[toni-a]

just downloaded a trial of lightroom, however it seems odd as a software, it is aking to import all the pictures, and things I don't need.

Is it a file organizer ?

as a RAW converter does it offer anything more than photoshop aside organizing ?

[davidmanze]

Basically Lightroom is Photoshop CS6 with additional library and file organizers...at least as far as I am aware..I briefly used LR but I didn't like the grey/brown panels and small text! 

[Studor13]

Ligtroom is for photographers whereas Photoshop is for photographers as well as graphics professionals.


I tried to understand Photoshop but it was and is so big that I just use maybe 1% of what the program can do.

[Rainer]

it is aking to import all the pictures, and things I don't need.

Is it a file organizer ?

 

 

That was the kind of thought I had, when I used LR first time.

 

I never really got very familiar with LR ... whenever I use it today,

I use a small script that sets up an empty LR-library ...

into this I import everything (because LR will not let me do

anything useful without "importing") ... after I finished

working with LR, I simply throw away the library.

 

Not that this sounds like a good workflow, but it is the only

way to handle LRs annoying behaviour.

 

In the last year, I rarely used it ... rawtherapee has become

more stable since I switched to 64bit (from 32bit) and since

I added more memory. It is still not fast, but at least stable

enough to do a batchrun with a couple of hundred images.

 

With LRs ambition to become "rent-me" software with

"cloud-everything", I will likely stop using it entirely.

Honestly ... I will not miss it much.

 

 

Rainer

[toni-a]

Seems I will be uninstalling lightroom...till now not convincing, ACR in PhotoShop should be enough.

[JJ_SO]

If you can't see the need of a digital asset management software - it probably might be, you don't need it   It's not only photoshop, but also Bridge in one package, if you work on RAW (mainly), ACR will just not do all tricks - but when you open the picture in PS you already make a new file when you save that.

 

I rather have one RAW and if I have to, two or more variants. For that, LR or AA are the better choice. Also, to me it's a lot more simple to make the white balance better in the raw converter, PS has too much possibilities.

[toni-a]

For sorting my pictures I am using Canon zoombrowzer, it's a free software, it is fast, reliable and very practical, I don't wanna redo the sorting, aside this does lightroom do anything ACR doesn't do ?

[JJ_SO]

Geo-tagging, face-recognition, keywording, to names a few and I'm sure, there's more. Slideshows, books, print-organization. I don't know, I know mostly Aperture, but LR is more or less the same. It helps to organize pictures better than with a normal file system - it's all what a database can do, plus some advanced features like straighten up facades or other stuff - but hey, I'm sure you're able to read Adobe's advertisements for yourself 

 

Why do you want to know if you're happy with your simple workflow? If I read some of the answers, I think, there's more than one truth. I'd say, if you're satisfied with your workflow, just keep it that way. None of those asset managers are easy to learn, but most can do enough to make Photoshop unnecessary for morst pictures.

 

If you want to know more, take a look into YouTube, there are plenty of free tutorials.