to PS/ Camera Raw. That way I can use the structure system of my computer.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Mike G

    Mike G All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Oct 7, 2016
    West London
    Mike Gorman
    Yes it does, and that’s the way I do it and have always used Lr. I download from the camera to my own storage folders in an iMac filing system and then import to Lr, easy peasy.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. wt21

    wt21 Hall of Famer

    Aug 15, 2010
    Agreed, as it’s the same for Mac. The latest LR release does not work on my old El Capitan OS. This is an Adobe decision to limit the number of OS revisions they support on both sides of the house, it’s not a mac/windows thing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. wt21

    wt21 Hall of Famer

    Aug 15, 2010
    LR does not enforce folder structure like Apple products do/did, so you can keep your computer folders. But image changes are in the LR database. To minimize any concerns around there, You can choose to save changes to sidecar files which are readable by other Adobe products.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. wt21

    wt21 Hall of Famer

    Aug 15, 2010
    I organize my folders from within Lightroom where it’s all drag and drop.

    Any new images I have, I import direct to LR through the LR import interface (eg from Ann SD card) or drag and drop from my desktop (in Mac, just drag images over the LR icon on the dock, and the LR import dialog pops up with those pics preselected- using LR import also allows automated import treatments).

    I set up the import to go into a holding folder called “new pictures” and have LR auto breakdown into sub folders by date. I work on the pics and, when done, use LR to drag them into existing or new sub folders.

    There might be a better workflow, but this is fine by me. At least the photos are in a real folder structure stored in my Dropbox cloud folder for backup. Would love to hear what others are doing.
     
  17. Mike G

    Mike G All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Oct 7, 2016
    West London
    Mike Gorman
    Importing a file into Lr does not move the image file but only adds a reference to the image location in the Lr library and all adjustments are non-destructive so your files are safe! Although I have Bridge I don’t use as Lr does all I want at the moment!
     
  18. bartjeej

    bartjeej Hall of Famer

    Nov 12, 2010
    bart
    Yes, but since i move images around - to different folders or different devices - quite often, that's really inconvenient for me because LR keeps losing track of my raw files... And even if I don't move the raw file, trying to find back the import i did on an image is often more work than it should be. Software should just respect my cluttered folder choices :biggrin:
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  19. addieleman

    addieleman Regular

    112
    Oct 20, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Ad Dieleman
    Simple solution: move your raw files within Lightroom, then LR keeps track of them, clutter and all. I do that all the time. But seriously, think hard and long about creating a folder structure that doesn't need messing around and if applicable, do that before you import your files into Lightroom.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.