dkguill Loc: Elkhart, IN

I have no problem with what your are saying. I just don't want to learn to build a database when I have no need for it. You are comfortable with building them and I say have at it. I have found that I don't need a DB to find my files. My original reason for buying LR was because they said it could provide a catalog. They didn't say it was cryptic as it could be and impossible to rely on. I work in PS, ACR, and Bridge. I don't need another program that requires that I do everything in it (LR) or it threatens to lose track of my files. If I save something while working in PS it stays where I saved it. If I move something while in Bridge, it stays where I put it....AND it doesn't have another program throwing a hissy fit about it. I became especially disenchanted with LR when I discovered that it brought nothing to the table that wasn't already on the PS table of capabilities. I don't consider a cataloging system that doesn't work to be a necessary asset.

Bottom line...do what pleases you and I'll do the same. We're both good.

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

I did database for 45 years (of course rudimentary mainframe to start with "IMS" "Dbomp), but what Bridge allows you is self control and yes you can hierarchical your search and tagging. LR and Elements have their built in cataloging library, but I prefer to do my own.

dkguill Loc: Elkhart, IN

IMO LR doesn't do anything without the potential for a hassle...just read the frustrated posts on this forum. No one reports such problems using PS or Bridge that I have seen lately. I too have LRCC/PSCC and, if the price doesn't escalate, I'll be happy for the foreseeable future. The difference is that I would be even happier if LRCC were gone and I just paid what I'm paying now for PSCC. LR has no value whatsoever to me, and if I didn't fear physically removing LRCC from my computer, I would do it right NOW. But, because they MADE ME DOWNLOAD AND INSTALL LR before they would let me install PSCC, I'm not going to take a chance that removing LR might cause me headaches with PSCC due to the way they made me load them. I know...I've been told I should be able to dump LR and have no problem with PS thereafter, but I've played that tune before and heard nothing but sour notes at the end of the piece. Bridge works and I didn't have to take a course in order to learn to use it. It's the perfect work flow for me as it interacts with ACR and PS to produce the images I need. Why would I want to introduce a misbehaving, complicated program to mess with my currently functioning system. Some wise sage said..."If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Wisdom to live by. I'll end with one last quote by Emory Austin..."When the pain of staying the same becomes greater than the pain of change, you will change." HOWEVER, if the pain created by change is great enough, you will return to that which works and is painless. (my quote) Adding LR is ANYTHING BUT PAINLESS.

dkguill Loc: Elkhart, IN

Hallelujah Brother!

Bill P

For me, Bridge is the best. I learned Photoshop and Bridge in the pre Lightroom days, and tried it, but to me, lightroom is perfect for a wedding photographer that shoots 2 or 3 thousand exposures at a wedding (Ugh!) but otherwise is unnecessary. It seems to m e to be an attempt to make Windows a Windows program look and sct "more Mac-like) which isn't something I want.

So Bridge is good for importing, sorting, and reviewing the fruits of your labors. Lightroom unnecessarily complicates things for me.

If I were starting from scratch, I might feel differently.

jcolton

Lightroom was created to give one of Adobe's hotshot techies something to do so he wouldn't leave the company. It was thought to be a temporary spot for him until they found him a real job. Of course he was so good that he developed LR into a powerful tool that competes in many ways with Photoshop.

I don't use LR because I don't want to deal with the database. I'm glad I don't every time I see problems with the LR catalogs. I use Bridge and I have a very efficient filing system. Note that Bridge has the same tools as the Develop module in LR so it's like LR without the database. I process over 90% of my raw images in ACR and Bridge and use PS when I need to make more detailed changes.

jcolton

Lightroom was created to give one of Adobe's hotshot techies something to do so he wouldn't leave the company. It was thought to be a temporary spot for him until they found him a real job. Of course he was so good that he developed LR into a powerful tool that competes in many ways with Photoshop.

I don't use LR because I don't want to deal with the database. I'm glad I don't every time I see problems with the LR catalogs. I use Bridge and I have a very efficient filing system. Note that Bridge has the same tools as the Develop module in LR so it's like LR without the database. I process over 90% of my raw images in ACR and Bridge and use PS when I need to make more detailed changes.

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

James R. Kyle Loc: Saint Louis, Missouri (A Suburb of Ferguson)

====================

Yep!

I, like you - "Clapperboard" - Use Bridge as my "Opener" - Then it's Open In RAW, to do some adjustments -- Opening then in CS-5 and with the NIK Software "plug-ins" I balance things a little, and do my finals back in CS-5. If I wish to convert to a "Shades of Gray" I make use of NIK Software's "Silver Efex Pro 2".... I really like ALL of the NIK Software's "Tools" ... It comes with all ready "profiles" --- However = I choose to make my own where I use as a starting point.

LightRoom - to me - was a hindrance in my already established work-flow. Other photographers find it really good to work with. What gets me is I see on this site and others a lot of questions about problems that have and are occurring with LR. I choose to Make Photographic Prints - Not mess around trying to learn a new system. That "great cataloging system" that LR is so praised about was a mental thunderstorm for me. I bought it - kept trying to use it for about 6 months - wasted a lot of time to get my head around it with reading and watching VIDs ---- I gave up on it.... Gave it to my son, who really likes it and understands it well. (It was a nice Christmas Surprise for him :-)


-0-

James R. Kyle Loc: Saint Louis, Missouri (A Suburb of Ferguson)

=========

YUP!

Well Put :-)

anotherview Loc: California

You can download your photographs into Adobe Bridge. AB can organize and display your photographs. You can open your RAW (or JPEG) files directly from AB into Photoshop CC. AB stores the developed photographs, if you so choose. I find AB integral to Photoshop CC.

I do not use LR.

Don's Leica Loc: Asheville, NC

Yes, I use Bridge for almost all my photo processing and file management. I am fortunate that the various things that Bridge can do are an almost perfect match for my working habits and desires. My old-fashioned approach to photography does not require Photoshop to change the photo into something that the camera didn't see. Once I spent all day with Photoshop removing beer bottles from the table at a party, only to discover that the guys in the photo didn't care and didn't want my result. And I don't want to learn to use anything new and complicated, like LR.

anotherview Loc: California

Photoshop CC along with Adobe Bridge and Adobe Camera Raw can do all that LR does and more.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Actually, Bridge does have a database and a cataloging system. You simply haven't learned to use it yet. I have.

Clapperboard

The 'Keywords' facility in Bridge is very useful and very easy to use.
Maybe it's time to end this discussion when it's becoming 'I'm better than you' instead of a simple comparison of facilities offered by programmes.
Cheers, Albert.