Wednesday, February 02, 2011


After procrastinating for years, I'm determined to start using Lightroom to catalogue my images properly. A new computer and even more hard drives has pretty much forced me into this.

I'm almost finished the superb Lightroom 3 Tutorial Videos from Luminous Landscape, more than 8 hours of invaluable information. I'm starting with the importing of all my raw files (some I haven't seen in years) and most importantly, adding keywords to them so all the images from each imported folder can be found, then more keywords for smaller groups of images.

I'm also looking into using Lightroom and an add-on website publisher from Photographers-toolbox to link to my Rapidweaver website - to automate updating my web images through lightroom and to better control the size of images on various sizes of screen.


John Satterberg said...

Congratulations on the move to Lightroom. You'll love it. I have been using it for a number of years and love it. fyi I have moved to Newfoundland ... a great place to do photography.
John Satterberg

Tim said...

I know that feeling as well. I just reprocessed everything I've taken since last April using DxO and Adobe Bridge for adding tags, titles, descriptions etc. It's taken me about a month, so good luck with it ;)

Frank Field said...

George -

Well, I've just sort of made the reverse journey. Lightroom 1.0 started shipping just about the time I made the (belated) move to digital capture so I adopted it from almost my day one. It is an invaluable tool and I can find most any image I'm looking for quickly. Based on the urgings largely in your writings and those of Alain Briot, I finally adopted Photoshop (CS5) a few months ago and am just now getting to the point where I seem to have reasonable facility with it.

After resisting Photoshop for a long time and now having re-optimized maybe 100 images in CS5, my take is that about 80% of the time, I'm able to get a noticeably better image out of CS5 compared to Lightroom 3, sometimes dramatically better. About 15% of the time, I'd say you have to look closely to notice the difference. And, maybe 5% of the images optimized in LR are superior to the results I can get with CS5.

LR does a very credible job of image optimization and is clearly far more time efficient than CS5. The fact that LR speaks the language of photographers (e.g., color temp, exposure value, etc.) rather than graphic designers certainly makes LR far more approachable. Still, I find that CS5 does a noticeably better job in terms of: managing unwanted color casts, local optimization, and local contrast. The time invested is worthwhile for my best images.

Good luck with LR!


James said...

I went through a similar process about 6 months ago. However, I had a fair number of lower-quality photos. I made the mistake of keywording everything. In retrospect I should have rated all the photos before going to the effort of adding keywords.