Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Why Do I need Lightroom?

Reply
Thread Tools

Why Do I need Lightroom?

 
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2007
John McWilliams wrote:
> MarkČ wrote:
>> Annika1980 wrote:
>>> On May 29, 4:04 pm, C J Campbell <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>> wrote:
>>>> It depends a little bit on what Kelby shows you. If he shows you
>>>> the workflow aspects of Lightroom, you can see what it is for.
>>>> Lightroom is there from image acquisition, either tethered or
>>>> un-tethered, through organizing, rating, selecting, editing,
>>>> publishing, and archiving your files. The whole point of view in
>>>> Lightroom is workflow.
>>> It looks like that's the way it will be presented ... from the
>>> actual shoot to the print. Here are some details of the program
>>> for anyone who might be interested:
>>> http://www.photoshopseminars.com/class/161/
>>>
>>> I've been to a few seminars at that location before, but don't
>>> recall any of them selling out a 500-seat room. They had to move
>>> into a bigger hall to accomodate all the attendees. I suppose I
>>> might just go although listening to Kelby for a whole day might
>>> make me a little violent. At least I'll have a good lunch (at the
>>> KFC just down the street).

>>
>> Luminous Landscape has prepared a very detailed Lightroom course
>> that is 4.5 hours in length, and downloadable, for $14.95. I
>> watched a preview and was impressed. It's nearly 800MB, and
>> high-quality video, which I'll start downloading in a few minutes...

>
> It's worthwhile, esp. if you're new to LR. Interesting dynamics
> between Jeff Schewe and Michael Reichmann.....
>>
>> The seminar sounds interesting, but to me, I'd rather have something
>> like LL's course...because it means I can re-visit any portion at
>> any time. Here's a link to it if you're interested:
>>
>> TinyUrl: http://preview.tinyurl.com/2gvgkd
>>
>> Or...here's the whole enchelada, for the paranoid among us:

> <http://www.luminous-landscape.com/zencart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=2&products_ id=126&zenid=4ad11dba15bfc574d20cd04a1a95e850>
>
> Don't know about others, but I have no objection to tiny urls from
> folks I "know" online. OTOH, why bother with setting one up when a
> bracketed
> long URL goes fine through any respectable Email client?
>
> I've just done most of all three of Deke McClelland's CS3 online
> tutorials- still have big pieces each of the advanced, intermediate
> and beginner's sessions left.


I'm not familiar with Deke. Where do you access that?
I haven't upgraded to CS3, since the beta gave me major printing headaches.
I know they've probably worked those kinks out...but I heard a similar
complaint from another guy using the full CS3 with Epson printers (I use the
4000 Pro).

Adobe has come up with a pretty effective "gotcha" to get people to upgrade,
though... -They don't release RAW conversion for new cameras...unless you
buy the new version... I'll receive my 1D3 tomorrow morning...so until
Lightroom is updated, I'll be stuck with Canon's conversion for its RAW
files... Oh well... More power to Adobe, I guess, for coming up with a
great marketing device. I'm assuming Lightroom WILL receive such an update
in short order, so I'm holding out a bit longer for that. Eventually I'll
upgrade to CS3 & when I do, I'd be interested to look into the series you
refer to. Do you have a link?

MarkČ

--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by MarkČ at:
www.pbase.com/markuson


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2007
X-Man wrote:
> On 29 May 2007 18:43:32 -0700, Scott W <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> On May 29, 3:10 pm, X-Man <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> On 29 May 2007 10:07:10 -0700, Annika1980 <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I use Downloader Pro to download my images and Breezebrowser to
>>>> quickly view them.
>>>> Then I use Photoshop to edit them.
>>>
>>>> So somebody please tell me why I need Lightroom?
>>>> I'm considering going to a NAPP Lightroom seminar in Atlanta on
>>>> Friday given by Scott Kelby and I need to know if it'll be worth
>>>> my time.
>>>
>>>> So what will Lightroom do that Photoshop won't?
>>>
>>> And yet, the freeware RAW Therapee fromwww.rawtherapee.comdoes more
>>> and does it better than both of them. I just got through comparing
>>> them.
>>>
>>> You should have asked, "What does Lightroom and Photoshop do that
>>> RAW Therapee won't?"
>>>
>>> Simple answer: Both Adobe products will turn you into a royal-sap
>>> for wasting your money on either one.

>>
>> Well yes but then you believe that a point and shoot camera is better
>> then a DSLR as well, for me at least this makes it had to give your
>> opinion much weight.
>>
>> Scott

>
> Oh look! It's that useless Scott Troll that insists EVERY dSLR in
> existence must be better than every P&S in existence, to justify why
> he's wasting his money and wanting everyone else to jump off the same
> stupidity-cliff that he did.


Whether you're correct, or incorrect in you assertions...
....your language and attitude paints you as someone not worth reading.
PLONK and fare thee well...

--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by MarkČ at:
www.pbase.com/markuson


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2007
On May 29, 10:26 pm, "MarkČ" <mjmorgan(lowest even number
here)@cox..net> wrote:
> I haven't upgraded to CS3, since the beta gave me major printing headaches.
> I know they've probably worked those kinks out...but I heard a similar
> complaint from another guy using the full CS3 with Epson printers (I use the
> 4000 Pro).


I still use the beta version and I have experienced the same problems.
When you go to the print menu CS3 doesn't seem to register changes
made to printer settings like paper size, paper type, etc.
What you have to do is to change the settings of your default printer
before you pull up the print menu. CS3 Beta defaults to those
settings no matter what you tell it in the print dialogue.

 
Reply With Quote
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2007
Annika1980 wrote:
> On May 29, 10:26 pm, "MarkČ" <mjmorgan(lowest even number
> here)@cox..net> wrote:
>> I haven't upgraded to CS3, since the beta gave me major printing
>> headaches. I know they've probably worked those kinks out...but I
>> heard a similar complaint from another guy using the full CS3 with
>> Epson printers (I use the 4000 Pro).

>
> I still use the beta version and I have experienced the same problems.
> When you go to the print menu CS3 doesn't seem to register changes
> made to printer settings like paper size, paper type, etc.
> What you have to do is to change the settings of your default printer
> before you pull up the print menu. CS3 Beta defaults to those
> settings no matter what you tell it in the print dialogue.


My Beta expired... Guess I didn't do the "trick" very well. No matter...
I don't feel I need it yet, though that may change if they stall on giving
Lightroom a 1D3 converter. -Let's see if Adobe pulls just such a stall...in
an attempt to get those slow to upgrade...to jump to CS3 over the issue...

--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by MarkČ at:
www.pbase.com/markuson


 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2007
On May 29, 10:26 pm, "MarkČ" <mjmorgan(lowest even number
here)@cox..net> wrote:
> I'll receive my 1D3 tomorrow morning...


Did I ever tell you how much I hate you, PW?

You sure about that AM delivery? Last time I checked that shipping
info the FEDEX truck was just south of Nashville.

The first thing I would do with the 1D3 is to use it's most unique
feature.
Canon discovered that various lenses work differently with different
bodies so a lens like the 300 f/4L that I rented might show serious
backfocus problems on my 20D (it did) while working excellently on a
different body. The 1D3 lets you calibrate each individual lens for
use with it to avoid backfocus problems, thus getting the most out of
each piece of glass.

Now the bad news, PW. The one problem you will now face as a proud
new 1D3 + 500 f/4L owner is that you are now all out of excuses.
We will expect nothing less than excellence from all your future work.
Certainly lots better than most of that crap you've been used to
posting.
heck, you might even want to revisit Yosemite and Haleakula just to
retake some of those shots with the improved gear.

God, I hate your ass!




 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2007
On May 29, 10:41 pm, "MarkČ" <mjmorgan(lowest even number
here)@cox..net> wrote:
>
> My Beta expired... Guess I didn't do the "trick" very well.


Mine finally crapped out the other night, amazingly right after I
received an e-mail from Adobe announcing that the Beta would no longer
function.

WRONG!

Sometimes the most obvious fixes are the best. Simply reset your
system clock to 2006 instead of 2007. Works like a charm now.
Plus, I'm a year younger!
I tried setting it back to 1975, but I kept getting constant
erections.

 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2007
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, BaumBadier
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Lightroom is only at v1.0 (still in Beta phase actually)


actually, no - it has been final for several months, and version 1.1 is
about to ship.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2007
In article <4h57i.22265$(E-Mail Removed)>, MarkČ <
here)@cox..net> wrote:

> Adobe has come up with a pretty effective "gotcha" to get people to upgrade,
> though... -They don't release RAW conversion for new cameras...unless you
> buy the new version...


it isn't just a consipiracy to extract money - adobe camera raw 4 is a
significant feature update to 3.x and it requires host application
support that isn't in cs2 and earlier. it would be nice if they kept
adding camera support to earlier versions (which they did with a few
iterations of 3.x) but that can't go on forever. the cutoff happened
to be with acr 4 and cs3.

> I'll receive my 1D3 tomorrow morning...so until
> Lightroom is updated, I'll be stuck with Canon's conversion for its RAW
> files... Oh well... More power to Adobe, I guess, for coming up with a
> great marketing device. I'm assuming Lightroom WILL receive such an update
> in short order, so I'm holding out a bit longer for that.


lightroom 1.1 is due 'soon' (can't find the post at dpreview at the
moment) and since adobe camera raw 4.1 was just announced, lightroom's
release is probably *very* soon.
 
Reply With Quote
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2007
Annika1980 wrote:
> On May 29, 10:41 pm, "MarkČ" <mjmorgan(lowest even number
> here)@cox..net> wrote:
>>
>> My Beta expired... Guess I didn't do the "trick" very well.

>
> Mine finally crapped out the other night, amazingly right after I
> received an e-mail from Adobe announcing that the Beta would no longer
> function.
>
> WRONG!
>
> Sometimes the most obvious fixes are the best. Simply reset your
> system clock to 2006 instead of 2007. Works like a charm now.
> Plus, I'm a year younger!
> I tried setting it back to 1975, but I kept getting constant
> erections.


But your posts are still correct. Hmm... Maybe news servers FINALLY got
"smart" enough so we don't have those pesky posts hanging at the top for
three months...just because some idjit had his clock turned back...

--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by MarkČ at:
www.pbase.com/markuson


 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2007
MarkČ wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>> In article <IG37i.396423$(E-Mail Removed)>, MarkČ <
>> here)@cox..net> wrote:
>>
>>> My understanding was that Adobe bought them out in order to utilize
>>> some of their tech in Lightroom without encroaching. I'm not
>>> emotionally involved, so if that is shown to be wrong...great!

>> they definitely incorporated rawshooter in lightroom and adobe camera
>> raw. however, the lightroom project began long before that occured.
>> that's all.

>
> The Lightroom we now enjoy is the way it is...to a significant
> degree...because they incorporated technologies they aqcuired from
> RawShooter Premium.
>
> Does that pass your legal verbage-checker?
>
>

Define: significant!

I believe they acquired it more for the top two guys who developed it as
for the technology.

Keep an eye out. Should be a good upgrade/bug fix soon.

--
John McWilliams
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
why why why why why Mr. SweatyFinger ASP .Net 4 12-21-2006 01:15 PM
findcontrol("PlaceHolderPrice") why why why why why why why why why why why Mr. SweatyFinger ASP .Net 2 12-02-2006 03:46 PM
Cisco 2611 and Cisco 1721 : Why , why , why ????? sam@nospam.org Cisco 10 05-01-2005 08:49 AM
Why, why, why??? =?Utf-8?B?VGltOjouLg==?= ASP .Net 6 01-27-2005 03:35 PM
Why Why Why You HAVE NO IDEA MCSE 31 04-24-2004 06:40 PM



Advertisments