Author Topic: Adobe Lightroom 1.0 to make it's debut (Read 5367 times)

Dreamstime News · « **on:** January 29, 2007, 09:34 »

<a href="http://www.imaging-resource.com/SOFT/LR1/LR1.HTM#bet" target="_blank">Adobe Lightroom 1.0 to Make Its Debut[/url]

Greg Boiarsky · « **Reply #1 on:** January 29, 2007, 10:51 »

I really like Lightroom, but I think that $199 US is a bit steep. I'll have to see if my earnings can cover it.

MiguelAngelo · « **Reply #2 on:** January 29, 2007, 13:42 »

That's a shame the Beta series will end

I really like Lightroom and I will buy it, since it's so much nice the way it works.
I find it really usefull for the jobs were I need to deal with large amounts of RAW files and have them developed as fast as Its possible.

CJPhoto · « **Reply #3 on:** January 29, 2007, 16:29 »

I am going to wait for CS3.

However, one of the main things I didn't like about LR they have fixed in the final version.

GeoPappas · « **Reply #4 on:** January 29, 2007, 20:23 »

Does Lightroom do categories as well as keywords, or just keywords?

I currently use IMatch and am trying to compare the two products.

MiguelAngelo · « **Reply #5 on:** January 29, 2007, 22:31 »

I don't use categories, but I can't see them there.

It does IPTC as they say, but it should be more some XMP standard on the final release to match PS and Bridge.

I only use bridge for developing large amounts of RAW files usually all from the same shoot.
For keywording and all the Metadata work I use Bridge only on the outputed files.

beisea · « **Reply #6 on:** January 30, 2007, 01:01 »

I really like the interface, with my limited experience using LR, I found it's rather slow in handling raw files, when I try to import a folder of 150 raw files ( 10.2mp Nikon D80 file), it hoggs my memory like crazy, the computer is standstill, using 2gb of ram, since I have only 1gb on my laptop, so it's not working for me.
does anyone has any experience with the speed?

I used to use Nikon Capture, it's rather easy and fast, but now they can not process D80 files, the NX is also a little slow, so the LR could be a good one if it's a little faster and does not using that much memory at a time.

digiology · « **Reply #7 on:** January 30, 2007, 02:07 »

It looks like catagories will be supported in 1.0

It has become slower for me also. Although I have nothing to really compare it to. I can still tolerate working with it though. I have not tried Aperature and Nikon Capture NX looks cool (but cannot believe Nikon does not bundle software with their cameras)

GeoPappas · « **Reply #8 on:** January 30, 2007, 02:23 »

Quote from: digiology on January 30, 2007, 02:07

It looks like catagories will be supported in 1.0

Where did you read that?

digiology · « **Reply #9 on:** January 30, 2007, 03:29 »

I thought I saw it on the Lightroom forum but now I cannot find it.

I saw a screen grab showing the new import dialog where you can create new (MetaData) presets in the import dialog. Catagories was listed there. (or I am going nuts)

leaf · « **Reply #10 on:** January 30, 2007, 03:37 »

perhaps you were thinking of that screen shot. The image is linked to the web page it was stolen from.

So it looks like it has regular metadata categories.

digiology · « **Reply #11 on:** January 30, 2007, 03:46 »

thanks leaf, that was it

leaf · « **Reply #12 on:** January 30, 2007, 04:18 »

unless i am not understanding something correctly however, The catagories in the metadata don't work quite as well as the catagories used in match. With imatch you can have a main catagory with numerous levels of child catagories, which is very nice.

GeoPappas · « **Reply #13 on:** January 30, 2007, 05:30 »

Quote from: leaf on January 30, 2007, 04:18

unless i am not understanding something correctly however, The catagories in the metadata don't work quite as well as the catagories used in match. With imatch you can have a main catagory with numerous levels of child catagories, which is very nice.

Yes, you are correct. IPTC categories are not nearly as good as IMatch categories.

I am really surprised that they wouldn't have included real categories. Oh well, I guess that I will be sticking to IMatch...

leaf · « **Reply #14 on:** January 30, 2007, 05:37 »

the only fear with imatch categories is after 10 years and thousands or millions of images catagorized, and perhaps imatch quits updating their program or change their process... all my work will be lost

i think iptc will be here to stay.. so i am not sure what the best way to organize my photos are.

CJPhoto · « **Reply #15 on:** January 30, 2007, 07:18 »

Quote from: leaf on January 30, 2007, 05:37

the only fear with imatch categories is after 10 years and thousands or millions of images catagorized, and perhaps imatch quits updating their program or change their process... all my work will be lost.

It is a problem when we become software dependant.

Where I use to work used lotus 123 in the old days. We still had the files but they didn't open very nicely on excel. Lotus 123 use to be the main spreadsheet program so microsoft "built in" conversion software. That might not happen with smaller software companies.

That is why I reluctantly feed the beast and normally go with the big companies - i. use IE, Office, photoshop rather than the alternatives.

GeoPappas · « **Reply #16 on:** January 30, 2007, 08:33 »

Quote from: leaf on January 30, 2007, 05:37

the only fear with imatch categories is after 10 years and thousands or millions of images catagorized, and perhaps imatch quits updating their program or change their process... all my work will be lost

But that is one of the great features of IMatch: the ability to use a script to export the data in almost any format imaginable. If you wanted, you could load the IMatch categories into the IPTC categories field at any time.

That is one of the main reasons that I bought IMatch - because it is open. At any point you can transfer your whole database to some other new-fangled software.

Quote from: leaf on January 30, 2007, 05:37

i think iptc will be here to stay..

Nothing is here to stay indefinitely. Some "standards" just last longer than others.

leaf · « **Reply #17 on:** January 30, 2007, 08:47 »

i actually have purchased imatch as well but never managed to figure out those scripts...

MiguelAngelo · « **Reply #18 on:** January 30, 2007, 11:15 »

Is this Imatch for PC or they also have a Mac version?
Never heard about it!!

leaf · « **Reply #19 on:** January 30, 2007, 11:29 »

IMATCH LINK

GeoPappas · « **Reply #20 on:** January 30, 2007, 12:05 »

Quote from: MiguelAngelo on January 30, 2007, 11:15

Is this Imatch for PC or they also have a Mac version?

I don't believe that they have a Mac version.

snem · « **Reply #21 on:** January 31, 2007, 04:30 »

Quote from: beisea on January 30, 2007, 01:01

I really like the interface, with my limited experience using LR, I found it's rather slow in handling raw files, when I try to import a folder of 150 raw files ( 10.2mp Nikon D80 file), it hoggs my memory like crazy, the computer is standstill, using 2gb of ram, since I have only 1gb on my laptop, so it's not working for me.
does anyone has any experience with the speed?

Same experience with lightroom. Importing RAW files from disk (canon 350D 8MP) is terrible slow, the order of several minutes. And when I have imported almost 1000 file in the library, LR simply seems to hang. :-( very bad.

For raw processing I use Capture One: very very rapid in raw conversion, few options means rapid workflow. Excellent colors rendering. A bit bad with noise suppresion, but I think it is a choise of developers oriented to a print-ready imaginery.

Where it is possible, a combination of various software is the ideal: imatch catalog, acdsee-like for rapid view/compare, etc...

The imatch script feature is very useful: import every data from acdsee, catalog by metadata, export to iptc is a very rapid workflow. Change keywords conditionally in a large batch of images is possible also.

Regards

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Adobe Lightroom 1.0 to make it's debut (Read 5367 times)

Dreamstime News

Greg Boiarsky

MiguelAngelo

CJPhoto

GeoPappas

MiguelAngelo

beisea

digiology

GeoPappas

digiology

leaf

digiology

leaf

GeoPappas

leaf

CJPhoto

GeoPappas

leaf

MiguelAngelo

leaf

GeoPappas

snem

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors