Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

I have been using Adobe Lightroom Classic for the past couple of years. Since I do ALL my editing in Photoshop I am seriously considering moving from Lightroom to Bridge.

I use Lightroom simply as a data base to organize my photos, about 8,000 and growing. I do not use anything in Lightroom except what is available in the Library Module and since I am more than comfortable in Photoshop I see no reason to try to learn Lightroom.

Questions: Am I missing something about Lightroom? What?
For you Bridge users why do you continue to use it instead of Lightroom.
Any other comments on why you think I am/am not crazy to make this change.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

Seems to me that if you need Photoshop, the subscription includes Lightroom Classic. Do you use keywords, collections and filters? If you like your workflow, keep it.

Bridge is a file browser and records nothing in a catalog of any sort. Lightroom Classic uses a catalog that can store useful information.

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

You might want to look into some training for LR. I do 85% of my editing in LR, opening PS directly from LR when I need the extra horsepower. You can also get into Topaz plugins directly from LR. I have used Bridge in the past, but like the LR -> PS workflow better. BTW, if you know PS the LR develop module is a piece of cake.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Do you process raw files or do you process camer JPEGs?

Below is the same photo processed in Photoshop and in Lightroom. Here are some differences:

For the LR version of the photo my total used disk storage space is 29.4 megabytes.
For the PS version of the photo my total used disk storage space is 232.2 megabytes.
For the LR version I have one file to store and manage.
For the PS version of the photo I have two files to store and manage.

In a raw workflow the processing done in LR is 100% non-destructive and non-linearly re-editable.
In a raw workflow the processing done in PS is not 100% non-destructive and non-linearly re-editable.

Photoshop version

(Download)

Lightroom version

(Download)

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I moved from Bridge to Lightroom BECAUSE of it's catalog and streamlined editing interface. As plugins became more available I found that using them together with LR was easier and faster. However, if you are ok with using a file browser for looking for and viewing files by folder locations, and you have no use for virtual copies or collections, then bridge should be fine. I am not sure that as your inventory of images increases in size you'll find it as convenient, however. My library is over 120,000 images spanning 20 yrs, and I have another library of just film scans that were taken before 2000, which I rarely access anymore.

The point of virtual copies can be important, however. As I edit a file, it is not uncommon for me to want to see it with different treatments, including Black and White, high key, low key etc etc etc. Having the ability to create a virtual copy for each one makes that possible. The same goes for collections - which is a virtual way to organize files into groups by whatever criteria you choose - I take a lot of bird pictures, but I have lots of collections to find them - raptors, waders, shorebirds, finches, sparrows, warblers, etc etc etc. In addition to this these images are also organized in collections by location and season, and also if they were used in exhibitions or galleries - which is good to avoid submitting duplicates. Virtual collections let me have just one copy of the file and have them organized in a variety of ways. I use these features now much more than I used to, and I don't know where I'd be without them. I suppose I can spend some time to research alternative DAM (digital asset management) programs, but I am quite comfortable with Lightroom.

One more important (to me) difference - I rename all of my files at time of importing into the catalog. I have multiple cameras, in some cases in the past multiples of the same camera, as well as having employed second shooters with the same camera - my filenaming includes camera and serial number, and a unique sequence number that absolutely eliminates duplicate file names on import. To my knowledge there is no such capability in Bridge, and the multi-step process to batch rename files is a big PITA.

It's easy enough to have it both ways. If you don't want to use the editor in LR you can simply right click on an image in the film strip or on the main screen and select "Show in Explorer" and from there you can right click again and open it with the program that is associated with the file extension, which in your case will be Photoshop. If you want to have a 100% non-destructive workflow and you only want one file to store, both applications can do that. In Lightroom, all the edits are in lrpreview and lrcat databases which store all of the metadata changes, including edits. These changes can be written to xmp for a little more portability. In Bridge and ACR, changes are automatically written to xmp. The non-destructive nature of raw edits in ACR is preserved if you just choose Done when finished, instead of Open, which will open a raster copy (jpeg, tiff, psd, png) of your file with the edits "burned in" to the raster file. If you choose to no longer edit the file in raster form, then the file size of the raw file with edits is the same regardless of which program generated it. Of course, you won't have virtual copies or collection information in the Bridge/ACR version of the raw file.

This article summarizes the main differences:

https://www.vfpresets.com/camera-raw-vs-lightroom/

Wanda Krack Loc: Tennessee, USA

The above-listed article explains the difference between the two programs well. I am a user of Camera Raw/Adobe Bridge for my editing along with photoshop. I also set out to learn PS many years ago and am comfortable with it. I attempted to use Lightroom several years ago, at one time, and actually had it loaded on my computer, unused, for several years, and then erased since I found I never used it. I have my own cataloging system (it's not perfect, but has worked for me so far) that I like better than lightroom's. I didn't like how lightroom sent my images places I didn't want them, so since the editing part is almost like camera raw's, I have just stuck with CR. I do think that lightroom's editing portion is a little more user-friendly and maybe just a little improvments over CR, but, not worth the hassle for me. But, I'm retired and not in the 'business' unless it's something I want to do, and if I were shooting professionally, I'm sure that I would more than likely use lightroom. If I were young, and anticipating a career using the camera and editing, I would choose lightroom over CR, I am cofident. However, in my situation, it's not worth the time and effort, and then the hassle of having my pictures in different places, and having to go from one program to another, and then having to store all of the edits along the way. It's probably more of an issue of what you become familiar with using. Both of these programs are good, IMHO.

Al Beatty Loc: Boise, Idaho

Hi Curmudgeon,

A couple of years ago I retired as a magazine editor. After several months, I discovered it hadn't used the subscription PS/LR more than a couple of times. I switched to Bridge with PSE and I've been very pleased with them. I still do some magazine work and I find they more-than-serve my needs. Take care & ...

ronichas Loc: Long Island

I have been using photoshop/bridge since before lightroom came out. I have never been successful at switching. I upload all my images to folders on Bridge. I open them into camera raw, delete images I know I won't use. I then open them in photoshop.

One of the things I love about Bridge, is I can access anything on my computer, not just images. I also found it less time consuming to go from bridge, camera raw then photoshop. Having to go from lightroom to photoshop and back to lightroom just seems to take more time.

Years ago I attended a lightroom session with Dave Cross, one of the original photoshop guys. I spoke with him after the session, explaining I started with bridge/photoshop and have never been able to make the switch to lightroom. He explained he had to teach it but he doesn't use it. He does use bridge and photoshop.

rmcgarry331

Some thoughts, you say you do “all” of your editing in Photoshop, but are you working with raw files? If so Lightroom is handling the conversion of the RAW file from raw to tiff/psd. It is also creating the file name for the new file from Photoshop and preserving a database link between that file and the original raw. Bridge on the other hand will simply open the file in camera raw, for movement onto PS. You need to save the file when you are finished (tiff/psd) recommended, Bridge will detect the file however there is no association between it and the raw file that it came from. Also, in my own work flow I find it easier to apply global adjustments (lens corrections, white balance, exposure) in Lightroom/Camera Raw rather than in PS.
If you are dealing with SOC Jpegs you probably want Lightroom over Bridge, simply because Lightroom forces a non-destructive workflow, by creating a new tiff/psd file from your Jpeg when sending it to PS. With Bridge, your original JPEG opens in PS and if you hit save, you have lost your original unedited file.
Do you post files in multiple resolutions or to multiple platforms? Having Lightroom Classic as part of my workflow allows me to do a complete edit in PS at full resolution. I can also leave the file un-flattened, and still publish jpeg copies of it. I can keep multiple versions e-mail, Facebook, print etc, in the Lightroom Catalog without having to store and track separate jpeg files on disk. To accomplish these tasks in Bridge, you need to open PS and complete the task from there.
One thing Bridge does that no version of Lightroom does is track and create PDF files, so I still use Bridge extensively in my workflow, as I often I create PDF’s from digital photos. I do keep my Lightroom set to save to XMP files, so Bridge can see the Lightroom edits.

DRM Loc: NC

I certainly hope you aren't crazy sticking with Bridge, because if you are so am I.

I learned Bridge, ACR, and PS--and developed my own file numbering/storing/sorting system (a throwback to my film days) all before LR was introduced. I have seen no reason to change, no loss of organization, and no significant loss of productivity in my work flow as a result of foregoing use of LR. Everyone has different needs and preferences of course; what I use works for me.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

I guess the real question is WHY have you been using Lightroom for the past couple years. You say only as a data base to organize your photos. Why do you think Bridge will improve your organization? Are you using ALL the organizing tools in LR?

If you are only using keywords, Bridge will do that. But in my opinion, keywords are easier to edit (add/subtract) in Lightroom than they were the last time I used Bridge for that purpose (probably a decade ago). And other organizing tools (e.g. collections, virtual copies) are not available in Bridge.

As I said, it's been a while since I used Bridge, but I think you are crazy to make this change. Particularly since you have Lightroom in your current workflow. People who have not gotten familiar with LR might find Bridge advantageous, but that is not your situation.

The only advantage Bridge has over Lightroom is the ability to be used by several people at the same time on the same set of image files. For that reason it has been claimed to have an advantage for working groups as opposed to individuals.

Don's Leica Loc: Asheville, NC

I use Bridge because I learned it several years ago, know how to keep unedited files if I want them, keep all my pix in "Pictures" on my MAC in alphabetical and then chronological order, seldom desire to so serious editing, just
crop and adjust light.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

I use Photoshop only and Bridge. I dont really use the primitive cataloging functions in bridge other that the star ratings for images. It is essentially a file browser. I also do a lot if not most of my adjustment PP with Adobe Camera Raw. Full Ps for sizing and cropping.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Not true at all. You just need to learn how to use Bridge. It's power goes far beyond what Lightroom does.

Photomac Loc: The Dalles, Or

Have any of you "lost a shoot" in LR?? I've been using it since the beginning, taking care to not move files around outside of lr, or move them at all, yet I've had to valuable files simply disappear, and a whole year's but thanks goodness not many images in that year. I've consulted our local PS/LR expert who couldn't figure it out either, so I'm sure he thought I simply screwed it up somehow without saying so.