Solving the Digital Photographer's Archiving Dilemma? (Digital Asset Management)

[workerdrone]

I am still gutted that Aperture is done for. Nearly 600,000 images in 12 libraries. The migration is going to be biblical. . .

Lightroom is ok, but neither elegant or intuitive.

Honestly, I am just avoiding the inevitable in the hope that something worthwhile presents itself

600k ******

I didn't like LR at first (couple years ago) when I was switching to it from Aperture, but after a short while I was used to it and now no regrets - just a learning curve like anything else. I saw the writing on the wall and figured I'd join the industry standard crowd and life would be easier. It is.

I also didn't like the subscription model from Adobe at first, but now at $10/month for LR and Photoshop, it does seem like a much better deal than buying new software every couple years.

Workerdrone, drinkin' the Kool aid

 

[nwoods]

I'm not a fan of Lightroom's UI either. I find it very disorganized, with tiny control buttons sprinkled all over the place. Very unituitive.

However, I just found out this afternoon (sorry for the Late Notice), that ONONE is offering a free Matt K online webinar about this topic!
"MATT'S ULTIMATE GUIDE TO ORGANIZING PHOTOS"
http://www.on1.com/photos/streaming-course-lrweek/

 

[DiploStrat]

Big Battalions (God is on the side of the …)

Much as I love the Apple OS, you have to admit that Apple has done very poorly by anyone who chooses to use their actual applications. Remember MacPaint, MacWrite, ClarisWorks, AppleWorks, and any number of others like FileMaker, and various video and audio programs. Many have been orphaned and many have been consumerized. It now appears that this has been done to Aperture.

The pity is, that many of these applications, like Aperture, were simply better than the alternatives, but I, for one, will be very wary about making any commitment to things like Pages, Keynote (very nice), etc. I will take a look at Photos, but I suspect that, like many others, I will end up giving my money to Microsoft for Office and Adobe for Lightroom. (I already own PSE.) I am look at Capture One, but there is much to be said for going with the market leader.

The combo pack of Lightroom and the full Photoshop is attractive. I would love to see an effective combination of Photos and some form of Photoshop, as I used to do with iPhoto and PSE, but, I fear, that Photos may not allow quite enough cataloging or file placement flexibility. The initial promise of Photos + RAW plugins like Nik and OnOne was very exciting as I rarely use the graphics tools of Photoshop.

We shall see; I have at least a year before I need to worry about any of this.

 

[goodtimes]

I am still gutted that Aperture is done for. Nearly 600,000 images in 12 libraries. The migration is going to be biblical. . .

Lightroom is ok, but neither elegant or intuitive.

Honestly, I am just avoiding the inevitable in the hope that something worthwhile presents itself

I never found the love for Aperture.

Lightroom was always a fair bit easier to use as far as process flow goes. Maybe it's just that I learned on Lightroom 1.0 (back in my PC days) & didn't get into Aperture until much later (3.x????) when I bought my first Mac (which is still running strong 8 years in). Tried it for a bit, then went right back to Lightroom 4 (I think ... ).

Of course, I'm working in a strictly non-professional environment.

 

[DiploStrat]

Maybe it's just that I learned on Lightroom 1.0

Ding, Ding! You hit the key point - we often prefer what we are used to. I remember huge arguments between those who wanted to adopt the non-destructive workflow of Lightroom or Aperture and those who wanted to stay with Photoshop. You certainly couldn't argue that Photoshop wasn't a better editor but it was hard for some to accept that you might need a better image filing system.

I suspect that it will take me less than a month to adapt to Lightroom. (Doesn't mean that I would indulge in a few gripes along the way.) The real issue is that Apple has done a poor job of convincing pros and serious amateurs, in any field, to commit to any of their pro applications.

 

[Lost Canadian]

When I transitioned to C1 from Lr it also felt unintuitive and I was frustrated at first thinking the program was somewhat worse, but that was because I kept thinking C1 should work like Lr. When I finally accepted that C1 is just a different process and gave the program a real chance I really started to like it, in many ways a lot more than Lr. For instance, session based library management makes a lot more sense to me than cataloging, although cataloging is also available in C1. Sessions are organized into a session folder containing various sub-folders such as Captures, selections, outputs and trash. Also each session contains a session file that can load the session contents into C1 regardless of where the session is located. For wedding and travel work this sort of structure makes perfect sense as it allows me to shoot into a portable drive, then copy to my main drive once I’m back home and easily be able to open it without re-importing or re-mapping anything.

Further more the session sub folders help me quickly access exactly what I want like final edits, or raws without having to comb through large folder collections.

Of course with C1 you also have customizable workspaces, much much better colour management tools, and in my opinion much more refined and detailed output. There's something special in C1 that Lr doesn't have. Images just look better, sharper, with more depth and punch. It's hard to explain until you see the difference yourself.

 

[Lost Canadian]

Oh one other thing, if using C1 you can also easily import your aperture library or Lr catalog with adjustments. A big time saver if you're worried about losing your edits.

http://youtu.be/IylO2Hxegkg

 

[nwoods]

More live streaming. Scott Kelby introduces Lightroom 6
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/kelbytv-com

 

[DiploStrat]

Oh one other thing, if using C1 you can also easily import your aperture library or Lr catalog with adjustments. A big time saver if you're worried about losing your edits.

http://youtu.be/IylO2Hxegkg

Trevor, that is slick! Many thanks. At the end of the day, I don't mind revisiting the images a bit as part of the reason for moving would have to be to get a better image.

 

[DiploStrat]

Shelby is fun; I have some of his books. Just remember that, like the Luminous Landscape, he is a hopeless Adobe shill. Doesn't mean that he isn't the person to listen to on HOW to use Adobe products, but it does mean that he is far from objective on the question of WHETHER to use Adobe products.

Caveat emptor!

 

[texascrane]

FWIW, I really like lightroom but I'm about 3 years down-level on that and photo shop so YMMV. Regardless of the program, the real key from my perspective is implementing a good controlled vocab system so that you can actually go back and find stuff years from now.

 

[nwoods]

FWIW, I really like lightroom but I'm about 3 years down-level on that and photo shop so YMMV.

If you are interested. Kelby and B&N have teamed up to offer Adobe Photoshop CC + Lightroom CC (both version 6 if you are counting) on a annual subscription basis for $99. I'm still rocking PS CS5 and LR4.