Bogin Bob Loc: Tampa Bay, Florida

"My workflow is very simple" - excellent

"I have a good organizational system on my external drive" - Lightroom won't change that.

"I want to ditch LR and use Bridge (browser capability) and Adobe Camera Raw" - will those applications allow you to search and quickly find photos via keyword, date, file type, lens? Can you organize photos in different 'collections' without the requirement to have copies in several folders using hard drive resources?

"I understand it can do most of what LR can do." - so why not stick with something that does ALL of what Lightroom can do, versus trying to integrate pieces that LR already does

"I don't batch edit. I also use Luminar 4 and am learning PS." - Luminar (which I have also) was originally billed as a Lightroom replacement never fulfilled all of Lightroom's catalog capabilities.

"Also I won't have to worry about LR losing photos or not recognizing a drive." LR really doesn't 'lose' photos, your workflow process within LR just needs to be tightened - do not move photos outside of LR, and if you do simply synchronize the folder inside of Lightroom

Other features that keep me with LR - free website and sharing tools - Adobe cloud, My Portfolio, Adobe Spark

The bottom line is - photography is to be enjoyable ... so find that which brings you joy.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I never delved into Lr's cataloging due to the fact that I had my own system established prior to Lr being released. I'd used Ps for some years prior to Lr and didn't need to learn another photo processing program. I do however, have an SQL database for my photographs. It is completely separate from any processing program. It simply stores and retrieves photographic information. It is web based. So, I can retrieve photographic information from any location from which I have web access.
--Bob

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

The LR catalog is NOT a browser. A browser is NOT a great substitute for a solid database/catalog. What seems like a good organizational system rarely is, once you understand the way LR (and other catalog based DAMs work). DAM is an acronym for digital asset manager. The idea for Lightroom's catalog comes, no doubt, from the industrial strength DAMs used in corporations for years to organize and manage all paper and media within a corporation, for multiple users.

LR's power is the rub. To be honest, I was accustomed to using browsers and OS file and folder systems when I first looked at LR 2.0. It sat on my system for almost a year simply because I "expected" it to work like every other software product I had ever used - find the file in the browser, using a right click on the filename to open it and select the application to open it with, and edit away. LR was not that software, and my expectations blinded me to its benefits. I suspect that this is what is happening to you and the "very accomplished participant" who is influencing your decision.

I was completely baffled by how LR worked, and where things were saved, etc etc etc. But I refused to be defeated by a software product that many around me seemed to have figured it out.

So one weekend I opened a nice claret, put a do not disturb sign on the door to my office, and planned not to emerge until either the bottle was empty or I had figured it out. The "ahah" moment came about halfway through the bottle.

Now here is the thing. The very efficient file/folder/keyword system I had relied on for 10 years was ok, but it lacked the second level organizational capability that an indexed relational database could provide. LR was that. Being able to organize my images using many-to-one and one-to-many relationships between files/virtual collections finally allowed me to have a single file be part of multiple "collections" instead of making and tracking multiple copies of my images. One picture of a waterfall taken while vacationing could be part of a small collection for that trip, another collection including waterfalls, another collection including family vacations, another collection that aggregates images for a gallery submission, etc. This organization is absolutely not possible with a simple file/folder/keyword scheme. The indexed database is also blindly fast. Because what you are seeing and editing are previews stored in a catalog, rather than editing an entire, often huge, raster file, means that editing is also efficient and fast.

The best part is that I could continue storing my files in the same manner as I had done for 10 yrs. All I did when I started using LR was tell it to "add" the existing files to the database and voila! there they were.

Taking the time to wrap your head around LR's data management model is worth the investment - I can only say this because I was entirely in your shoes until I did, and after "getting it" I can't even think about how I would manage my 200,000+ images.

BTW, you CAN batch edit in ACR - it's just not as slick and fast as doing it in LR - which has a user interface that is decluttered and optimized for fast and efficient editing of multiple files. And you can use LR and Bridge together if you'd like, as long as you are religious about updating the LR catalog with any changes that you make outside of LR. But for my workflow, there is nothing that Bridge offers me that I can't do in LR. Which is why I rarely use it anymore.

After import my basic workflow is simple and file clutter minimal. I open the raw file, edit to optimize it, then use "edit in" to open the file as a 16 bit psd raster file in ProPhoto colorspace. I use this as my master working file to finish the image to my liking. Upon saving, the "edit in" option is set up to place the edited (and finished) psd file in the catalog, alongside the original raw file. From that point forward, I have defined a number of export presets for different destinations - several low res ones for social media and email, a couple of high-res ones for printing, higher quality high res ones for clients (for viewing and printing), etc. - and these are grouped by destination and saved to their corresponding folders unde the master folder with the source raw files. Most of the time, once the images have reached their destination, I delete them. There is no reason in my workflow to keep my jpegs - since if have to recreate them all I need to do is export them again using the appropriate export preset. This is very basically what I do.

neillaubenthal

Some use collections, smart collections, various flags or colors, or keywords to organize their library. Some rename photos as they are imported. However…LR also supports a folder structure which is mostly what I do. Little to no renaming on import, put images into folders by year and location or by subject or by trip or whatever makes sense. I do use some collections, stars, and colors…and I do keyword on import so I can see all elk photos for instance……but the folder structure is my primary organizational tool.

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

When Professor Paul speaks, it pays to listen.
I'm old enough to have used more than one or two file systems, and yes they would still work. Lightroom was not at all intuitive, but it was worth the effort to learn. Once learned, it becomes easy and quick, at least to the extent any system is quick. When there are lots of photos to sort, it takes a while to get them imported and labeled, no matter what system you use.
Yes, LR takes some time and effort to learn, but it is an excellent system, both for cataloging and editing!

ELNikkor

All my photos are organized by the year, with a folder for every month since June of 2006. I don't use Lightroom, but if I knew how to use it the way it was designed to be used, it would save me a huge hassle whenever I need to find an image I took a long time ago, but can't remember when.

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

I want to control where I put my files and what I name them.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

There is ZERO aspects of LR that prevent you from doing exactly that. The point is that once you go beyond "YYYYMMDD <Description>" and the original 12345678.xxx file names, you're now making / taking redundant actions to the work you also perform within your RDBMS-based Lightroom. Instead, do it once inside LR rather than twice inside and outside LR.

GLSmith Loc: Tampa, Fl

I gave up on Adobe as a whole ages ago & have settled on ACDSee Ultimate. One cost, any updates are free, bugs minimal, As powerful as Light Room & a ton easier to learn & get accustomed to...but...to each their own.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I can never remember what year I went where or shot what.
I'm always interested in finding a where or what, not a when.
Mine are organized by subject matter.
But that's just me.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Inside LR, you can find your images by date since the RDBMS picks up the EXIF data. But, all your user-added keyword descriptions of what / where / why are equally available for searching and sorting. From the EXIF you can also get all the 'how' such as camera, lens, ISO, focal length, shutterspeed, and so forth.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Similar for Windows File Explorer. Just different in operation and display.

Personal preference, eh?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Like was said earlier, now in multiple replies: LR is far more than an OS file system browser. It's less work to accomplish more. If you like that idea, subscribe (the only option). If you don't, don't. For those that are subscribing, but refusing, that's the saddest story of all.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Work is relative to what needs to be accomplished.
Okay, I'm sad.

CaptainPhoto

You nailed it - I love LR and the catalog-filter search system it has. I add key words to my images and bang no matter where they are in my LR catalog system- the image pops up. I don't rely on my memory to tell me where and when I took a photo. It's a great technology.

To all you LR haters - do what you want, use what you want, more power to you. But stop bad mouthing a good/great program like LR. If you don't like it, don't use is. What, you looking for someone to validate your ideas. Or you want to start an argument. Go some place else.