Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Is it time to change from Adobe cc?
Page <<first <prev 6 of 7 next>
Feb 26, 2023 10:30:13   #
ronichas Loc: Long Island
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Yes, I use the software I paid for. Not paying monthly and then proudly and loudly telling others how smart I am to not use it, and naming-checking others doing the same. Even though, that population is rather small relative to the majority that use LR only or LR and PS together.


It is difficult to voice your opinion of lightroom when you are using an 8 year old program. It has come a long way in the past 8 years.

I am happy for you *proudly & loudly telling others how smart you are to not use it*

Reply
Feb 26, 2023 10:37:46   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
ronichas wrote:
It is difficult to voice your opinion of lightroom when you are using an 8 year old program. It has come a long way in the past 8 years.

I am happy for you *proudly & loudly telling others how smart you are to not use it*


By your own admission, you wouldn't know anything about any version of Lightroom. 8-year old software doesn't fall over as if a stricken animal. By LR6, the software was quite mature and feature-rich. Coupled with advanced equipment and shooting technique, it does everything most anyone needs, if you got a copy before Adobe stopped selling and use it only on Windows. If I felt I was limited by 8-year old software along with my equally 8-year old digital cameras, I'd do something about it. At this point, I'm just happily doing more to more images with less effort in less total time.

Reply
Feb 26, 2023 10:38:36   #
terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
LOL

Talk about someone who thinks they know everything. Very UHH, welcome back to the community full of these types!

BTW - What is now LR Classic started back in 2007 as LR1. It really started to get good around v4 in 2012. I've never personally moved on from LR6 that still operates on Win10/11, dating back to 2015. The current subscription model, and the variety of flavors and mobile platforms, dates only to 2017.



I haven't touched the 'newest' Adobe Camera RAW, not being a subscriber to the current updates. What I do know of the software is that it is a cruel joke when compared to Lightroom Classic. From the earlier back n forth, LR may be everything that ACR is, but it doesn't go the other way; ACR is not even close to everything that LR is. ACR is so incomplete and cumbersome, the comparison is laughable, a cruel joke ...

So, the proper phrasing of the earlier statement is:

When you understand Lightroom, you understand the plethora of things that you can do better and faster than trying the same thing in ACR & PS. You understand when to expend the extra effort to work in PS for the relatively few images where this time and effort is needed.
LOL br br Talk about someone who thinks they know... (show quote)


I just stated that I DON'T know everything, and now I'm beginning to understand that you can't possibly know what ACR is if you have "never touched it." Therefore you argue from ignorance, and I'm done here.

Reply
 
 
Feb 26, 2023 10:39:29   #
BebuLamar
 
Does LR6 support raw files from Canon R5?

Reply
Feb 26, 2023 10:40:05   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
terryMc wrote:
I just stated that I DON'T know everything, and now I'm beginning to understand that you can't possibly know what ACR is if you have "never touched it." Therefore you argue from ignorance, and I'm done here.


I knew you'd be back to say you didn't know everything, even though, you then proceeded to expound at length about the everything you did know ...

Reply
Feb 26, 2023 10:40:54   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
BebuLamar wrote:
Does LR6 support raw files from Canon R5?


Nope, never will.

Reply
Feb 26, 2023 10:45:29   #
Hip Coyote
 
A quick read of this thread and I did not see mention of facial recognition (which actually is just a way to add key words with name of the person.) Sadly, on more than one occasion, we have had a relative or loved one pass away. Because I am the photog of our friends, they turn to me for photos. "I'd sure like a copy of that photo of grandma and little Billy from years ago!" Well, I keep an organized file system but it would take a lot of work to find that exact photo. Because I am faithful in running the facial thing in LR once in a while, I simply filter for those names and I get all the desired photos. More than once, I have given people every photo I have ever taken (and kept) of someone for their memories and use. It is a wonderful gift to them. The trick to this seems to be to take the shots, curate, process, print, whatever, then after all that, run the facial recognition and let it do its thing. It is not that time consuming.

I also am getting better at geocoding pics. I now take a shot or two with an iPhone and then match those coordinates with my files from my regular camera. For instances, we just got back from Egypt...and things start to look the same. I can go to my map feature and do a little detective work. Again, it does not take a lot of time to do.

I also do not have 100,000 photos. Curate, curate, curate. LR helps me do this...as do other programs. I am getting better to cull 95% of my shots to what I consider to the be very best of the bunch. I simply try to use all the features of the program. The masking capabilities of the new LR is helpful to me...select subject, etc. It amazing how quickly and accurately LR does this. For those of you who have older versions of LR, as did I, I think you will find that going back to re-edit some shots, using the select subject feature, might change your mind about the efficacy of the newer LR version. Do a side by side comparison and, maybe, like me, you will have an "ah ha" moment. It has changed my photo game quite a bit.

I use collections in LR quite a bit. I now synch some of those collections with the cloud and use Adobe's included web site maker, "Portfolio," for my meager website. For my purposes, it is an elegant application. I think LR has a plugin for Smugmug as well.

The interface for the bookmaking, to me, is a complete mess (meaning maybe I have not figured out how to use it!)

On a few occasions, I have used the slideshow tool to some effect. It is a bit clunky, but it works.

I also use collections for other things...a relative of mine is an avid scrapbooker and is here for a week working on a gift for my adult son and daughter in law to make a scrapbook of their child's first few years. I do a quick search for the baby (hundreds of shots!), add them to a collection, we go through and pick the one's she want printed and the work is accomplished. Upload to get printed and done.

I also use the cloud based version of LR while on vacation in that we are often in groups who like to see pics right away. I shoot in raw and just edit on they fly in LR on my phone (after migrating some shots to my phone). Or someone on the trip shares a photo that needs fixin and I can do it quickly on the trip. It has the quick selection masks that the regular LR uses. Its amazing really. I upload to WhatsApp for the group. What I have not quite figured out yet is how to totally and elegantly fold all that into my regular workflow when I get home. As they say, always student and sometimes a teacher.

Reply
 
 
Feb 26, 2023 10:48:54   #
bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA
 
terryMc wrote:
If you understood that the identical masking capabilities are in Camera Raw, you would understand that for masking capabilities, you don't need any version of Lightroom Classic.

If you understood that Photoshop also has AI masking but with better and more accurate refining capability than clumsy brushes, you would realize that you don't need Lightroom.


I did overlook that part

Reply
Feb 26, 2023 10:55:51   #
ronichas Loc: Long Island
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Nope, never will.


So you are using old camera gear and old Adobe product.
Ok, I don't think you should be insulting those who chose not to use old products.

Reply
Feb 26, 2023 11:00:19   #
ronichas Loc: Long Island
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
By your own admission, you wouldn't know anything about any version of Lightroom. 8-year old software doesn't fall over as if a stricken animal. By LR6, the software was quite mature and feature-rich. Coupled with advanced equipment and shooting technique, it does everything most anyone needs, if you got a copy before Adobe stopped selling and use it only on Windows. If I felt I was limited by 8-year old software along with my equally 8-year old digital cameras, I'd do something about it. At this point, I'm just happily doing more to more images with less effort in less total time.
By your own admission, you wouldn't know anything ... (show quote)


You don't know, what you don't know about the newer cameras and newer software.
I don't believe you should be insulting others who have more knowledge about the newer equipment.

Reply
Feb 26, 2023 11:00:53   #
DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA
 
terryMc wrote:
...As I said, I don't know everything, and that may be why I don't know how file management systems make better photos. Yet, how often do the Lightroom advocates ignore the editing portion, which is identical to Camera Raw, and tout the database as the reason to use it? I use Camera Raw for many things, and I go into the Camera Raw filter often. There is no need to export/import, just click "camera raw filter," do whatever you want, and click "okay," like any other filter. For instance, I think the new people selection AI stuff is great, but guess what? It's all there in Camera Raw, and I don't need Lightroom.
...As I said, I don't know everything, and that ma... (show quote)


I use Lightroom. I use Photoshop. Have been using both for almost two decades.

I agree that the file management system does not improve my photos. However, I need it to keep track of things. I use a dual system: the Lightroom database and a defined folder structure. For me, the database is much easier to use and does more for me than the folder structure. But I keep the folder structure because my family won't know how to use the database when I'm not around. I do use virtual copies and collections, which allow me to group photos without duplicating them as I would have to do in a folder based management system. Duplication is not a really big deal as far as storage space is concerned, since memory is cheap. But if you want to edit a file that has been placed in different folders, you have to send the new edit to all the folders, which means you have to remember which folders have that image. With a database, it's only one image so you can edit it at will and it will be edited in all the instances.

Lightroom does indeed use Camera Raw. LR has a convenient user interface that allows you to use Camera Raw. You could of course use Camera Raw outside LR, but it's there and makes it easy to use. Where LR has insufficient capability for your editing, it is simple to send your image to Photoshop to complete the edit. Returning the image to LR for the management, it can be stacked with the original. That is just a convenient way to display the most current edit while leaving the pre-Photoshop image intact and available. It is not displayed but can be if it is needed. Stacked images are marked so you know there are hidden images. Stacking is just a management tool.

If all you are interested in is editing, Photoshop will do it for you. You don't need Lightroom. In my opinion, the database management is worth using so Lightroom is important to me. The virtual copies and collections are part of the convenience I find that Lightroom offers.

Reply
 
 
Feb 26, 2023 11:01:33   #
BebuLamar
 
ronichas wrote:
So you are using old camera gear and old Adobe product.
Ok, I don't think you should be insulting those who chose not to use old products.


LR6 does support the raw files from my Nikon Df and it has sufficient editing capabilities in its development module for me. I don't need the power of of PS and I do hate to subscribe to software but.. I really hate the cataloging function of LR. It makes me import the files and then making sure I don't move the files. And thus I subcribe to PS CC and not using the LR.

Reply
Feb 26, 2023 13:48:53   #
anotherview Loc: California
 
Well said. Let me please note, however, that Nik software offers a comprehensive approach to processing black-and-white photographs.
terryMc wrote:
If you understood that everything you stated above is your opinion and is worthless to me, because I have everything I need in Photoshop, Camera Raw, and Bridge;

If you understood that I have been using Photoshop daily since 1992 and I can do everything I need to do there, without a lot of extraneous bells and whistles that have nothing to do with photographs;

If you understood that all that fluff you warble on and on about above has nothing to do with better images, and everything to do with adding steps to your workflow;

If you were capable of understanding that you would likely still not understand why I DON'T NEED LIGHTROOM.

Sophistication is meaningless. Camera Raw has all the editing functions of Lightroom, because Lightroom is Camera Raw.

I have the edit history of my images in Photoshop, and I can walk back and forward to any state. Then, I can use the history brush to make changes to the image from that state. Where is the History brush in Lightroom? I don't need Lightroom for history.

I don't need "export presets," I have Save, Save As, Save A Copy, Save For Web; the choices are overwhelming. And I never use presets. But if want one-click anything, I can make a Photoshop Action to do it. I don't need Lightroom for actions.

I can't imagine why I would need "many" virtual copies, but I have lots of disk space for any copies I need. I usually save three or four in different file types. But if need be, I can make as many snapshots of History States as I need in Photoshop. I don't need Lightroom for any copy, virtual or otherwise.

After all these years, in February 2023, this month, they just now fixed the crummy database? Wonderful. I still don't need a database to find files that are still on the disk just like any other file, and can be found with a simple search using Bridge. When it's been working for a year without problems, get back to me. In the meantime, I don't need Lightroom.

If you understood that I never use presets, you would understand that understanding how Develop & Import presets works would save me no time at all. The ability to do something I don't do is not something I need Lightroom for.

I do, of course, have the "Image Compare Window" in Photoshop, just one more thing that I don't need Lightroom for.

I don't understand "Stacking images for organization and reference." I can't imagine why I would spend even a moment trying to. Just figuring out the jargon would waste lots of my time.

I manage my images or ("digital assets" if you think using esoteric terms is more important than making quality images) just fine, and I can even extract assets from a layer to a separate image if I need to use them again. I don't need a catalog for that. Where are the layers in Lightroom? I don't need Lightroom.

The OS is not my file manager. Bridge is my file manager, where I have Favorites, Collections, and a search feature. If my OS has Collections and Favorites that I can access across folders and disks, I was not aware of that. Bridge does. Where are the actual image files that are cataloged by Lightroom? Are they not on a disk?

If photography to you means only unlimited virtual copies, databases, catalogs, organization and reference, importing and exporting instead of just "Save," or "Save a Copy," bragging rights for using "pro-grade software" (Photoshop is not "Pro Grade??") and coming on to forums like this one constantly asking for help in finding the files that Lightroom's "urban legend" catalog has lost, or how to transfer the catalog and database without losing all the files, etc. (I think there are at least 4 active such posts here right now;) if that is photography to you, don't let me stop you from using all the great features in Lightroom.

I don't need Lightroom. I will never need Lightroom.
If you understood that everything you stated above... (show quote)

Reply
Feb 26, 2023 14:15:00   #
bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA
 
BebuLamar wrote:
LR6 does support the raw files from my Nikon Df and it has sufficient editing capabilities in its development module for me. I don't need the power of of PS and I do hate to subscribe to software but.. I really hate the cataloging function of LR. It makes me import the files and then making sure I don't move the files. And thus I subcribe to PS CC and not using the LR.


"LR6 does support the raw files from my...."

I'm sure you know this, but using the (free) Adobe DNG Converter program as you card to computer transfer utility, you can have LR6 use for any camera.

I like the subscription plan. If it were not for the $10/month subscription plan, I would not have such good software. The old "Creative Suites" were beyond my budget.

Reply
Feb 26, 2023 15:34:44   #
Sidwalkastronomy Loc: New Jersey Shore
 
I may be wrong but this thread is right up there with filters/mo filter treads OR raw vs JPEG threads.
Can we request popcorn from the moderators for this thread watching

Reply
Page <<first <prev 6 of 7 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.