Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Windows Beta  (Read 10767 times)
David White
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272



WWW
« on: July 19, 2006, 12:11:56 AM »
ReplyReply

The Windows beta is available.

Lightroom Downloads.
Logged

David White
jlmwyo
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2006, 01:06:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Windows beta is available.

Lightroom Downloads.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71090\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Got it, and played with for awhile.

Its certainly interesting. The greyscale mixer is cool.

One thing thou, I can't for the LIFE of me figure out why I can't see all my printer profiles from within the PRINT module. Am I missing something? I can only see like 10 of the profiles I have installed, and definitely NOT the one's I need to use.

It seems slow on 1gb RAM, but I guess that's not bad for non optimized code.
Logged

Images of Wyoming

Link To My Gallery

David White
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272



WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2006, 01:42:35 AM »
ReplyReply

It's crashed twice now trying to import files.  

In the print module it only shows 17 profiles and one blank when selecting "other" for print color management.  I can't see the profile I need to get to.

Lots to learn here and there doesn't seem to be any help except for shortcut listings.
Logged

David White
jlmwyo
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


« Reply #3 on: July 19, 2006, 02:21:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's crashed twice now trying to import files. 

In the print module it only shows 17 profiles and one blank when selecting "other" for print color management.  I can't see the profile I need to get to.

Lots to learn here and there doesn't seem to be any help except for shortcut listings.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71095\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I only see seven printer profiles available.

Hopefully someone will be along to straighten us out.
Logged

Images of Wyoming

Link To My Gallery

David White
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272



WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 19, 2006, 02:31:51 AM »
ReplyReply

OK, you have to select your printer properties (from the Start Menu Printers and Faxes) and manually add the profiles under the Color Management tab.  They will then show up in Lightroom.  Seems rather strange since Photoshop is aware of all the profiles installed on the system.
Logged

David White
GeneB
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #5 on: July 19, 2006, 01:40:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Anyone give me an idea of the D/L file size so I'll know what I'm getting into with my incredibly slow dial-up connection.  

Gene
Logged
jlmwyo
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


« Reply #6 on: July 19, 2006, 01:40:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
OK, you have to select your printer properties (from the Start Menu Printers and Faxes) and manually add the profiles under the Color Management tab.  They will then show up in Lightroom.  Seems rather strange since Photoshop is aware of all the profiles installed on the system.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71097\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Sweet, thanks dave.....

Now, the "1 operation in progress" thing is next. I wonder if its still trying to choke down my initaial import of 4k files. Says something about 'large thumbnails'
Logged

Images of Wyoming

Link To My Gallery

bob mccarthy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 372


WWW
« Reply #7 on: July 19, 2006, 02:51:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Anyone give me an idea of the D/L file size so I'll know what I'm getting into with my incredibly slow dial-up connection.   

Gene
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71158\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I saw two versions available for download. The app only at 6meg or so, and a version with sample files at over 100 meg.

Application only shouldn't be too bad.

bob
Logged
KTMax
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2006, 06:12:14 AM »
ReplyReply

I've been playing with WBETA3 for a few days now. Looks cool but so far the simple straightforward appoach of the Elements organiser seems more powerful to me.

What I miss most uptill now are a simple one key/one click full screen view like F11 in Elements and the (IMO) brilliant feature to stack multiple file versions.

Beautiful stylish GUI though...  

Richard.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2006, 06:14:55 AM by KTMax » Logged
paulbk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 464



« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2006, 11:17:53 AM »
ReplyReply

re: Lightroom, Win XP, v beta3

I removed Lightroom from my system. Tried it. I have no need for it. Iíd say Iím a dedicated amateur-enthusiast. Shoot about 300 shots a month depending on weather with Canon 1D Mark II. Print with an Epson 4000.

A)  Downloader Pro and clever (auto) directory structure naming self-sorts my files by date and keyword. All I do is put the Compact Flash card in the reader and it happens.... automatically. Downloader Pro auto-starts, copies all files from the card into the properly named directory, example: 2006_07_22_keywords. Downloader Pro also auto renames each file as it copies, thus: YearMonthDayHourMinuteSecond_index = 060722112430_001. Burst files taken in the same second are also handled automatically. Then Downloader Pro auto-closes and starts BreezeBrowser Pro. Downloader Pro is fast, and focused on a single task.. move your files from the card to the computer.

B)  BreezeBrowser Pro is all the photo file manager I need. Easy intuitive interface, great for keeper culling, bulk renaming, and bulk RAW convert. And since it uses Canon RAW convert algorithms, it gives me an accurate demosaic with modest adjustment ability. It gets me close without a lot of fuss and anguish. It aint Photoshop, and better, it doesnít try to be! I use it mostly as a bridge to feed Photoshop files. BreezeBrowser Pro.. can not live without it.

C)  Photoshop CS2 is probably more than most photographers need, but once youíre over the hump of the learning curve, itís a must have application. This is where the work you did in the field is polished to gallery ready prints. Or not.

I use RSP if I want to experiment or fine tweak in the RAW convert process. I think it is/was the best RAW convert application for Canon files. It had a bright future. Iím waiting to see what Adobe does with it.

At this writing Lightroom has the look and feel of an application designed by committee. Clearly not deserving of the collective hype.. yet. But what do I know.

p

ps: I have no commercial interest in ANY Breeze Systems application.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2006, 02:27:05 PM by paulbk » Logged

paul b. kramarchyk
Barkhamsted, Connecticut, USA
alfin
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 76


« Reply #10 on: July 22, 2006, 01:14:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Don't you just love all open minded people here!

As for the profile issue, please read the other posts.

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=11583
Logged

Lars Mollerstrom
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7970



WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 22, 2006, 01:51:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Paul,

I'm with you completely on Downloader Pro and BreezeBrowser Pro. I couldn't live without them. I have downloaded the Lightroom Beta (Win), but haven't bothered trying it yet. From most of the posts about Lightroom so far, I can't imagine that it can ever make cataloguing easier than Downloader Pro. And BreezeBrowser Pro is so fast and convenient that it is my main image browser for raw and converted photos. CS2 is, of course, a mainstay, but I don't even use Bridge, because it is so cumbersome compared with the Breeze offerings.

I'll certainly try Lightroom some day, when I have nothing better to do, but I am not optimistic that it will work into my workflow very soon. And I will be getting the first commercial release free, as I do own RawShooter Premium.

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
paulbk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 464



« Reply #12 on: July 22, 2006, 02:18:33 PM »
ReplyReply

I donít use Bridge either. Bridge does nothing that I need done or that other apps donít do better. And worse, it gets in the way. BBPro is a far better file manager. But it is not a database.

Maybe itís an Apple v PC thing. Apple people seem to be less concerned with (more tolerant of) behind the scenes hard drive activity. Where PC people tend to be more hard drive file structure aware. Iíve been a PC user since DOS v1.0 and spend a lot of time in Win Explorer ďlooking at my hard drive.Ē And.. I know when some application is filling my drive with unnecessary crap. Both Bridge and Lightroom database take up a fair bit of room... which is fine if you need them. I donít.

p
« Last Edit: July 22, 2006, 02:47:09 PM by paulbk » Logged

paul b. kramarchyk
Barkhamsted, Connecticut, USA
budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 22, 2006, 02:22:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
re: Lightroom, Win XP, v beta3

I removed Lightroom from my system. Tried it. I have no need for it. Iíd say Iím a dedicated amateur-enthusiast. Shoot about 300 shots a month depending on weather with Canon 1D Mark II. Print with an Epson 4000.

A)  Downloader Pro and clever (auto) directory structure naming self-sorts my files by date and keyword. All I do is put the Compact Flash card in the reader and it happens.... automatically. Downloader Pro auto-starts, copies all files from the card into the properly named directory, example: 2006_07_22_keywords. Downloader Pro also auto renames each file as it copies, thus: YearMonthDayHourMinuteSecond_index = 060722112430_001. Burst files taken in the same second are also handled automatically. Then Downloader Pro auto-closes and starts BreezeBrowser Pro. Downloader Pro is fast, and focused on a single task.. move your files from the card to the computer.

  BreezeBrowser Pro is all the photo file manager I need. Easy intuitive interface, great for keeper culling, bulk renaming, and bulk RAW convert. And since it uses Canon RAW convert algorithms, it gives me an accurate demosaic with modest adjustment ability. It gets me close without a lot of fuss and anguish. It aint Photoshop, and better, it doesnít try to be! I use it mostly as a bridge to feed Photoshop files. BreezeBrowser Pro.. can not live without it.

C)  Photoshop CS2 is probably more than most photographers need, but once youíre over the hump of the learning curve, itís a must have application. This is where the work you did in the field is polished to gallery ready prints. Or not.

I use RSP if I want to experiment or fine tweak in the RAW convert process. I think it is/was the best RAW convert application for Canon files. It had a bright future. Iím waiting to see what Adobe does with it.

At this writing Lightroom has the look and feel of an application designed by committee. Clearly not deserving of the collective hype.. yet. But what do I know.

p

ps: I have no commercial interest in ANY Breeze Systems applicaton.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71483\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree with the you on Breeze System's products. I use BBPro and DLPro. They're great.

I also have C1Pro and ACDSee Pro (a bad program). I'm looking forward to Adobe integrating RSP into a fully functional version of Lightroom. When that happens, I'll probably be very happy with LR, PSCS2, and Breeze products. This will also keep the upgrading cost lower with fewer apps to use.

Bud
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
Pete
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 104


« Reply #14 on: July 22, 2006, 03:00:33 PM »
ReplyReply

I also agree with the above about Chris Breeze's products; I've been using them both for a number of years now and find them indispensable.

Still working my way through lightroom and have not yet decided how helpful it will be for me.

However, as far as cataloging, I've been very happy with thumbsplus and would recommend it without hestitation.  

Pete
Logged
jdyke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 123



WWW
« Reply #15 on: July 22, 2006, 03:44:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Just started trying it today.
It looks very promising but I have to say that the current BETA for Windows has some 'major' performance issues.  Adobe have actually admitted this and are working to speed things up.  The truth is that its so slow on my system (zooming, sliders ect.) that I can only really use it to test out 'what is to come'.  In its current state its just not practical to use as a workflow tool.

In case anyone asks my systems is an Athlon XP (not exactly very new but good enough for Photoshop) and 1GB of RAM. (ok so its not exactly a flying machine but it handles all my other software ok (Photoshop, Iview, RSP)

Any one else finding it just a tad slow?

JD
Logged
Tim Gray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2002



WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 22, 2006, 07:26:20 PM »
ReplyReply

PROCESSING......
Logged
Gordon Buck
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 409



WWW
« Reply #17 on: July 22, 2006, 08:26:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Paul,

I agree.  My interest in photography and resulting workflow is very similar to yours.  

I've downloaded the Windows version of Lightroom and attempted to use it without any instruction (hey, it is a "beta" and we are beta testers!).  Lightroom doesn't appear to be particulary intuitive at this time.  On the other hand, I have to believe that Lightroom will evolve into a powerfull application for photography.
Logged

David White
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272



WWW
« Reply #18 on: July 22, 2006, 10:09:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
J

Any one else finding it just a tad slow?

JD
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71501\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My system has an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ CPU with 3GB of ram and is pretty highly tuned for performance and available ram.  With only a couple images in the library, it seemed responsive.  After I loaded all the images from a shoot, iaround 920, it became extremely slow, even after building the thumbnails.  If I move a slider in Develop, about 5 seconds later the "Working" pop-up comes up and that will stay for 10-20 seconds.  The CPUs are pretty muched maxed out most of the time unless I leave it alone for a minute.

About the only function that works with any regularity is the print function, although I can't access the 16-bit plug-in for the Canon ipf5000.  Lots of crashes after importing and sometimes when developing.  Had a couple crashes when it was just sitting there doing nothing.  Seems like it is going to take more than a simple code optimization pass on the compiler to get this thing up to speed.

I'm not real fond of the sidebars that can't be detached and moved to a second monitor.  Also can't seem to scroll the right hand window with the mouse wheel.  One time when I tried it the screen went white and the system was locked up for over 10 minutes.

The types of controls available for RAW processing are a welcome improvement over ACR.  This seems to be where this application may shine when it becomes more usable.  I'd really like to see selections become part of the raw converter.

Other than that Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?
Logged

David White
jdyke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 123



WWW
« Reply #19 on: July 23, 2006, 03:28:44 PM »
ReplyReply

I have read somewhere that it runs faster on Intel rether than AMD.  Not sure if this us true but its seems to be gaining ground.  Stranger things have happened!

Overall I like what it offers - it just needs som major tweaking in certaina areas (speed being the main one)

I do intend to upgrade my PC soon but as I am not as wealthy as some I cannot afford a top of the range 4GB system to run it on as mentioned!    

I will continue to test  the functions and wait to see what happens on the perfomance side.

JD
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad