Photo editing/processing: Photoshop or???

[foghorn67]

May I ask how?

Lightroom is much more than bridge, all edits are non-destructive so no files are actually touched keeping all originals in tact. LR is a database used to import, catalog, and add keywords to photos for easy searching. You can rate photos, sort photos by certain exif criteria (lens used, body used), create virtual albums, apply presets upon import, and much more.

I think the biggest plus for LR over PS is the time it can save you. Try converting a batch of 200 files from RAW to JPEG while applying a custom tone curve, WB, and crop using Photoshop.

I know what it is. I use it everyday. But not sure if that was directed at me. Multiple quotes can help in situations like this.
Anyway, you can modify your swap file and tweak your catalog settings or break them up. Catalogs are everything about LR performance.

 

[pennylane]

May I ask how?

Lightroom is much more than bridge, all edits are non-destructive so no files are actually touched keeping all originals in tact. LR is a database used to import, catalog, and add keywords to photos for easy searching. You can rate photos, sort photos by certain exif criteria (lens used, body used), create virtual albums, apply presets upon import, and much more.

I think the biggest plus for LR over PS is the time it can save you. Try converting a batch of 200 files from RAW to JPEG while applying a custom tone curve, WB, and crop using Photoshop.

Bridge can do all those things (non-destructive raw editing, rating photos, sorting photos by exif criteria, being able to apply presets upon import, batch converting raw to jpeg)

LR is certainly faster. Adding keywords is definitely faster. I'm sure it's better for cataloging. Applying custom tone curves, WB, and cropping using Bridge is slower only because you have to open up each file to get to Camera Raw rather than having the editing platform embedded into lightroom. After you open the file (double click), the features in Camera Raw look almost identical to those in LR, so making the edits doesn't take any longer. It's just the extra clicks to open the file.

It seems like LR's major advantage is speed, while Photoshop's advantage is more detailed edits. I'm not a high volume shooter, so I chose the extra versatility of Photoshop over the speed benefit of LR. The more files you deal with, the more apparent LR's advantages are. But for my needs, I still haven't been convinced that I'm missing very much (even speedwise) by not having LR.