Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Adobe Lightroom V2.0 Beta — Killer Photo workflow

<< < (6/10) > >>

Carol Haynes:
Thanks for that summary - saved me a job. My problems with ACDsee RAW also include poor colour matching because its profiles don't seem to work properly. They were truly awful in that last non-pro version I used (and ACD acknowledged it in an email and said I would have to wait for the next version). Pro version was OK but not a patch on the other tools I have. Haven't tried ACDSee Pro v. 2 because I don't want to spend £50 on something I don't need.

The only program I still use from ACD is FotoSlate - which is handy at times - but they won't get any more money from me any time soon.

iphigenie:
Thanks for that, it is very useful. I guess I should compare the RAW converters - i was just using what came with my camera out of lazyness until i started thinking about it. If the RAW workflow in ACDSEE is as clunky as you say, then I just wont have the patience for it... I hadnt tried it yet.

ACDSee is nowhere near as slick as other tools for combining fixes and effects and undoing/adjusting later. Unless it is all in their RAW tool. I like what i saw in lightroom and lightzone (lightzone offers it for jpegs too and i have a lot of those)

I have been looking at tutorials on lightroom and the beta, and I must admit it looks pretty nice. Very slick. If you know what you are doing - I dont think I understand enough (or more precisely want to take the time!) how to use all the sliders and curves. And I am sure I dont want to pay 220 pounds (although give me time, you never know. 199 dollars i might pay)

I just dont have the 100 hours and 1000 pounds to spend on being an expert (well i have them but dont want to use them for that). I wouldnt know a color profile if it bit me... it's not that I cant understand, it is just that I am not sure I want to spend the time to read, learn, then pay for all the costs. I also am not sure whether it isnt a bit of an illusion - like people with top of the range ski gear who barely can ski, maybe one converter or tool is not as good but I wouldnt do any better with the top of the range one due to lack of patience.

I'm old school when it comes to photos, taught in the time of film (still have film cameras and use them). I try to get them right the first time and forget about them if they arent. Still getting the head around the fact that some of my "bah" picture could be made stunning.

Give me time

PS: As for acdsee at the time i compared it with a few of the other tools and it had the best workflow to acquire, file, name, tag files from scanning negatives, as it would stay in acquisition mode for strip after strip until i told it to stop. Other tools would take the 4 scanned, then go back to the main interface and you had to go through the menus and "ok" "ok" "ok" etc. So I used the demo to scan half of them in. Only bought it later when they did a deal. The price and the scanning workflow is what won acdsee the sale, that and allowing me to change certain iptc tags like camera etc. which many tools just do not let you do, but which you want to do when scanning.

Carol Haynes:
If you want RAW processing try Pixmantec RawShooter Essentials. This is the package that Adobe bought and the team that created it moved into the LightRoom team.

It isn't LightRoom and is no longer developed but it is free and the Raw conversion is excellent (assuming your camera RAW format is old enough to be supported).

There is one snag - Adobe no longer support registration of the product so every time the app starts it asks you to register. There is a way round this though. See this thread in the forums for a script which removes the registration nag screen: http://www.pixmantec.com/forums/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=37690&page=&vc=1

There is a download link in that message for 2006 v1.2 - unfortunately I can't remember what the last RSE build was as I purchased RS Premium (hence my free copy of LightRoom) and stopped downloading the Essentials versions. 1.2 is that last version I used and it was pretty good.

The thread above hints there was a later release so you may want to look for it.

iphigenie:
My GX10 works natively in Adobe's RAW format I think (dng?), so I should have it easy

I'm just wading my way through hundreds of scans trying to improve them, get rid of scratches too, and I am sure the right tool could speed it up. Of course the other right tool could help me get even better final pictures... and i already own too many tools, although apart from acdsee they are aimed at image composition and manipulation. So theres this itch to scratch, this empty hook in the toolbelt...

nontroppo:
I like what i saw in lightroom and lightzone (lightzone offers it for jpegs too and i have a lot of those)
--- End quote ---
lightroom does non-destructive edits to jpgs too. I use this because I'm playing a lot with HDR (bracket 3 exposures +-2ev then combine the light informaton into one 8-bit image), and spit my image out as a JPG instead of a TIFF to save space on my laptop HD. The JPG is reimported into LR (sits next to the 3 DNG source image) and I can then do a final few tweaks.

I thus find LR preferable to Photoshop/others for fast fixing. All edits are modifiable, my JPG stays untouched. The history shows you previews instantly of every step you took. You can see exactly what you did by hovering each history item, no need to wade through your adjustments layers toggling like crazy. I can make different snapshots or virtual copies in the same non-destructive way I can for RAWs. All of this is just metadata sitting in an SQLite database.

 Of course there are many things only Photoshop (or other higher-end pixel pusher) can do, and professional finishing is really a photoshop endeavour.

In terms of learning — just play! I didn't read any tutorials other than one on catalogs for LR (which I was confused about at the beginning). But all the develop tools were new to me (along with ACR). LR is very visual.

As an example take the histogram. Classically the histogram is fixed, you use sliders and numerical input to change the histogram. In LR just drag around on the histogram, drag shadows to the right and you are doing a fill light, drag highlights to the left and you are recovering. For someone who has never used an editor before this is neat, but if you are used to endless sliders, it can be disorienting. The HSL and tone dragging tools are similar. If you want to lighten just your blues in an image, click the circle in the luminance tab of the HSL panel and click and drag some blue in your image to lighten it. No need to fiddle around with sliders (they're there if you stil want them); edit visually.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page