> You have hit on what is my problem with LR, and to a degree Adobe, whom I
> think has a thought in the back of their heads to push photographers from PS
> to LR for some strange reason.
Some of you may recall that I was clam-happy with LR and the entire
concept of it from the very beginning. There were certainly issues,
but nothing that time wouldn't address. The underlying ACR converter
is still a mess, and the library/develop split personality is beyond
comprehension. But overall, it has become extremely powerful, not just
as a catalog system but a mighty fine editor too. I would like to
rearrange functions a bit, so I'm not constantly scrolling up and down
the toolbar. But it is very fast to edit images and everything is
> Anyway, I have always seen LR as an asset management program, which I don't
> need. With digital, I don't shoot all that many more frames than I did with
> film.In my 40 some years of shooting professionally, I developed a disipline
> and ability ot make every shot count. Shooting a 'blad with only a 12 exp
> back further honed that skill. So, I don't need a complex aset management
> program, I have a precess that serves my purposes perfectly.
OK, guilty as charged. I shot 470 pictures yesterday. There was a
logic behind that, but it did make for a mess to sort through later.
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/