Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Abandoning Lightroom  (Read 11482 times)
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2228



WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 14, 2007, 09:46:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
currently on an Athlon64 3200+ w/ 2GB - not a slouch, but a solid generation behind.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133196\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Try 3 generations behind.  Way old to expect good results.
Logged

macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #21 on: August 14, 2007, 10:56:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Ok, ignoring the performance part (which I already know already has one answer), how do you feel about the database system?  I ask this simply because I feel its been long enough for most people to be able to comment on it.
Logged
jedbest
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 352


« Reply #22 on: August 14, 2007, 10:56:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Besides Michael and Jeff's superb tutorial and Jeff's choice of shirts, Mikkel Allard's Lightroom Adventure is a great help in learning Lightroom. The book is laid out very logically and has lots of great tips.

Jed Best
Logged
barryfitzgerald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 608


« Reply #23 on: August 14, 2007, 11:00:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Well got to say whilst there are some well known issues with LR, and some areas that do need working on more (web/slideshow/distortion correction etc), + a few performance issues,  LR is def working for me

Runs well on my X2 4200 2Gb pc. LR likes a dual core processor. I have seen it run ok on a single one too.

Trust me I am no adobe fan, but LR has become a lot more than a overpriced way to play with ACR, its fine program. Credit where its due, it saves me time..wedding work..so much much faster to work with LR, and hardly ever go near another editing program.

So..my advice is to stick with it, the quirks will get ironed out. There is a lot of good here.
Logged
Mort54
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 590


WWW
« Reply #24 on: August 14, 2007, 12:01:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ok, ignoring the performance part (which I already know already has one answer), how do you feel about the database system?  I ask this simply because I feel its been long enough for most people to be able to comment on it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133209\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm comfortable with the database approach used by LR. It certainly provides more features than Bridge provides. Most importantly, it doesn't impose any folder structure on you - you are free to organize your database anyway you want. In addition, you get virtual copies, collections, keywording, and stacks. What's not to like :-) I suppose it would be nice to be able to have multiple catalogs open at once, although frankly I don't feel the current approach is in any way limiting me. I personally like Aperture's backup approach a little better, in that it backs up both the actual images, in addition to the user's alterations (as far as I know, LR only backs up the user's alterations, but maybe I've overlooked something here).
Logged

I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My Own
X-Re
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 143


« Reply #25 on: August 14, 2007, 12:02:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Try 3 generations behind.  Way old to expect good results.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133197\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

     Whatever  
Logged

kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2228



WWW
« Reply #26 on: August 14, 2007, 12:24:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Whatever what?  

Whatever that it's from 2003, runs at a paltry 2GHz, on an old platform, socket 754 which means old and very slow DDR around 200MHz, with a tiny 128MB cache...and only a single core.

Whatever that it only scores 401 CPU marks compared to 2047 for a 6850 Core 2 Duo (not even close to the top level score of 6000+ for a quad xeon as used in mac pros)?  Yeah, you're right, 6.5% - 15% of current processor power - pshhh, whatever.

So yeah, whatever, that ignorant people expect good results from old, slow, outdated systems with today's heavy hitting software.  And whatever that morons like to pretend they know what they are talking about by making stupid remarks to posts about it.
Logged

seamus finn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 868


« Reply #27 on: August 14, 2007, 12:54:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Three words I detest unless you're looking in a mirror: ignorant, moron and stupid.

On another subject, Lightroom Killer Tips by Matt Kowslowski has some great information in digestable chunks. The vidoes are downloadable and free. There are also some short, sharp paragraphs giving very useful keyboard and other tips. Overall a very good resource for quick information. Also, Michael's and Jeffs videos on Lightroom, Lightroom 1.1 update and to round it off, From Camera to Print. Great work by both veterans. There's enough there to start anybody on the road.

And just in case somebody is wondering how many shares I have in Adobe in view of my post re Lightroom above, the answer is none. Rest assured, folks, Lightroom will rise above its current shortcomings and emerge as one of the great breakthroughs for digital photographers. Just be patient.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2007, 12:58:13 PM by seamus finn » Logged

X-Re
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 143


« Reply #28 on: August 14, 2007, 01:57:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Three words I detest unless you're looking in a mirror: ignorant, moron and stupid.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133241\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

     Hey, you gotta remember that Bryan thinks he knows everything, and that anyone who doesn't agree with him is those things, or a doofus   He's easy enough to get going, though, and I enjoy seeing him act like a fool, so.... Let's bait him some more, shall we???

     Again, I say.... Whatever

     As far as the topic goes, I agree, Seamus. I expect that the coming versions of LR are going to be pretty darn sweet. Even with the drawbacks I experience on my system, and the seeming yo-yo quality that LR 1.1 has to it right now, this workflow is quite a bit quicker than others that I've tried, and its almost 100% RAW. Awesome.

     For certain things, I still use Breezebrowser - when I've shot action, especially using high frame rates, its snappier to do first pass editing (cause I don't have to generate 1-1s, or import, or any of that), and it speeds up overall time later by avoiding DB overhead and all that. That may change once a hardware upgrade renders Lightroom faster, but that'll remain to be seen. I don't think I want to get into testing LR's DB consistency right now, either, but doing a bunch of adds and deletes all the time  Give it another couple dot releases for other folks to stress that code a little more....
Logged

kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2228



WWW
« Reply #29 on: August 14, 2007, 02:02:17 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm still right, no matter your personal opinion of me

Logged

John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #30 on: August 14, 2007, 02:30:56 PM »
ReplyReply

sigh . . .

http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshoplig...nfo/systemreqs/
Logged

kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2228



WWW
« Reply #31 on: August 14, 2007, 02:39:46 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm not sure who that was intended for, but regardless - Required minimums are in no way to be taken as 'required minimums to perform well'.  They are just as they state - minimums to function, period.

You can run Windows XP on the published minimum of 128MB of RAM for example...it runs alright...like crap.  Required minimums are just about useless.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/upg...ng/sysreqs.mspx
Logged

gerry s
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #32 on: August 14, 2007, 03:06:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Ive just stuck with photoshop and find cs3 and bridge sufficient for me but have been wondering exactly where LR does a better job and wether or not I should consider it, just finished  C2P and thought it was an excellent watch, lots of info, great rapour between Michael and Jeff. Interesting shirts...  
Logged
oldcsar
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


« Reply #33 on: August 14, 2007, 03:14:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ok, ignoring the performance part (which I already know already has one answer), how do you feel about the database system?  I ask this simply because I feel its been long enough for most people to be able to comment on it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133209\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Honestly, the database system is something I'm getting used to. I got very used to simply opening images in Photoshop, but the database system allows me to tinker on my photos every now and then without having to open each one in that traditional way. I am a hobby photographer, and out of the thousands of photos I take per year, only dozens end up making their way to my LR database... the best of the best. The nice thing about the database system is that when you start up the program, your files are already "opened". I always store my files as RAWs and DNGs, until they are either posted on the web or printed- they become temporary files, either quality JPEG or TIFF. I do not import all the photos I take into LR, because frankly, it would be a waste of time and a waste of resources.

I store all my selected photos in separate folders from my shoots, sorted by camera and subject matter. Whenever there are new photos to contribute, I copy them from my ingested folders to my portfolio folder and reimport that folder into LR to update the database.

The LR database has not caused me any errors or problems that I've read about. It may be due to my limited use of the catalogue, but Lightroom is about producing great photos in the Develop module, and I would still use it even if there was an occasional crash-- but there hasn't been anything yet.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2007, 03:17:29 PM by oldcsar » Logged

seamus finn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 868


« Reply #34 on: August 14, 2007, 03:24:19 PM »
ReplyReply

CS3 is trememdous. Improved filters like the black and white conversion and contrast, among a whole bunch of other improvements, make it a great tool. The latest camera raw is splendid too. Used together, they are a fantastic combination and at present, CS3 will be needed to put the finishing touches to most quality work done in Lightroom. Selections, cloning and the like, including final output sharpening are just some. I prefer to print from CS3. Fine work that Lightroom cannot handle yet must be handed over to any recent version of Photoshop.
What I personally find about Lightroom, however, is its user interface - neat, logical, sequential steps.  On the panels, you move down in a structured workflow which leads to a natural conclusion. If you find too many panels cluttering up the real estate, right click on, say, basic and activate SOLO MODE and see what happens. Then simply click on whateve mode you want in either panel. Things like that make Lightroom very user friendly whereas Photoshop can sometimes be a pain in the ass, especially when you're trying to learn it. From now on, I keep out of PS as much as possible and stick with Lightroom - warts and all.
Logged

picnic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #35 on: August 14, 2007, 03:39:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ive just stuck with photoshop and find cs3 and bridge sufficient for me but have been wondering exactly where LR does a better job and wether or not I should consider it, just finished  C2P and thought it was an excellent watch, lots of info, great rapour between Michael and Jeff. Interesting shirts... 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133265\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Gerry,  that's exacty what I was wondering---and I even had used the LR beta for awhie, but had some things 'stuck' in my head about archiving and some other things.  Nonetheless, since I owned LR (due to having a license for RSP and Adobe offering vs. 1.0 of LR to RSP users), I thought I would bring myself up to speed.  I bought the really 'cheap' LR video tute of Michael's and Jeff's ($14.95--that can't be beat LOL) and found that I was wrong about some things, other things I wasn't utilizing the best way, etc.--and some things I just hadn't gotten right.

So--perhaps you should dl the demo and perhaps buy the video and see for yourself if it works for you.  I expect I will use a hybrid version of LR and PSCS3, myself, but for others, LR is---or will be when they upgrade some things, as in the printing module--all they need.

Diane
Logged
barryfitzgerald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 608


« Reply #36 on: August 14, 2007, 03:39:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Whatever what? 

Whatever that it's from 2003, runs at a paltry 2GHz, on an old platform, socket 754 which means old and very slow DDR around 200MHz, with a tiny 128MB cache...and only a single core.

Whatever that it only scores 401 CPU marks compared to 2047 for a 6850 Core 2 Duo (not even close to the top level score of 6000+ for a quad xeon as used in mac pros)?  Yeah, you're right, 6.5% - 15% of current processor power - pshhh, whatever.

So yeah, whatever, that ignorant people expect good results from old, slow, outdated systems with today's heavy hitting software.  And whatever that morons like to pretend they know what they are talking about by making stupid remarks to posts about it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133234\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



Um well maybe a pc builder should come in on this!

Right LR isnt hammering your CPU until you start to export shots.

Doing normal processing doesnt max out my X2 4200 or anywhere near it..neither would I expect it too. Thats kinda telling me any performance issues are not cpu bound.

A decent bit of ram and an ok processor should do the job. Rushing out getting a top line cpu isnt really that smart just for this program.

Companies sometimes do not have optimal code. Anyone who has used Sony Vegas compared to Adobe's Premiere will tell you just how well coded Vegas is...it flies even on moderate spec pc's.
Logged
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2228



WWW
« Reply #37 on: August 14, 2007, 03:49:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Your X2 4200 is also more than 2x as powerful as a 3200 single core, with a smaller die, much more onboard cache, and ram that is over 4x as fast.  A big improvement, relatively speaking.

CPU speed is just as important for an overall system - when you get to a certian age, everything works against you - FSB speed, ram type and speed, memory addressing/bandwidth, CPU cache/speed, etc.

'Do the job' is also relative.  Speed that might be good for you, with the file sizes you happen to work on, may be painfully slow to someone else.  Or let's say you upgrade cameras, and all of a sudden you notice your system is not as quick dealing with larger file sizes

There is always a certain point where it becomes noticeable.

I work on the same files sometimes here at the office and at home.  Home is a 3.4GHz C2D 2GB ram system.  Office is an old XP 3200 (get the idea of how well I know this dicussion now?) with 1GB.  It's simply day and night, no comparison.
Logged

seamus finn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 868


« Reply #38 on: August 14, 2007, 04:57:50 PM »
ReplyReply

You see that appeal to the police above - the one about having 'a different opinion than me'? Shouldn't that read 'different FROM MINE'?
« Last Edit: August 15, 2007, 01:53:43 AM by seamus finn » Logged

The View
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1003


« Reply #39 on: August 14, 2007, 07:23:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Um well maybe a pc builder should come in on this!

Right LR isnt hammering your CPU until you start to export shots.

Doing normal processing doesnt max out my X2 4200 or anywhere near it..neither would I expect it too. Thats kinda telling me any performance issues are not cpu bound.

A decent bit of ram and an ok processor should do the job. Rushing out getting a top line cpu isnt really that smart just for this program.

Companies sometimes do not have optimal code. Anyone who has used Sony Vegas compared to Adobe's Premiere will tell you just how well coded Vegas is...it flies even on moderate spec pc's.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133276\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So is it RAM and GPU that counts more?
Logged

Deserts, Cities, Woods, Faces - View of the World.
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad