Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Tedium [was Two down - Who said it was easy money?]

Subject: [OM] Tedium [was Two down - Who said it was easy money?]
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:06:36 -0700
Lordy, haven't we beat this one to death often enough yet?

On 9/16/2015 2:59 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
I don't see that that's any different than what I normally do using
BreezeBrowser Pro or even (freebie) FastStone viewer.
Probably not. If the ONLY thing you use LR for is sorting, then it is
a fool's errand.

Exactly! LR is two things, a cataloging app, and a Raw converter/editor. NOTHING that you have expressed interest in doing in sorting and rating images requires LR. You have expressly rejected the extra things that it does well, so there is simply NO reason for you to use it for that.

Many people like or LUV LR, for both rational and irrational reasons. They will continue to tout it's capabilities as catalog/view/sort/rate/tag/geocode/shoe repair/etc. app. Until your needs change, just ignore them. I've started using it for cataloging and tagging, so you will probably hear more from me, especially on geotagging and finding by map location. Ignore me unless or until that becomes something you want to do.

They will also continue to tout LR for its fabulous editing capabilities. I will continue to ignore them for the simple reason that it doesn't do what I want to do. I'm not sure why you dislike is as an editor. You do most of your editing in ACR, and LR is at heart ACR with a fancier interface. It has additional capabilities, as well, but may be used exactly as ACR, with the same results.

On 9/16/2015 1:03 PM, Tina Manley wrote:
LR was developed by photographers for photographers as a non-destructive
editing and cataloging software.

"Non-destructive" is an oxymoron when dealing with Raw files. NO converter/editor writes back into the Raw format. ALL final output for display is TIFF, JPEG, PSD, etc. The original, Raw, file is always left intact. LR lets you mess with a file and saves a file of what you did (XML?). You can go in again, pick up where you left off and edit further, and so on. I actively hate that model, but that doesn't mean it isn't good for many, many photographers. And in the end, whether making a wedding proof book, a find art print, a web gallery, whatever, LR creates new output files based on the saved criteria. And that end output is just what all the converter/editors do as well. They may get there a different way, BUT ALL are non-destructive.

On 9/16/2015 2:12 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
Someone mentioned "collections". I don't have "collections" beyond a named folder of related images. I guess I prefer to stay primitive.

This is a term for a useful function in LR, for many other than yourself. Just because it is a normal word with many meanings doesn't mean it does not have a specific meaning in LR. Ignore.

However, the processing and editing capabilities which are built in are what 
makes LR stand out.

As crap.

There is no raw conversion until output.

Absolutely untrue! The Raw file is converted into an image in memory each time it is opened. A Raw file cannot bee seen until it is converted, unless you are, for example, seeing a lot of green, red and blue monochrome pixels. It is not WRITTEN OUT until you tell it to produce an output.

You are always working in a dynamic image editing environment which RARELY, if 
ever, requires you to even open
up Photoshop.

There you go again, with that "You" that refers to the reader. What you say is not true for this "you", me. Accurate usage would be "... RARELY, if ever, requires me to even open up Photoshop."

If you are married to your beloved Photoshop and choose to waste time
opening, converting, editing and saving files on a one-by-one basis,
stick with what you have.

Here the usage of "you" is correct. And I will ...

For both of these weddings,

The day I find I have 2,000 wedding images to deal with is the day I should be 
committed.

...

Chuck, what you are doing is picking out only one very specific subset
of functionality and judging the worth of the program based on only
that one subset of functionality while ignoring all of the other
benefits of the program.

In the first wedding, the bride has a mole on her forehead. I didn't
remove it in the proofs, but may for an album and enlargements. In
experimenting with the spot healing tool, I can fix it in about five
seconds per image. With about 100 images that need touching up, that's
10 minutes work for everything. If I were to do the same in Photoshop,
at best I could do three images in 10 minutes because of the raw
conversion, edit and save process.

I will NEVER be doing that, in any program.

Best of all? No need to work with layers. Die, layers, die!!!

Layers are the most powerful, time saving and useful method for the editing I 
want to do that I've ever seen.I LUV them!

Moose D'Opinion

--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz