burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Photoshop, Bridge, Lightroom, and Lightroom Classic all use Adobe Camera Raw, but with slightly different interfaces.

The biggest hurdle most folks have with LrC is understanding

> what Import means (LrC stores links or drive/folder paths to your files' locations)

> where your files are located (where YOU put them on your drive, or where YOU TOLD LrC to put them on your drive)

> what happens if you MOVE those files OUTSIDE of LrC. (your files are where you moved them, and the links/paths are broken, but restorable.)

Lightroom Classic does not store files you "import" into it. Importing only stores a path to the file, creates a record in a database, saves a proxy image for display during editing, and optionally stores a metadata file. You can predetermine that path to the file by importing files from a specific place on your drive, or you can tell LrC via defaults how you want it to name and organize the files you import.

That said, all movement of files should be done inside LrC, unless you want to go through the bother of re-linking files (which is easy, once you've done it).

Bobsphoto

se Bridge to import photos to my drive. I started using it before I got Lightroom. I like it because of the batch processing capability, which I use to rename and sort my photos. Once in Bridge I add some keywords and other information.

It's probably very unsophisticated , but I then import into Lightroom, which I like because of its cataloging and editing capabilities.

I admit I am not an expert user and probably don't understand the Adobe phot suite, but I do like the interaction between the different programs.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

[quote=terryMc]

To each his own. Lightroom Classic was designed by and for a group of professional photographers. It morphed to an app for the general photo industry from there. Not once have I lost a file due to anything other than my own momentary lapse of attention, and in all cases, retrieval took seconds.

It should speak volumes that the most powerful photo lab systems work in a manner quite similar to Lightroom Classic, using a database to track images and orders, color correct files, render files to printers, etc. Apple Photos also works in a manner similar to LrC, except it DOES grab your files and store them in an enclave where you can't really get to them without voodoo. (That said, it works well if you play by Apple's rules!)

Ednsb Loc: Santa Barbara

We really need a thumbs up

bonjac Loc: Santa Ynez, CA 93460

I just watched a YouTube video on Bridge by Anthony Morganti. I covers the latest edition of Bridge and was an eye-opener for me. Very informative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv2PKjKWVSI

sodapop Loc: Bel Air, MD

You can do all of the things you mentioned in Lightroom

Davidka

I am not a pro photographer and have been using Adobe bridge for 20 yrs and I like it. It serves me well. Here is a tutorial (long) that may help you. Good luck and have a nice day https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKHhV390W4A

BebuLamar

I use Bridge because I don't like the cataloging function. If the OP like the cataloging function then he should use LR.

johnny1950 Loc: Palm Coast, Florida

I use bridge as my primary. I upload photos to my external harddrive and keep them in folders for ease of finding. I then open bridge and click on my external hard drive from the drop down menui and it opens all my folders. Click on the one I want and then open in photoshop. Work on it and save it to my external hard drive.
Johnny

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

Where's the insult. Repeat it. It's not b there.

Why are you always picking on Paul. Are you jealous.

ronichas Loc: Long Island

frankraney wrote:
Where's the insult. Repeat it. It's not b there.

Why are you always picking on Paul. Are you jealous.


Lookup the word Luddites. Read what he wrote. No way am I jealous of him. Why are you defending him?

Luddites
1.
DEROGATORY
a person opposed to new technology or ways of working.
"a small-minded Luddite resisting progress"

ronichas Loc: Long Island

Lookup the word Luddites. Read what he wrote. No way am I jealous of him. Why are you defending him?

Luddites
1.
DEROGATORY
a person opposed to new technology or ways of working.
"a small-minded Luddite resisting progress"

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

He did not call the op a Luddite and he did not take it that way. Above told the op to use bridge, and the op asked is anyone used it that way and how. The op is already using new technology. Paul was talking about others, not the op.

The ten can be taken as derogatory or offensive, but not in this case.

And it's a descriptive word describing those that fight change. That includes a LOT of people.

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

There are a couple of people here who seem to feel that the only opinion that matters is their own, and the only software or methodology of any import is that of which they approve and use, and that is unfortunate, because there are actually many knowledgeable people who simply do things another way.

I have told people here I don't need Lightroom, and they tell me that's because I'm not smart enough to do it right, like the "professionals." Let me give me you a clue: I worked for several years with "professionals," correcting their mistakes, trying to educate them about how film, exposure, processing, printing, etc. and later, software works.

A "professional" who I know who loves to talk down to me about my amateur status, once said to me: "Is it shutter speed or aperture that makes depth of field, I can never remember that." I must remember to ask that man to design some software to help me streamline my photography workflow. He also uses Lightroom exclusively, because he is a professional fine art photographer, and professionals use Lightroom. Oh, yeah, and he doesn't use Photoshop because he DOESN"T KNOW HOW TO.

When you tell me I'm doing it wrong, don't cite as proof the fact that "professionals" do it your way, because I have literally forgotten more about photography than at least half the professionals that I have had the misfortune to come in contact with.

I am a student of photography. I started late, in my early 40s and I am still learning now into my 80s. Tell me something I don't know and I will thank you, because I am always trying to learn something new. One thing I have learned is to try everything myself and not take the word of someone whose only proof is his own opinion.

I don't tell people they're stupid and non-productive if they don't use Bridge and ACR, I tell them I use those tools and they tell me I am stupid, old and behind the times. I can of course, still Photoshop circles around them, but what does matter if I don't use a database, right? You may not know that I once had a DOS database with which I catalogued all my film as I digitized it. DOS, on 5" floppies and it worked better than Lightroom's. It was the 1980s.

I have ACR, and without ACR there is no Lightroom. I know how it works. I use it. I use it to open and initiate editing on raw files and use as it as a filter inside Photoshop. I have Bridge and I have all the organizational power that I need, and the actual files are in the same place on disk as they would be if Lightroom added a pointer to it, which can get lost or corrupted and did so many times that it wasn't worth it to me to keep fighting with it. Bridge can find any picture on my computer without a database.