1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Adobe Lightroom for photographers

Discussion in 'photography, graphics & art' started by wordie, Jan 11, 2006.

  1. RoyReed

    RoyReed Must fly!

    Maybe you could try Corel AfterShot. It's the renamed version of Bibble after Corel took it over.
     
  2. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    I'm trying to do it in Lightroom but it's just a resource hogging muthafucka that it's causing my machine to grind to a halt.

    It's only importing files at the moment and is already up to nearly 2GB of RAM

    del.jpg
     
  3. mauvais

    mauvais change has become unavoidable

    Mine's using 171MB. In any case, 1.8GB isn't actually that unreasonable for serious photo work, especially cataloguing.
     
  4. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Actually, I've got more photo files than I thought:

    del.jpg
     
  5. mauvais

    mauvais change has become unavoidable

    Are they all JPG or something? I've got 183GB over 33k files (25k photos).

    Anyway if you want stupid resource usage you're not trying hard enough:

    [​IMG]

    I put 12GB in that machine and it still ran out. I don't even know what it wanted.
     
  6. fractionMan

    fractionMan Custom Title

    Ugh. I can see where Ed is coming from now and I'm only importing 8000 photos. It's a dog, took at least an hour and a half.

    Then, I copy 80 new photos in my picture folder, synchronise it and it's still bloody working on it 10 minutes later. Only 80 new photos. Urgh. There must be a quicker way.
     
  7. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    I think I'm going to have to get a book to work out how to do this. Every time I put in a memory card, the great lumbering beast that it is Lightroom roars into life and I. Do. Not. Want. That.
     
  8. mauvais

    mauvais change has become unavoidable

    Edit > Preferences > General tab > Untick 'Show import dialog when a memory card is detected'. Might be a Windows action too.
     
  9. fractionMan

    fractionMan Custom Title

    wow, it's actually unusable on my machine. stutters madly just zooming in and out.
     
  10. fractionMan

    fractionMan Custom Title

    It seems to get stuck importing. This time on photo 59. I expect it'll take off again in a minute but in the meantime it's eating CPU like a CPU eating thing, which is not good when importing a paltry 80 pics.
     
  11. fractionMan

    fractionMan Custom Title

    Sod this, I'm going to stick with picassa and get gimpshop out to fix anything specific.
     
  12. Citizen66

    Citizen66 splash the cistern

    I downloaded this and then was politely informed that it won't run on xp. :D
     
  13. mincepie

    mincepie Everday lurker!

    Indeed v4 won't run on XP.
    I'm a great fan of Lightroom, but it's a resource hogger - you need a decent PC - even if it did run on XP - on a 4 year old machine it's soooo slow as to be too painful.
     
  14. Citizen66

    Citizen66 splash the cistern

    Maybe a pc upgrade is required then.
     
  15. mincepie

    mincepie Everday lurker!

    Yeah - or you'll end up like this (below) - I had to upgrade too for the same reason.
    Its annoying really - the FREE picasa is super quick even on any old machine, whereas this seems to need a super computer.
     
  16. Citizen66

    Citizen66 splash the cistern

    What should I use in the mean-time to play with (nikon) RAW files? I've got PS CS6 but don't have a scooby what plug in to use. That's why I was going to start using Lightroom.
     
  17. RoyReed

    RoyReed Must fly!

    I've just upgraded to 4.1. It's a bit slow on my laptop (still usable), but runs just fine on my desktop. I thought it might take ages to import the old catalogue (about 30,000 images, almost all RAW) but it did it in less than a minute. So far I'm liking the upgrade.
     
  18. RoyReed

    RoyReed Must fly!

    Doesn't PS CS6 come with Camera RAW plugin? If not FastStone Image Viewer can view and do basic edits on NEF and save to JPG.
     
  19. mincepie

    mincepie Everday lurker!

  20. Citizen66

    Citizen66 splash the cistern

    Cheerrs.
     
  21. weltweit

    weltweit Well-Known Member

    Any users out there?

    It seems like quite a powerful program. And good value.

    If I had Lightroom I am not sure I would need PhotoShop much - if at all.
     
  22. RoyReed

    RoyReed Must fly!

    I use Lightroom and really like it. And depending on what you want to do you might indeed find that you don't need PS. The best thing (for me) is that any editing you do is non-destructive, with the changes you make to the original file being stored in a database. You can always go back to the original whatever you do. There are plenty of things that PS can do that LR can't, but it might be that even then you don't need the full blown PS, but PS Elements might do instead.

    Got any specific questions?
     
  23. FunkyUK

    FunkyUK u=5337

    I dont like it. I want to like it, and despite trying for a good 3 years on various versions I keep going back to ACDSee. I find ACDsee quicker, less clunky and its file management makes far more sense.
     
    editor likes this.
  24. weltweit

    weltweit Well-Known Member

    Hi RoyReed,

    I was shown Lightroom last night and was impressed. I liked the actions like colour balance that you can do to a group of images at once, that it is non destructive, the shadow and highlights adjustments seemed very powerful. I liked the way you can attach key words into the exif info to more easily find images in your catalogue. The wide support for Raw, it copes with my Fuji S2 *.raf files for example.

    I wondered why Adobe had created this as a seperate product as it seems to me it will only reduce purchases of PhotoShop.

    Not sure about minimum system requirements. I only have a back catalogue of about 10,000 images because I ruthlessly delete. I suppose I could have multiple catalogues to keep their size down but the person who showed me Lightroom has a very uber pc, a very fast processor and multiple hard disks.
     
  25. weltweit

    weltweit Well-Known Member

    Oh and it can correct for the distortion of your particular lens! I have never felt the need to do this before. Not sure I will bother with it but it is a powerful feature ...
     
  26. RoyReed

    RoyReed Must fly!

    I think Adobe see them as being complementary, with maybe Lightroom being more focused to photographers and Photoshop to designers who use photography - although there's obviously a very big overlap.

    I use LR both on my desktop (quite powerful) and on my laptop - both accessing the same database. This currently has over 15,000 images in one catalogue. What is slower on the laptop (Win7 32bit 3.2G RAM) is editing and displaying RAW images at 1:1. It's still usable, but notably slower than my desktop PC. If you mainly use JPG images you might not even notice.
     
  27. RoyReed

    RoyReed Must fly!

    They have a database of most of the top Canon and Nikon lenses and quite a few for other makes. For these the correction is pretty good (and automatic if you turn the feature on). For lenses not in the database there's a set of manual controls that allow you to correct for various lens distortions (barrel, pincushion, vignetting, chromatic aberration) as well as vertical/horizontal architectural correction. Some people say that DXO is better for this, but Lightroom is still very good.
     
  28. sim667

    sim667 Licking windows on the 303 bus.

    I've always stuck with aperture..... never tried lightroom
     
  29. weltweit

    weltweit Well-Known Member

    I wonder what the system requirements are for Lightroom 4 .... the guy that showed it to me has a very powerful computer with loads of RAM.

    From adobe's Lightroom website

    Windows
    •Intel® Pentium® 4 or AMD Athlon® 64 processor
    •Microsoft® Windows Vista or Windows 7 with Service Pack 1 or Windows 8
    •2GB of RAM
    •1GB of available hard-disk space
    •1024x768 display
    •DVD-ROM drive (if installing from DVD)
    •Internet connection required for Internet-based services*
     
  30. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    That's exactly where I am. I want to like it. I know I should use it. But ACDSee just does the job.
     

Share This Page