Using the fact that CS3 is so much better than CS2 and therefore must be good is like saying a crap from a poodle is smaller than the crap from a german shepherd and therefore it must smell okay
Honestly though, reading a 10MP RAW image off the disc and rendering it is going to take a while no matter how good the code is. One of the fundamental differeneces between Lighroom and a file browser is that Lightroom keeps a prerendered cache of recently viewed images so, once the cache is built, you can view 10MP RAWs at 2MP JPEG speeds.
Using the fact that CS3 is so much better than CS2 and therefore must be good is like saying a crap from a poodle is smaller than the crap from a german shepherd and therefore it must smell okay
Honestly though, reading a 10MP RAW image off the disc and rendering it is going to take a while no matter how good the code is. One of the fundamental differeneces between Lighroom and a file browser is that Lightroom keeps a prerendered cache of recently viewed images so, once the cache is built, you can view 10MP RAWs at 2MP JPEG speeds.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought Bridge cached thumbs, too?
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought Bridge cached thumbs, too?
Br doesn't pre-render files.
When you browase to a folder in Br, it references the XML data in said folder (or wherever you store your XML) and it 'looks' at the image like it's doing it for the first time.
I'm not sure, but I think Br caches each image as long as the application is running. As soon as you quit or exit. It dumps this cache.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought Bridge cached thumbs, too?
Lightroom caches a large enough version of each image to generate a full screen preview which means you can run through a folder white balance, adjusting exposure, and contrast really quickly. It only needs to go to the orginal RAW when you zoom into actual pixels.
Lightroom caches a large enough version of each image to generate a full screen preview which means you can run through a folder white balance, adjusting exposure, and contrast really quickly. It only needs to go to the orginal RAW when you zoom into actual pixels.
Now if I can just figure out what all those sliders do...
"Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to. Oh well."
-Fleetwood Mac
If you do any siginificant amout of photo processing, you owe it to yourself to use a RAID for your primary drive. These days you can install a 1TB RAID 0 in your computer for not much over $250. In terms of bang for the buck, that's the best deal going in computer upgrades.
RAID 0 ain't raid. R = redundant. RAID 0 isn't redundant. RAID 0 is only striping. If you want speed and protection, you need RAID 0 + 1.
Photography, as a powerful medium of expression and communications, offers an infinite variety of perception, interpretation and execution.--
Ansel Adams
RAID 0 ain't raid. R = redundant. RAID 0 isn't redundant. RAID 0 is only striping. If you want speed and protection, you need RAID 0 + 1.
For many of the reasons pointed out in this thread, RAID 1 is not a substitue for backups. If you are careful about backing up your working data to an offline or remote drive, all a RAID 1 does for you is save you the time of a restore when your working drive goes south.
Well after spending more time in Lightroom, I keep coming back to this thread to try and figure out the best way to do some things like the sidecar or not to sidecar the XMP info.
Anyone got any comments? The challenge I am having right now is that I want to do keywording in LR and do "Green eye" removal of the dog pictures in Photoshop and keep everything in sync.
Well after spending more time in Lightroom, I keep coming back to this thread to try and figure out the best way to do some things like the sidecar or not to sidecar the XMP info.
Anyone got any comments? The challenge I am having right now is that I want to do keywording in LR and do "Green eye" removal of the dog pictures in Photoshop and keep everything in sync.
If you need the info/changes to be available to bridge automatically, the you want to check the "auto-save to XMP" box. I think 1.3 or 1.3.1 finally fixed the performance issues associated with this.
I don't use Bridge at all so it's not an issue for me.
If you need the info/changes to be available to bridge automatically, the you want to check the "auto-save to XMP" box. I think 1.3 or 1.3.1 finally fixed the performance issues associated with this.
I don't use Bridge at all so it's not an issue for me.
Thanks. I am not using Bridge either but notice that when I do edits in PhotoShop CS3 I am losing keywords (but it could just as easily be operator error).
Next question, now that I checked it, is there a way to make sure that the change took place? In other words can I search for the XMP files?
Thanks. I am not using Bridge either but notice that when I do edits in PhotoShop CS3 I am losing keywords (but it could just as easily be operator error).
Next question, now that I checked it, is there a way to make sure that the change took place? In other words can I search for the XMP files?
Yes, the .xmp files should be located in the same directory as the images.
Once you have finished your initial processing changes in LR, all you have to do is export. I export them as jpeg, and keep them in a folder with the original raw files, the folder called Export. So each Raw folder by date and subject has inside an exportdate and subject, that way I have jpeg to work with, and I keep the original files clear, as LR uses non destructive processing. It keeps the originals original, you can always revert to the initial NEF (Nikon) file.
I then burn a DVD of the originals and the export folder with it. I might keep the export folder on my computer for a while, till I am done working with it on short time, but I do have original RAW files and a JPEG worked on version.
Because .xmp files are usually hidden. I don't know which OS your running, but the following should sort you out:
Wow. Looks like mac has all those ugly files that windows has too. They just make it tougher to see them.
OS X does not hide .xmp files by default.
It's just that the XMP files may not be generated -- if you use Lightroom you need to tell it to write to XMP files (instead of to its built in database), and if you're using Bridge there's an explicit setting for it to use the xmp sidecar files instead of storing the information in the cache. Not exactly sure of the setting though... I use LR for this
Maybe this was a setting I changed a while back and don't remember it. All my .xmp files are hidden though. I can see them in Br. But not in Windows Explorer.
Okay. So I tried the Show Hidden Files, nothing visible.
So I did a search/spotlight for xmp - nothing
So I here is the way I have stuff set in LR 1.3.1
and I created a few new image edits to make sure that it might need to be updated. Does it only take effect on catalog creation?
I'm guessing a bit here. But I'm pretty sure you can tell bridge to either write the .xmp files in the same folder as the images are stored or you can have one central location where all your .xmp files save themselves.
I'm guessing a bit here. But I'm pretty sure you can tell bridge to either write the .xmp files in the same folder as the images are stored or you can have one central location where all your .xmp files save themselves.
Anyone know about this on a Mac?
Yeah. Why would it be any different? Answer: no reason!
It's just that the XMP files may not be generated -- if you use Lightroom you need to tell it to write to XMP files (instead of to its built in database), and if you're using Bridge there's an explicit setting for it to use the xmp sidecar files instead of storing the information in the cache. Not exactly sure of the setting though... I use LR for this
I'll have to follow this thread. I set my XMP files to being local in the folder (going back several versions) because if you used the 'file browser' and moved the image file (like .CR2) to took the associated XMP with it. Could shuffle images around all day long and retain the link.
But it seems if you commit to LR and its database of XMP data, you can't switch back and forth between LR to manage you images and using Bridge or File Manager / Finder. You would hose either Lightroom's tracking of the images or break the link between the image file and the XMP sidecar. Is this correct?
"Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to. Oh well."
-Fleetwood Mac
Comments
Honestly though, reading a 10MP RAW image off the disc and rendering it is going to take a while no matter how good the code is. One of the fundamental differeneces between Lighroom and a file browser is that Lightroom keeps a prerendered cache of recently viewed images so, once the cache is built, you can view 10MP RAWs at 2MP JPEG speeds.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought Bridge cached thumbs, too?
Photos that don't suck / 365 / Film & Lomography
When you browase to a folder in Br, it references the XML data in said folder (or wherever you store your XML) and it 'looks' at the image like it's doing it for the first time.
I'm not sure, but I think Br caches each image as long as the application is running. As soon as you quit or exit. It dumps this cache.
Lightroom caches a large enough version of each image to generate a full screen preview which means you can run through a folder white balance, adjusting exposure, and contrast really quickly. It only needs to go to the orginal RAW when you zoom into actual pixels.
Now if I can just figure out what all those sliders do...
-Fleetwood Mac
-Jon
RAID 0 ain't raid. R = redundant. RAID 0 isn't redundant. RAID 0 is only striping.
Ansel Adams
For many of the reasons pointed out in this thread, RAID 1 is not a substitue for backups. If you are careful about backing up your working data to an offline or remote drive, all a RAID 1 does for you is save you the time of a restore when your working drive goes south.
Anyone got any comments? The challenge I am having right now is that I want to do keywording in LR and do "Green eye" removal of the dog pictures in Photoshop and keep everything in sync.
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
If you need the info/changes to be available to bridge automatically, the you want to check the "auto-save to XMP" box. I think 1.3 or 1.3.1 finally fixed the performance issues associated with this.
I don't use Bridge at all so it's not an issue for me.
Thanks. I am not using Bridge either but notice that when I do edits in PhotoShop CS3 I am losing keywords (but it could just as easily be operator error).
Next question, now that I checked it, is there a way to make sure that the change took place? In other words can I search for the XMP files?
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
Yes, the .xmp files should be located in the same directory as the images.
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
I then burn a DVD of the originals and the export folder with it. I might keep the export folder on my computer for a while, till I am done working with it on short time, but I do have original RAW files and a JPEG worked on version.
I use LR and photoshop... never use bridge.
http://photocatseyes.net
http://www.zazzle.com/photocatseyes
Is there a different location/extension in Mac world?
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
To view all the hidden files in finder. Open terminal and type in the following command:
Wow. Looks like mac has all those ugly files that windows has too. They just make it tougher to see them.
To hide all the hidden files again (make Finder act the way it did before):
*BTW, all you did was change false to true or vice versa.
OS X does not hide .xmp files by default.
It's just that the XMP files may not be generated -- if you use Lightroom you need to tell it to write to XMP files (instead of to its built in database), and if you're using Bridge there's an explicit setting for it to use the xmp sidecar files instead of storing the information in the cache. Not exactly sure of the setting though... I use LR for this
Oh well, it's not that then
So I did a search/spotlight for xmp - nothing
So I here is the way I have stuff set in LR 1.3.1
and I created a few new image edits to make sure that it might need to be updated. Does it only take effect on catalog creation?
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
Anyone know about this on a Mac?
Yeah. Why would it be any different? Answer: no reason!
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
I'll have to follow this thread. I set my XMP files to being local in the folder (going back several versions) because if you used the 'file browser' and moved the image file (like .CR2) to took the associated XMP with it. Could shuffle images around all day long and retain the link.
But it seems if you commit to LR and its database of XMP data, you can't switch back and forth between LR to manage you images and using Bridge or File Manager / Finder. You would hose either Lightroom's tracking of the images or break the link between the image file and the XMP sidecar. Is this correct?
-Fleetwood Mac
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact