 |
| |
| This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you. |
| Moderated by: chrisbet, | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TomOC
|
This will be the final release that will work with PS 5 It DOES include D4, D800 and D800e It Does NOT include Fuji xpro-1 Available for download from within the app. Cheers, Tom |
|||||||||
jk
|
Thanks Tom. Sent info to Robert Levy but forgot to post to everyone!  So now those of us who have the Fuji XP1 will have to shell out for CS6 or use the workaround with Lightroom 4 that Rich pointed out. Why do I feel cheated by this again! Thanks Adobe.... Not! |
|||||||||
Robert
|
As heads up, I have just installed the Adobe Design Standard suite CS5 on my Mac mini i7. Having installed I ran the updaters. ACR 6.7 was installed. So anybody wanting ACR6.7 should be able to upgrade even CS5 without HAVING to go to CS6. |
|||||||||
TomOC
|
jk wrote:Thanks Tom. I'm no adobe fan any more, but to be fair... The blame, if there is blame, is on Fuji for not working closely enough with adobe to get it in the existing version. You can be sure that must have had something to do with NIkon's timing of the D4 and D800? I'm going to be spending some time working with trial apps like Phase One Capture and Aperture 3 as alternatives to adobe... If they don't cut it, I'll pay the blackmail just for ACR. Tom |
|||||||||
rlevy
|
Thanks All. Downloading 6.7 as we type. RL |
|||||||||
richw
|
TomOC wrote:jk wrote: Just get Lightroom, basically you can view this as just the ACR, although it comes with a lot extra. |
|||||||||
TomOC
|
Rich- I have two problems with lightroom (I had LR 3 with my Leica x1 and gave it away). 1- It forces you to make huge catalogs which I don't need or want since I catalog everything with Media Pro. 2- I couldn't see that it did anything that PS didn't do and I have literally dozens of plugins for PS and a very established workflow. For me Bridge is a better viewer since it just views the files and leaves them in place. As to ACR, my problem is that 6.7 does not support Fuji xpro-1 and that is killing me. I also have lately waited 6 months to upgrade any adobe product on a mac. The last two upgrades were initial disasters in the first release. I may have to reacant that practice for now. My real dream would be for adobe to sell ACR as a standalone/plugin. I would gladly pay for ACR. That said... There HAS to be something I'm missing with LR. Doug has been saying the same thing and i respect the opinion of both of you, but I just can't see it on this one... Please ... Convince me  Cheers, Tom |
|||||||||
Doug
|
TomOC wrote:
Everyone is different in their needs and expectations so I'd have to see your existing workflow to work out where and how Lightroom would benefit you, but I'm sure it can (I have one client who imports jobs into Lightroom, works on them and pushes through to Photoshop for further editing, then removes from Lightroom before the cycle starts again) Do you adjust White Balance? Do you Crop? Do you rename? Do you convert to different formats? While Bridge can do all of these things, Lightroom is faster and less clunky with better shortcuts BECAUSE the photos are in it's catalog Of course all that assumes that you can and want to use ACR for raw processing, but from your post above it does seem that way |
|||||||||
richw
|
If all you wanted was ACR then you could delete the photos, but why is the catalogue an issue? I have 64,000 images in mine and even with backups the space taken on my hard drive at current prices costs less than a dollar. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
That was the point I was trying to make above, rather less eloquently. HD space is so cheap nowadays, why constrain your choices for a few Gb? |
|||||||||
TomOC
|
Doug wrote: Everyone is different in their needs and expectations so I'd have to see your existing workflow to work out where and how Lightroom would benefit you, but I'm sure it can (I have one client who imports jobs into Lightroom, works on them and pushes through to Photoshop for further editing, then removes from Lightroom before the cycle starts again) TomOC wrote: Doug- Yes, Doug, I do all of the above - most of it in ACR, then Photoshop where I have a great collection of plugins (many would work in LR, I think) where I make most of my edits; I then save and sharpen either with NIK sharpener or PhotoTools edge sharpener and print (I like to sharpen for each print size and not save the sharpened file). If I were just opening a saved file to change the format (PSD being my main format), I can see where an app like LR would be great - one step to find file and open and save rather than find in bridge, open in PS and save. Rich, my total catalog has about 130,000 images and when I tested LR, it seemed that would create a catalog of almost 100gb (not a strain for my desktop, but kills my macbook pro). I have those files in a Media Pro catalog of about 1.6gb and save it to DropBox so it is always up to date on both machines and doesn't kill the MBP by filling the SDD (only 256 gb). That problem might be solved if I snag a new MBP before they quit making the 17" ones (as rumored), but till then, I simply cannot put a file that large on my MBP. That all said, it looks like I can buy a copy of LR 4 for $99 if I buy CS6 at the same time and I think I'll give it a go just because you guys feel so strongly that it is worthwhile - god knows I often miss thing Cheers, Tom |
|||||||||
jk
|
I use LR for my cataloguing on Mac but I have also tried Media Pro and found it slower than LR but probably less customizable. All these pale into insignificance when compared to iMatch which only runs unfortunately on Windows. This is definitely the fastest and best image management tool I have come across. |
|||||||||
TomOC
|
jk wrote:I use LR for my cataloguing on Mac but I have also tried Media Pro and found it slower than LR but probably less customizable. JK- Not to quibble because I loved iMatch, but simple searches are SO much faster with Image Pro (complex ones much slower). If you do a simple search in the upper right "search" window, using any word or phrase that can be found in either the file name or the keywords, it will return an instant set of results. You can't use boolean phrases, the actual words must be in the file name or keywords, but it is truly instant. Tom |
|||||||||
Doug
|
TomOC wrote:my total catalog has about 130,000 images and when I tested LR, it seemed that would create a catalog of almost 100gb (not a strain for my desktop, but kills my macbook pro). I have those files in a Media Pro catalog of about 1.6gb and save it to DropBox so it is always up to date on both machines and doesn't kill the MBP by filling the SDD (only 256 gb). That problem might be solved if I snag a new MBP before they quit making the 17" ones (as rumored), but till then, I simply cannot put a file that large on my MBP.
Tom. I think you might like to sit up  I think you have completely misunderstood how LR should work (you have also highlighted one of the major reasons I prefer it over Aperture and iPhoto - although Aperture and iPhoto can both be made to behave in the way described below) I have a catalog with well over 100,000 images I am working on for a client The 'Preview.lrdata' file is 3.9GB (this file stays on your computer as it can easily be rebuilt on any machine in use and doesn't need to be the same or sync) (my own Preview.lrdata file is 5.9GB for 25,000 images - larger because the inlaws were just here and lightroom has busily built a bunch of previews to speed browsing as we searched through for family photos) The 'Lightroom Catalog.lrcat' file is 1.1GB (my own is 385MB) (this file could be the same on all machines, can't be launched from a network drive, can probably be launched from dropbox since there is a local file - but this location should not be used for lrcat backups (described below) I have usually maintained a single file on an external drive (which also contains my images) that can move from Mac to Mac Thats it - the main part of the burden LR places on your hard drive Of course LR does create a backup of the lrcat file on a regular basis in case you ever experience a corruption of your catalog and the older backups should periodically be swept away I think (when importing to Lightroom) you must've clicked 'copy' at the top centre of the import window when you should have clicked 'add' 'add' does not touch or duplicate the file but merely access them in their current location As for searching - LR has it's faults (can't sort by size etc), but it is a powerful and robust catalog system that makes search easy (especially when you start to use smart albums) |
|||||||||
richw
|
I've just checked my LR4 cat. I have 63,5000 images on my NAS, and 6,500 on my MBP hard drive. The catalogue is 748Mb. Most of the images are DNG (sorry JK) but with a few thousand PSD thrown in also. They are about 20% D70, 50% D200 and 30% D3. The Fuji hardly has a foothold yet! I think the size of your previous catalogue may be because you had previews maintained for the whole thing? You can control this in preferences, it will render previews upon import by default, so if you imported all your images initially and rendered previews at that point it could well result in a very large file. Edit: Doug posted whilst I was writing, but do check the preview settings. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Doug wrote:I think you have completely misunderstood how LR should work Didn't you mean iPhoto Doug? I think you can edit your own post... |
|||||||||
jk
|
richw wrote: I've just checked my LR4 cat. I have 63,5000 images on my NAS, and 6,500 on my MBP hard drive. The catalogue is 748Mb. Most of the images are DNG (sorry JK) but with a few thousand PSD thrown in also. They are about 20% D70, 50% D200 and 30% D3. The Fuji hardly has a foothold yet!I really do need to come to Australia. You are getting in bad habits! I think the size of your previous catalogue may be because you had previews maintained for the whole thing? You can control this in preferences, it will render previews upon import by default, so if you imported all your images initially and rendered previews at that point it could well result in a very large file. Edit: Doug posted whilst I was writing, but do check the preview settings Yes if you keep previews in the catalog then it does bloat it hugely. However it is a pain waiting for them to generate as well. Always swings and roundabouts.  |
|||||||||
Doug
|
Robert wrote:Doug wrote: Oops (fixed) |
|||||||||
jk
|
Doug wrote:I think (when importing to Lightroom) you must've clicked 'copy' at the top centre of the import window when you should have clicked 'add' 'add' does not touch or duplicate the file but merely access them in their current location As for searching - LR has it's faults (can't sort by size etc), but it is a powerful and robust catalog system that makes search easy (especially when you start to use smart albums) Yes that is a killer if you click the Add button. I really hate having that button there but its just the way I work I'm sure there are some people who prefer it that way. I prefer to do my own housekeeping!! |
|||||||||
TomOC
|
OK - I rose to the bait just downloaded LR4 (got it for $85 using my NAPP 15% discount and preordering CS6 at the same time. So... am I losing it or did someone mention in an earlier post that there was some workaround to use LR to convert RAW from the xpro-1 ??? I'll be driving all day tomorrow, so the first shot I have at playing with LR is mid week. Thanks for pushing me to learn new things and not be so damn stubbon ! cheers tom |
|||||||||
Robert
|
TomOC wrote:Thanks for pushing me to learn new things and not be so damn stubbon ! You, stubborn? Wasn't it you who converted from a diehard PC user to Apple? Then adopted all the modern Apple features? I think if you are happy with what you have the incentive to change isn't obvious. |
|||||||||
jk
|
TomOC wrote: OK - I rose to the baitNo workaround in LR4 to process XP1 RAW files. Need to process through to Tiff or JPG with Dcraw or SilkyPix then manage these tiff/jpgs through into LR for enhancement. LR4 not so bad but I'm still scratching around for some items. Like..... How do I save my custom template for a slideshow and reuse it as a default. |
|||||||||
Iain
|
Everybody talks about the catalogue ability of LR but I have trouble getting my head around it. Maybe I'm just thick. |
|||||||||
jk
|
For those of you with Adobe Photoshop CS6 (yes I have the trial copy) there is ACR7.1 beta. (No RAW support for Fuji XP1 but some bug fixes for chromatic aberration/defringing). |
|||||||||
jk
|
Iain wrote: Everybody talks about the catalogue ability of LR but I have trouble getting my head around it.I dont think so. I find some bits completely counter-intuitive. Even the Catalog Import seems overly complex and wasteful on screen space. What I have found is that once you have got a high level catalog item then the best way is to copy items into the location using File Manager then do a right click (on the high level object) in LR and do a Synchronise Folder. (Always making sure that you do an 'Import but do not move'). I say it is just not very well designed or designed with a different monkey in mind (not me!). |
|||||||||
Iain
|
I'm glad to hear that JK. I feel better now. |
|||||||||
Doug
|
It's actually very well thought out once you understand all of it's intricacies I could tell you more, but then... |
|||||||||
Bob Bowen
|
Using CS3 and also LR4 but can't get D3 raw images to open in CS3. Can I get and ACR plug in that works or am I too far behind. Work around to process in LR4 and export as jpg or tif to CS3? |
|||||||||
jk
|
Bob Bowen wrote:Using CS3 and also LR4 but can't get D3 raw images to open in CS3. Can I get and ACR plug in that works or am I too far behind. Work around to process in LR4 and export as jpg or tif to CS3?I think you need CS3 or later to get ACR level that supports D3. You will need to install ACR version 4.3.1 or later for D3 (about Nov 2007) RAW support. http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=3826 |
|||||||||
Bob Bowen
|
Thanks JK. All well. |
|||||||||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |