lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

I finally took the plunge and started subscribing to LR CC. I have 3 sets of digital photos to import. The first, consisting of those on my desktop, back-up HDs, and CF/SD cards is pretty much complete.

The second will be from my defunct Aperture libraries (I've accumulated a few How-to URLs on such a Migration.) The third will be from Mac Photos. Yes, I'm using video tutorials from photo.net and will probably go back to using Adobe's own tutorials with it.

SO WHY AM I POSTING THIS TOPIC? The reason is that upon visiting an Apple Store today and asking one of the staff (not a "Genius", per se,) if she knew of an easy way to do the Aperture migration offhand, she answered that personally, she wouldn't bother. She doesn't think that LR CC's Photo Management System (i.e. the Library tab,) is that good and prefers that in Photos. However, she does use LR CC for its Editing capabilities.

Is her view merely an example of "to each his own taste"? Or is the approach of using Photos & LR done by several individuals? Does anyone know of the shortcomings of LR CC's Library vis-a-vis Photos?

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

I also use Photos s well as LR, and it does a pretty good job of cataloging by date--date downoladed, not exactly date taken.

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

Thanks for your reply, but to be clear, which are you writing does a better job, at least with respect to cataloging by date, LR CC or Photos?

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

Personally, I do not use the LR system to file my photos, I simply have them organized in my own filing system and import into LR only what I want to work on in LR/PS, then, export back to where ever I want them to be.

However, from what I understand, if one takes the time to learn the basics of how LR functions, it's said to be outstanding. Just the thought of trying to reorganize my photos into LR is a very daunting.

DGStinner Loc: New Jersey

I used Aperture for about a year before switching to Lightroom. Lightroom's Library module is just as capable as Aperture, it just takes a little time to get used to. Photos feels like a dumbed down version of iPhotos.
Lightroom can handle importing from your Aperture Libraries (File->Plug-in Extras->Import from Aperture Library) but not Photos. If your images are managed by Photos, you'll have to export them back out to someplace on your drive before you can import them into Lightroom. If they're referenced, you can import them from where they reside.

Leicaflex Loc: Cymru

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

Dear Leicaflex,
I realize that you posted that URL with the intent of doing good to alert your fellow Hogs. So in one sense, I don't want you to feel that you shouldn't do so in the future. However, as a person who is not a computer sophisticate, I suggest you more carefully review what you feel is essential information for the community to be aware of. The following might sound condescending to some readers, but I'm suggesting, with friendly intent, for you to consider doing at least two steps in the future in reviewing a link before you pass it on:

A. What is the date of the link's news story (and when indicated, when was the earliest report of this story disseminated)? Had you checked your URL, you would have noticed that the story's date was in November 2013. I then googled the story and found evidence that the matter first came out in early October 2013. In the context of the Topic I posted, the relevance of your post is quite diminished.

B. I won't opine for others, but I find it irritating when a link/URL is presented without any explanatory context whatsoever. Even if the part of the URL's label indicates the context, I recommend you're providing a short sentence (or more,) as to how such a link is pertinent to the discussion at hand.

Thank you

cmoroney Loc: Pasadena, California

Actually one of the beauties of Lightroom is that it will work with literally *any* organizational system you have. There is no need whatsoever to reorganize your photos for LR. All you need to do is select "add" when importing your photos and it will insert links to all your photos into the catalogue but it will *not* change your folder/file structure at all. I would recommend trying this, as you're missing out on a lot of LR's capabilities by using your workflow.

Catherine

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

Thank you, Catherine, DG, & the person who PM'd me this morning, for your views that give me confidence to invest time in learning to use LR CC as my primary Photography Management System as well. I don't believe, though, that this Topic discussion has necessarily concluded yet, as it's still possible for some naysayer with experience using the Photo Mgt Systems of both LR and Mac Photos to come along & opine otherwise.

cmoroney Loc: Pasadena, California

I'm an old veteran of iPhoto and Aperture and am kicking myself for not moving to LR immediately. Both Aperture/Photos/iPhoto hide the actual internal folder structure from you, whereas it's out in the open with LR, and customizable to boot. I would advise not even looking at Aperture/Photos/iPhoto and moving straight to LR. Now granted there are a few gotcha's to be aware of, but if you follow a few simple rules LR is a far superior product. And almost every 3rd party photo editing program plays well with LR, which I don't think is the case with Photos. LR can be complex but you can take your time and learn it in stages. I suggest reading Victoria Brampton's "LR Quick Start Guide" (free on the internet) to get a quick overview of how LR works.

Catherine

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

Many thanks, Catherine! I will look up this reference forthwith. 😀👍🏻😎

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

John Shaw has an inexpensive e-book on organizing the Library module of LR http://www.johnshawphoto.com/using-lightroom-2-and-photoshop-4/

lsimpkins Loc: SE Pennsylvania

Thank you for your post. I find that one of the biggest sources of confusion with LR is that people think the Import process necessitates LR creating its own organization of their photos. As you noted, the "Add" option of the Import process merely adds photos to the LR catalog in their *existing* location. Another misconception is that you have to Export your LR-edited images back to another location you select. This is also not true. Since LR adjustments are non-destructive and can be embedded in the original file or xmp side car file, there is no reason for an Export after editing unless you have need to post or email the edited file. Even for printing directly in LR no Export is needed. LR takes care of creating the actual file for printing in the background.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Both Photos and Lightroom operate as image databases. They don't really import your images, they create database records about them, and proxy images from them, then leave the originals "as is" until you export or print.

The biggest problem users seem to have with Lightroom occurs when they MOVE their original images and Lightroom loses its pointers to them! One way to solve that is to create new catalogs for each volume where you store images, and open that catalog from that volume.

I am a dyed in the wool Mac AND PC user. I have taken courses in Aperture and Lightroom from Apple and Adobe trainers, and have to say, I think Adobe got it right. The market thinks so, too. And Apple must, because they gave up on Aperture. Photos is a bit of a kludge of the best in their old iPhoto and the best in Aperture, and as such, is a bit of a stretch for users of either to appreciate. I do use Photos when I'm working with the iLife suite, because it's integrated with those apps.

On this iMac, I have Photos and Lightroom. I tend to use Photos for iPhone images and Lightroom for my serious (Panasonic GH4 and older Canon and Nikon) images. I also have DPP for Canon raw image processing, SilkyPix for Panasonic raw image processing. I use Photoshop for pixel-level editing, masking, and typography. I use Graphic Converter for lots of things... slide shows, editing batches, batch conversions..., and Fotor (for fun and silliness). I keep meaning to try Affinity Photo, because users absolutely RAVE about it. It integrates with Photos, using Photos as its catalog/database manager.

I'd be careful in Apple Stores. Some of the help are wannabes or newbies, and some really know their stuff. If they're not at the Genius Bar, I tend to be leery.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

If you have no intention of editing the Aperture images in Lightroom it may not be worth the effort. Regardless of what some people think, Lightroom is primarily a professional level raw file editor. It has strong cataloging features, but they are secondary to its prime function.