AG Schnozz wrote:
>> The problem I have with Lightroom is that in my case, I see it
>> as a redundant piece of software.
>
> Somewhat, yes. I'd definitely classify it as a tool
> specifically designed for the working pro dealing with large
> quantities of photographs within specific projects or
> assignments. For the casual or low-volume shooter, I think it's
> pretty much a waste of time/investment as it is almost totally
> redundant.
Ken,
Thanks for offering your point of view. I never thought of Lightroom as
having advantages in high volume, pro work. I don't think in those
terms because I don't work in that way. It's one of the reasons why I
left commercial, industrial sound engineering (radio spots and the like)
and went into album and demo music recording years ago. I couldn't
handle the fast pace of commercial recording where answers were needed
on the fly and there was little room for contemplation. I'm a bit of an
anxious person and the mix of my personality and commercial recording
was disastrous.
I still think my idea of modules and having the editing software as the
core (PSP, CS2, PWP etc) is a good one. There would need to be
standards set so all RAW converter modules, printing modules and
whatever other modules would be required would work with any image
editing software. But as I see it, that would require cooperation
within the software industry instead of extreme competition as it exists
now. That way, camera manufacturers could stick to RAW converters (BTW,
standards would need to be set as to what functions would exist in a RAW
converter) and let image processing be handled by other companies who
seem to do it better. I wish Olympus would make their Olympus Studio
RAW converter available as a separate program as I don't need the rest
of it as the image processing part is slow and poorly designed and at
the moment, I don't need the "studio" aspect of it.
My idea of modules reminds me of the way the old darkroom worked. When
I purchased an enlarger I didn't have to purchase the manufacturer's
paper, chemistry, lens or other darkroom supplies. I had a choice. Can
you imagine that if every time you bought an enlarger you had to buy the
entire darkroom setup including the darkroom sink? And can you imagine
if you liked the darkroom sink offered by another enlarger manufacturer,
you had to buy their entire setup to get just the sink and work around
all the extra junk you got? It's madness and that's how I see the
current state of digital photography software.
Richard L
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|