Adobe Lightroom Beta

[Dylan Wiggins]

Have you guys tried this out yet? It's a free public beta and it is a very interesting approach to handling mass quantities of photos.

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom/

Although it seems to be painfully slow at times even on my work machine (pentium 2.8D, 1GB, RAID 0), it made the first part of my workflow, the sorting and deleting part, much quicker.

[Todd Corzett]

I so rarely process RAW in a workflow... and most of the times even the JPGs just get captioned, batched, and sent. These sorts of programs look nice, but just seem to add a bunch of "candy" that I don't want or need. For me, speed is the key... most of the time I don't even want to wait for my computer to generate thumbnails. Could be nice in the right situations, but I don't see it being a part of my normal workflow.

-Todd...

[John Thawley]

I've tried the beta... it's worse than Bridge. :(

I've used iView Media Pro for years as a catloging tool... it's excellent. Though I just switched over to PhotoMechanic... I really like it for sorting and organizing and captioning (IPTC data mostly.)

JT

[Todd Corzett]

I've used iView Media Pro for years as a catloging tool... it's excellent. Though I just switched over to PhotoMechanic... I really like it for sorting and organizing and captioning (IPTC data mostly.)
I'm a big fan of iView, but have been thinking of switching to PhotoMechanic (mostly for the direct integration with PhotoShelter - which I may also start using). How has the switch been for you JT? (sorry if this is OT from the original post)

-Todd...

[Todd Spoth]

i love photomechanic.

on the rare occasion i shoot in raw and need to process i find that the freeware DPP works fine for me.

[John Thawley]

I'm a big fan of iView, but have been thinking of switching to PhotoMechanic (mostly for the direct integration with PhotoShelter - which I may also start using). How has the switch been for you JT? (sorry if this is OT from the original post)

-Todd...

Pretty straight forward... though it doesn't catalog like iView. In that sense, they're two different programs. But, in the end, I think what I wanted all along was what PhotoMechanic does. iView, in retrospect had me doing what THEY thought was a good thing... non file related catalogs. PhotoMechanic annotates the indivdiual photos without any sort of save process. So, you are working in real time in real folders.

There are a few features that require thinking through.... ingest (downloading cards) comes to mind... file renaming another... but for the most part, it's pretty straight forward. Two features I like a lot are the "Send Images To Droplet" command and the built in FTP feature.

JT

[Thomas Maranda]

I tried Bridge for awhile, but I didn't like it. I kept felt like I was missing something, like I didn't get it. I guess it just isn't for me.

[John Thawley]

Interestingly enough, I just downloaded Beta 4 of Lightroom. At this point I am VERY impressed.

First, it flies on my MacBook Pro. Second, it incorporates many features I've been lookng for and having to run PhotoMechaninc and iView Media Pro in tandem. While PhotoMechanic is excellent for organizing, viewing, transmitting etc... iView is excellent for previewing, sorting, cataloging... etc. Whiel they overlap a little... they both have distinctive strengths.

Enter Lightroom.

I think Adobe is about to demonstrate why they "own" the image editing domain. Lightroom is basically evolving into what I can best describe as an Operating System for photographers. The have taken a 5 Rule approach and created "desktops" that house the tools for each; Libray, Developing, Slideshow, Print & Web. With your images (thumbnails) displayed on the screen, each desktop is readily available to slide in and frame the preview and viewing pane. It's seamless. If I'm organizing the library or "binders" the Library desktop contains all the presets involved in that process... meta tag editing, IPT, captions, sorting, tagging, and so on. Time to do basic edits... click on Develop - and your presented with some very functional cropping, exposure adjustment etc. type tools. And not just toys... very functional tools... I think most quick post work could be done here saving only major surgery to be done in Photoshop.

And so on for the other frames.

I'm digging into the files "saving" heirarchy just to see how it is handling downloads... long and short term. It will download your flash cards to two sources at once.... also while applying your Meta or IPTC stationary and will rename your files during the process too. Those are big pluses for me.

Anyway.... I think we're going to be inheriting this environment in CS3.... so far, I REALLY like.

FYI, the GUI is VERY nice.... great look and feel, extremely intuitive. I find with Photshop, you're learning it for ever. But as "big" as this piece of software is and as involved as it can be, the learning curve is pretty quick. I think that says a lot.

JT

[Shane Parker]

I'm going to have to download it John. I played with the first beta's and knew that it'd be a while before I even thought about adopting it because it was so slow and buggy. On the other hand, I really liked where the UI was heading. Your post gives me hope (I've secretly wished for Lightroom to be "the" app for my line of work).

[John Thawley]

Just as a follow up, I've since opened and worked on folders "form their original location" without moving them around. Nice. Oh... and I loaded 8000 images all at once. No problem.

Also, your "imports" remain in the history for a specific time that you can set. So.... you can continue opening and closing the app without reimporting each time. Again, your files remain in their original location.

Of course, your "sort" can be filtered by different factors including date, rating and so on.

In the Library function this is a "quick develop" which is a set of editing tools that are adjustment I can only describe as more like camerra/exposure adjustments. And, they're applied in increments... not just automatic. Once you have an image adjusted, you can click a button to copy those settings and then just paste them to similar images as you go. So if you've got a set of images that are, say, a half stop under or too contrasty... whatever, you can apply the same adjustment to them all.

I'm really getting sold on this program.

JT

[Shane Parker]

Initial impression is that it is VASTLY improved over the previous versions I played with. It's much faster/snappier, the UI is mucho cleaned up, and the whole process of cataloging to output really appeals to me. I think this sucker is going to rule the market once it's in release v2-3. Adobe just seems to "get it" when it comes to this stuff (for the most part).

So far I'm impressed. I'll have to shove a couple complete workflows through it to get a better feel for how good it really is in BETA 4, but it looks like it has great potential. I've already cataloged 1,200 photos from my last shoot and it had no trouble adding them.

Thanks for the heads-up JT!

[Mike Ditz]

Even though Aperture has some really slick things in it, Lightroom has pretty much thumped it by releasing the Beta and listeng to the feedback. I like it.

[Shane Parker]

There's one major problem with Aperture... it's Mac only. This is one piece of software that I think Apple missed the boat on when they made it Mac only. (I'm a Mac fan btw).

[John Thawley]

I think this project is going to get legs. I've been using it for a few weeks now and even managed one event (though unsuccessfully) with it.

My experience to-date is a positive one. The one attempt I made to use it at an event left me dissatisfied with the way it "manages" files... but I think it's just a matter of time before they'll sort that out.

Personally, I want to control the location(s) of my files right from the get go. The minute I download a card, I want to decided where it's going and what it's called.

Lightroom will let me import more than one card and to more than one location. It will let me rename files at that time and it will let me create the IPTC and Metadata.

Here are the issues, though. I like the back up directories more than the main. The back up seems less convoluted and I know where it is. :)

When renaming files, it sequential numbering option starts over each time... it doesn't continue along with the next sequence throughout the event. If I've started the sequence at 0001... that's where it will start with every card. Result... duplicate file names for that event. It's ok if you're just importing one card. But I think that's a bit unrealistic. PhotoMechanic, for instance, keeps track of where you left off until you go and reset it.

Also, Lightroom creates "sidecar" XMP files. It isn't embedding the IPTC or Metadata into the fiel. It shows up fine if you're in Lightroom. But open that image in Photoshop, and got to File Info, all you'll see is the camera's EXIF. That doesn't work for me. They need to embed that information into the file.

There are other features I'd like to see, but these are the first important issues (at least to me) that affect my workflow.

I'm curious what others have found.

JT

[Daniel Buck]

John, that file re-naming issue (always reverting back to 1) would probably be a very easy fix for them, I would post up on their beta board and request that feature be added as a check box (continue current numbering, or re-start the numbering)

[John Thawley]

Thanks Daniel. I have posted to the forum in both General and Feature requests. One of the drawbacks to a beta is the lack of documentation... therefore I like to be careful with my posts in case it's something I'm simply missing. :) It could happen.

There are some pretty cool keyboard shortcuts not documented, though.

First, you can have your "Name Plate" appear where it currently says Adobe Lightroom. Kind of cool if you have a client looking over your shoulder.

Also, there is a way to get rid of this silly little typogliphic icons at the end of the menu panels. And substitute them with your own.

You can also option+click on the little Triangle Menu dropdown symbols to indicate which panels you want open by default.

And finally, the most useful shortcut is turn on Capslock when you are assigning ratings to images in the library. With capslock key on, after you assign a rating, the filmstrip immediately jumps to the next image. Nice and quick.

JT

[Wes Duenkel]

Tried Beta before, and just tried Version 1.0; powerful program, but simply too much of a resource hog for my modest Windows laptop. While my laptop meets the minimum system requirements, Lightroom runs uselessly slow. Compared to Capture One, it's a snail. Lightroom uses over twice the RAM and CPU that Capture One does (but then again, Capture One is over twice as expensive!)

I like the web gallery options, though. And the ability to "click-n-drag" in the image to adjust the curve is neat. Perhaps when I can afford a faster laptop I will try Lightroom again...

[Norm Yee]

Tried Beta before, and just tried Version 1.0; powerful program, but simply too much of a resource hog for my modest Windows laptop. While my laptop meets the minimum system requirements, Lightroom runs uselessly slow. Compared to Capture One, it's a snail. Lightroom uses over twice the RAM and CPU that Capture One does (but then again, Capture One is over twice as expensive!)

I like the web gallery options, though. And the ability to "click-n-drag" in the image to adjust the curve is neat. Perhaps when I can afford a faster laptop I will try Lightroom again...

LR is slower than C1? In what way? I've found the exact opposite, at least for RAW processing. LR processes RAWs noticeably faster on my windows machines than C1 ever did.

[John Thawley]

The release notes where posted on the APN front page last night.

I haven't looked at the final release version yet, but to be honest, I hit a road block when it came to how LR stores your images. Unless it has changed, you were forced to rely blindly on the LR Library.

I've switched to Aperture now full time. I'm always open to change... but I think I'm pretty well committed to Aperture.

JT

[Wes Duenkel]

LR is slower than C1? In what way? I've found the exact opposite, at least for RAW processing. LR processes RAWs noticeably faster on my windows machines than C1 ever did.
If you are referring to actual processing of RAW to another format, I dunno...I never got that far...because when chaging settings in the "develop" mode I'd move an adjustment slider and would have to wait for the slider to catch up, and the image to adjust. A quick check in Task Manager confirmed what I saw: 90% CPU useage, 110,000 K memory usage. I got fed up with pretending I could deal with it, and uninstalled the vampire. I have a P4 with 1GB of RAM, so it met the minimums (albeit barely).

[Norm Yee]

If you are referring to actual processing of RAW to another format, I dunno...I never got that far...because when chaging settings in the "develop" mode I'd move an adjustment slider and would have to wait for the slider to catch up, and the image to adjust. A quick check in Task Manager confirmed what I saw: 90% CPU useage, 110,000 K memory usage. I got fed up with pretending I could deal with it, and uninstalled the vampire. I have a P4 with 1GB of RAM, so it met the minimums (albeit barely).

ah yeah. I could see that..C1 would be faster in that regard on a slower machine. That said, I'm on an Athlon X2 4600+ w/2GB of RAM and the only time that it feels slow is when LR is generating the preview images. Once it's in the cache it's zippy & when i use any of the sliders it's immediately responsive. When it comes to conversion, RAW->JPG is substantially faster in LR... on the same machine it took 3-4 secs/image in LR while it took ~10 secs/image in C1 (adds up when i need to batch process a ton of photos).

[Norm Yee]

The release notes where posted on the APN front page last night.

I haven't looked at the final release version yet, but to be honest, I hit a road block when it came to how LR stores your images. Unless it has changed, you were forced to rely blindly on the LR Library.

I've switched to Aperture now full time. I'm always open to change... but I think I'm pretty well committed to Aperture.

JT

i don't recall what the beta 4.1 method of file storage was, but in the release version you can import your images & keep them at their current location (and the sidecar .xmp files are written to whereever those files are located). the import dialog is also much improved.

photoshop user has a good LR resource center, including some useful flash video tutorials: http://www.photoshopuser.com/lightroom/. The "Top 10 Hottest Features" gives a overview of what scott kelby's 10 favorite changes since beta 4.1 are.

[Todd Corzett]

I still dislike how LR can't be configured to import only the .JPG files that are in a folder (ie. leave the RAW alone when shooting RAW+JPG). This is the major reason why I don't plan on switching to LR from iView... it would just kill my current workflow. Also, I personally hate all the .xml files (I like what they do though) that get tossed-in with all my images.

I just want something fast for editing and captions... the ability to apply an action on selected photos (like a +1/2 stop exposure correction) would be nice... but not at the expense of speed. If I'm going to be doing RAW, or making significant adjustments, I'll just use Photoshop. If Bridge was replaced with LR I'd be happy... but I'm sure as heck not going to spend $199/$299 for it when I’m just going to use Photoshop anyhow.

-Todd...

[John Thawley]

... but I'm sure as heck not going to spend $199/$299 for it when I’m just going to use Photoshop anyhow.

-Todd...

I think that's the point, though, Todd. Photoshop has become secondary to my "workflow"..... the quick things I need to do to keep my images and shooting moving throughout the weekend are now managed in Aperture.

Photoshop has been delegated for "finish" work and "surgery." :)

I liken Photoshop to Microsoft Word. It has become very cumbersome for doing everyday basic use. If I need to generate some copy, I open a text editor and type... and as long as I have spellcheck, I'm good to go.

90% of my image adjustment needs are pretty straight forward and don't require all the extra overhead of Photoshop.

JT

[Todd Corzett]

Photoshop has been delegated for "finish" work and "surgery."

90% of my image adjustment needs are pretty straight forward and don't require all the extra overhead of Photoshop.

I get that, and would agree that the vast majority of the minor changes that Photoshop is not required. I will admit that I've not given Aperture or LR a real chance. However, since I like the import/sort/caption abilities of iView (which I've not really seen equaled anywhere else), I would be opening the images in a second application to edit/correct them anyhow... and it doesn't take any longer to open them in Photoshop than it would in LR/Aperture.

-Todd...

PS - I do like many of the RAW features of LR/Aperture... but for the vast majority of my work that doesn't come into play.

[Dan Routh]

I am playing with Lightroom now and I like it pretty well. It seems to be a fairly good way to work with a large number of files at one time. People I know are using Aperture and love it. They seem very similar, and seem to be like cars, "What's your favorite brand?" That being said, my workflow is still Photoshop heavy. The new Bridge will be better when it finally gets released, it's a little buggy now. Photoshop CS3 is going to be great, I use the beta almost all the time now.

There is another alternative to Lightroom and Aperture. A company called DAMuseful Software (Peter Krogh) produces a script for Bridge called Rapidfixer which allows you edit raw files from within Bridge sort of like LR and Ap do. IE, any changes aren't actually done to files until they are opened in Photoshop. The price is quite a bit less than the other two. Todd, Peter's workflow uses IView, Bridge (with Rapidfixer) and Photoshop. Look at www.damuseful.com. Peter is an ASMP member who give workshops on DAM(digital asset management).

Dan Routh

[John Thawley]

I get that, and would agree that the vast majority of the minor changes that Photoshop is not required. I will admit that I've not given Aperture or LR a real chance. However, since I like the import/sort/caption abilities of iView (which I've not really seen equaled anywhere else), I would be opening the images in a second application to edit/correct them anyhow... and it doesn't take any longer to open them in Photoshop than it would in LR/Aperture.

-Todd...

PS - I do like many of the RAW features of LR/Aperture... but for the vast majority of my work that doesn't come into play.

I was an iView Media user since 2003 - And, I know what you mean it was quick and a great way to organize. I remember when I first got it, I organzied an entire season in one Saturday afternoon.

But to me, the Aperture/Lightroom scenarios make that marriage of organizing and editing in one environment. And... interestingly enough, when explaining the software to people (I get tons of inquiries in the media centers) I have learned that people grasp the concept of Aperture much quicker when I tell them to learn the program in two steps. Take the organizing piece and get comfortable... then move into the image adjustment side from there. I think when people typically look at it, their mindset is so Photoshop-centric, the don't see Aperture and Lightroom for what they are. To me, they're a photographer's desktop... especially if you're an event shooter. Perhaps if I wasn't processing several thousand images per event, it wouldn't matter as much. But, for instance, after Daytona, I did full post processing on about 200+ images in just over an hour. For quick web galliers, I can pretty much get those of the desk between sessions. At winter testing I was done for the day when I left the track... galleries built and back-ups made. At Daytona I got on the plane with everything finished. That's huge for me.

JT

[Todd Corzett]

the Aperture/Lightroom scenarios make that marriage of organizing and editing in one environment.
This would be nice... but I'm not willing to give-up the organization side to get some editing (I'm also not a fan of TV/VCR combos).

I think when people typically look at it, their mindset is so Photoshop-centric, the don't see Aperture and Lightroom for what they are. To me, they're a photographer's desktop... especially if you're an event shooter. Perhaps if I wasn't processing several thousand images per event, it wouldn't matter as much.
See, this is the reason why I want the organization/caption speed. Because I'm dealing with thousands of images per event, I need something that will thumbnail/sort/caption as quickly as possible. At that point, I could see going into LR/Aperture rather than Photoshop... but not for the extra $$$ involved.

But, for instance, after Daytona, I did full post processing on about 200+ images in just over an hour. For quick web galliers, I can pretty much get those of the desk between sessions. At winter testing I was done for the day when I left the track... galleries built and back-ups made. At Daytona I got on the plane with everything finished. That's huge for me.
Getting several hundred images captioned and out the door is my biggest priority... and the image handling is the most time consuming part for me (not the editing). I will admit (and I'm less than proud of it) that I will often times let the quality of the images suffer because of the time required for sorting/captions. There are times when I'll shoot a session and a few random images will be underexposed (gotta love those headlights right?)... but I don't bother to adjust them. I would like a better way to handle this sort of thing in the future (this is one of the things that I'd like the LR/Aperture features for), but since it’s not a significant number of images right now I just take care of it in Photoshop (rather than spending $$$ on another program).

-Todd...

[John Thawley]

Giving up the organization side? I don't follow you. I do everything I ever did in iView Media and/or PhotoMechanic. I've given up nothing and my images are referenced in the same folder heirarchy that I've always used. PRIOR to even ingesting the card, I can rename the files, add IPTC and metadata (copyrights etc.) and backup to another location ... ALL before I even view an iimage or import the card. Once the card is ingested, I sort and reject the bad ones, rank the keepers, and or create albums and narrow it down to the images I want. After that, I do the post work (non-destructive to the masters) and export versions to a gallery.... the export sizes them and adds my watermark and puts them in a specified folder. Again... never disrupting the master file.

With respect to the bunch you underexposed.... I adjust one, lift those settings, selet the rest and "stamp" them with the same settings. Done.

Because I'm dealing with thousands of images per event, I need something that will thumbnail/sort/caption as quickly as possible.

And how many do you think I'm dealing with? LOL -

[Todd Corzett]

Giving up the organization side? I don't follow you.
I import the folder holding the RAW and JPG images into iView, and only the JPG images are imported (I like this ability, but could survive just importing the JPGs on my own). I then tag the keepers and add my captions. In iView, I add my IPTC to one image, then paste it across all of them. I then have custom fields for 'car number', 'driver', 'series', 'session', etc. (all the things that I need to have in my captions that are not standard IPTC fields). Using iView this is as simple as selecting all the images of a single car (by the pictures), paste the number across all the selected images. I then sort the images based on the numbers and use it to fill-out all the other fields and captions. All of this is as simple as selecting all the images I want and then pasting the captions across all of them.

How would you do this sort of thing in LR/Aperture? Is there a simple/fast way to select, tag, comment (say car number), and caption (complete) all the images? Personally, I don't think I could find a faster way to do this than iView (but I like to be proven wrong).

With respect to the bunch you underexposed.... I adjust one, lift those settings, selet the rest and "stamp" them with the same settings. Done.
This is the reason why I'd make the switch/addition... but not without the ability to quickly caption the images (as this is where the majority of my time is spent - even if I need to go into Photoshop to change a few images after the fact).

-Todd...

[John Thawley]

How would you do this sort of thing in LR/Aperture? Is there a simple/fast way to select, tag, comment (say car number), and caption (complete) all the images?


-Todd...

Exactly the same... but a lot of what you are describing can be done at the point of import... so it would already be done. You can view all your thumnails in a browse view... you can do a windowed view or you can do full screen view. In any case, all functions are available to you in all views. Rating, rejecting, adding specific metadata, appending or replacing IPTC information. And... keep in mind, any image adjustments you do simply create a "version" ... they do not destroy the original. And... unless you extract the version, the file is just a set of instructions to create version.. not another image. You can create as many versions as you like. You can also "stack" images... so say you have a burst shot of 5 frames... those images will get "clustered" on your thumbnail screen... and you can view and compare the stack.

If you are just viewing thumbnails, you can bring up the loupe.... park it and just run your mouse over a thumb and see 100% view of the thumb's area you're pointing at.

You can create sets of key words and a family of sets... a total heirachial tree if you will.

If you are someone that is comfortable with a keyboard, you have an additional advantage... the shortcuts are endless and you can really fly during the sorting process. the B key will put you in thumbnail mode, the V key will put you in Window'ed mode, the F key in Full Screen. I use full screen a lot because you can have a small film strip of thumbs place where ever you want floating on the screen.... and have it hidden. It will not appear until you move your mouse over it. So... I park it up in the corner... it dissappears... I slide my cursor up into the corner it appears. I hit the H key and a heads-up display of image adjustments floats over the screen.

To me, after several years of iView and over a year of PhotoMechanic, I like how complete the Aperture workflow is. I've given up nothing on the sorting end (in fact I've gained by eliminating several steps) and with respect to image adjustment, it was only a matter of getting comfortable with Apertures interface.

That said, I still use Photoshop to prep images I'm going to use for offset printing.. and of course any PhotoCHOP work. :)

JT

[Todd Corzett]

I like the image processing ability (what I don't do in iView), and am 'sold' on those features (well, given that my laptop can't run Aperture it doesn't really matter at this point)

Exactly the same... but a lot of what you are describing can be done at the point of import... so it would already be done. You can view all your thumnails in a browse view... you can do a windowed view or you can do full screen view. In any case, all functions are available to you in all views. Rating, rejecting, adding specific metadata, appending or replacing IPTC information.
Unless there is a system that reads car/bike numbers and puts it into IPTC than only 20 seconds worth of my work can be done on import (actually, even less than that because it's part of my Photoshop actions that are run on all the images before transmission anyhow). Are custom (searchable and sortable) fields available for captions? Can I create a field for 'driver', or do I just have to put it into the keyword field? Can I select an image, type-in the driver (for example) and then select other images and paste only that one field (not the whole keyword section of the IPTC) across all the images? Can I export the fields in a CSV file to integrate with a database?

I'm really not trying to be critical of LR/Aperture... the exact opposite... I like much of what they do, and would like to use them for those exact reasons. But then again, it's hard to justify buying a new laptop just to do the same thing I'm already doing with a little more 'candy' added to the process.

-Todd...

PS - I guess I should give the trials a spin

[John Thawley]

Todd:

I'm not sure you're understanding me. I used iView for four years. It's not even close.

Forget Aperture's image editing for now. First, I will tell you, PhotoMechanic does a MUCH better job of what you're describing than iView. The other bad news is Microsoft purchased iView. So you can be sure it will become a dumbed down piece of junk.

If you're sticking with a windows machine, PhotoMechanic is much better tool for sorting and organizing. At lest PhotoMechanic will let you download multiple cards at the same time... and backup to a second location during import. iView doesn't even allow you to create IPTC stationary.... or FTP from within the application.

I'm somewhat dumbfounded that you keep on about what Aperture won't do when you've never used it. I mean c'mon... I know both progarms inside and out.

FYI, Getty just developed a plug in for Aperture that uploads images on export directly from Aperture to their Servers. Here's a list of export plug-ins now available:

Aperture To Final Cut Pro
ApertureToGallery
ApertureToPBase
ApertureToPhanfare
ApertureToSmugMug
Digital Fusion
Digital Railroad
FlickrExport
Getty Images
iStockPhoto
Photoreflect
PhotoShelter
Pictage
SmugExport
Soundslides
YouSendit

And of course, you can use Apples Automator to automate other processes, though most are already built in.

I've been using it since Laguna... I've already pushed over 30,000 images through it.

I have no doubt Lightroom will be just as good... it's almost an Aperture clone.

There's nothing wrong with any of the programs... seriously, But the workflow and file management was never seamless from start to finish. And for those that work in the field, that is critical. I'm quite sure many will resist making the change. It's understandable... no one wants to go through the disruption of restructuring their porcess. But when I looked at how many files I managed in 2003 compared to 2002, and 2003 compared to 2004 and so on... it became quite apparent that yesterday's process wasn't going to be robust enough to manage tomorrows needs.

If you're comfortable, stick with what you've got... after all, growing your business and expanding your skills is all about staying comfortable. ;)

I'd recommend a couple of the online demostrations of Aperture before doing the trials. The trials aren't going to give you the logical understand of the concept. The problem with making the switch is your brain thinks in two halfs. One side Photoshop and the other iView Media. Lightroom and Aperture address both... so yes, you're re-learning two programs at once. But then BAM... they both float together seamlessly and all of a sudden, you get it.

. Like I said, it's probably comparable to Lightroom... so at least you'd see the direction these programs are going. This really is a new chapter is managing digital assetts and one I feel is very important going forward.

[John Thawley]

Helpful Read:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmedia/2007/01/26/a-hitchhikers-guide-to-aperture.html

Many "Quick Tours" available here.

http://www.apple.com/aperture/quicktours/

[Todd Corzett]

I'm not sure you're understanding me. I used iView for four years. It's not even close.
I guess not. But from what I can tell (and I'll give the Aperture trial a go tonight on my desktop) the file handling will not improve my workflow; rather hurt it.

Forget Aperture's image editing for now.
This is exactly what I want to do. All I want to compare is the ability to caption the images (as THIS is the most time consuming part of my workflow... and I'm not going to increase this step just to save a few seconds in editing/uploading). I admit fully, and never said anything to the contrary, that the image editing/processing capibilities of iView are EXTREMELY poor compared to Apeture/LR. But, for me, I don't use iView for anything more than sorting/captions.

First, I will tell you, PhotoMechanic does a MUCH better job of what you're describing than iView. The other bad news is Microsoft purchased iView. So you can be sure it will become a dumbed down piece of junk.
The only feature in PhotoMechanic that would make my process faster is their ability to pull captions from a file, but since I'd have to generate that file new every race anyhow... it's no faster than what I do right now. Yes, iView will become dumbed-down, but since I'm still using 1.5.7 (and actually dislike the features of the new versions) it doesn't matter what Microsoft does to it.

If you're sticking with a windows machine,
Windows machine :eek: I've been on a Mac since '84 and wouldn't be caught dead with a PC for anything other than gaming (which these days I'd just do on the intel-based Macs) - I'm happy to admit that I am a Mac-zealot :D . I can't run Aperture on my laptop because it's only 800Mhz (about half the minimum req.).

PhotoMechanic is much better tool for sorting and organizing. At lest PhotoMechanic will let you download multiple cards at the same time... and backup to a second location during import. iView doesn't even allow you to create IPTC stationary.... or FTP from within the application.
Candy that doesn't really help me... I have one card reader, FTP takes a fraction of a second to drag one folder into Fetch, etc.

I'm somewhat dumbfounded that you keep on about what Aperture won't do when you've never used it. I mean c'mon... I know both progarms inside and out.
I'm asking questions about how these programs would handle this sort of thing because I've not used them. I will try them out for myself tonight, but thought that I'd ask someone who may already know (like you :) )

FYI, Getty just developed a plug in for Aperture that uploads images on export directly from Aperture to their Servers. Here's a list of export plug-ins now available:

Aperture To Final Cut Pro
ApertureToGallery
ApertureToPBase
ApertureToPhanfare
ApertureToSmugMug
Digital Fusion
Digital Railroad
FlickrExport
Getty Images
iStockPhoto
Photoreflect
PhotoShelter
Pictage
SmugExport
Soundslides
YouSendit
FYI - I don't shoot for Getty :rolleyes:
Of that list, the only thing that I use is PhotoShelter and their uploader is as simple as dragging a single folder. I like the integration, but again... that is only a VERY small time savings compared to captioning.

And of course, you can use Apples Automator to automate other processes, though most are already built in.
That would require 10.4 :o

If you're comfortable, stick with what you've got... after all, growing your business and expanding your skills is all about staying comfortable. ;)
I have NO problems making changes... I just don't want to increase the most time consuming step of mine just to use a fancy new piece of software. If I'm going to spend the money on software (and a computer), it needs to provide me a functionality that I do not already have (which both do)... AND not increase the time that it takes for me to get my job done (which, if it's not able to caption quickly will kill any increases in effency).

I'll be home in a little while... I'll let you know what I think after some hands-on experience.

-Todd...

[Todd Corzett]

I'll let you know what I think after some hands-on experience.
Well, sorry for all of this...
I can't run either software without 10.4, so it looks like I'll not be able to try them out. I guess when 10.5 comes out I'll be sure to reinvestigate.

-Todd...