Lightzone/Lightroom/Aperture

I've been trying out Lightzone and Lightroom.

Lightzone seems very nice, and I think its editing features are quite
special. But I don't think an awful lot of its management/browser
features.

It takes an age to do anything (admittedly, my photos folder has some
1640 images in it, but still...).

Selecting multiple images (say to trash them) is slow because each image
selected is loaded up for editing at the same time - rather pointless
for simple management operations.

And, weirdly, you can't move an image to another folder from within
Lightzone (not very useful when you're trying to use it to keep your
pictures in order with it) and you can't use it to tag pictures with
anything except a rating.

All-in-all, I fail to see what the browser features of Lightzone do to
nearly double its price over the Basic version which lacks them.

Lightroom seems to be better thought-out in many ways, though I'd be
loath to send any of my hard-earned money to Adobe, and would much
prefer to see it go to a smaller developer.

It certainly seems to be faster, and does more of the things I'd expect
it to do (and some I wouldn't, such as the instant vignetting, which
will save a trip to Photoshop), and it does the things mentioned above
that Lightzone doesn't.

At the moment if I had to choose I'd choose Lightroom (I haven't looked
at Aperture yet).

Has anyone comments based on experience with these applications?

Daniele

On Apr 23, 10:40 am,
(D.M. Procida) wrote:
I've been trying out Lightzone and Lightroom.

Lightzone seems very nice, and I think its editing features are quite
special. But I don't think an awful lot of its management/browser
features.

It takes an age to do anything (admittedly, my photos folder has some
1640 images in it, but still...).

Selecting multiple images (say to trash them) is slow because each image
selected is loaded up for editing at the same time - rather pointless
for simple management operations.

And, weirdly, you can't move an image to another folder from within
Lightzone (not very useful when you're trying to use it to keep your
pictures in order with it) and you can't use it to tag pictures with
anything except a rating.

All-in-all, I fail to see what the browser features of Lightzone do to
nearly double its price over the Basic version which lacks them.

Lightroom seems to be better thought-out in many ways, though I'd be
loath to send any of my hard-earned money to Adobe, and would much
prefer to see it go to a smaller developer.

It certainly seems to be faster, and does more of the things I'd expect
it to do (and some I wouldn't, such as the instant vignetting, which
will save a trip to Photoshop), and it does the things mentioned above
that Lightzone doesn't.

At the moment if I had to choose I'd choose Lightroom (I haven't looked
at Aperture yet).

Has anyone comments based on experience with these applications?

Daniele
My experience with these 2 is much the same as yours. You can buy the
basic Lightzone as a plugin to Lightroom, using LR as the browser and
organizer, for $99 at the moment.
Actually the heart of LZ, the tone controls, are pretty much the same
as those in LR once you get used to it.
Regards,
Don

Don B wrote:
On Apr 23, 10:40 am,
(D.M. Procida) wrote:

At the moment if I had to choose I'd choose Lightroom (I haven't looked
at Aperture yet).

Has anyone comments based on experience with these applications?

Daniele
My experience with these 2 is much the same as yours. You can buy the
basic Lightzone as a plugin to Lightroom, using LR as the browser and
organizer, for $99 at the moment.
Actually the heart of LZ, the tone controls, are pretty much the same
as those in LR once you get used to it.

Lightroom doesn't currently support plugins; perhaps Don meant PS?

IAE, my betting is on LR. I use it extensively, and while v1 has some
bugs, they are not across the board, so it works fine on my Macs. I
tried Aperture some time ago, but just didn't have time to give it a
real work out.

--
John McWilliams

On Apr 24, 2:51 am, John McWilliams wrote:
Don B wrote:
On Apr 23, 10:40 am,
(D.M. Procida) wrote:

At the moment if I had to choose I'd choose Lightroom (I haven't looked
at Aperture yet).

Has anyone comments based on experience with these applications?

Daniele
My experience with these 2 is much the same as yours. You can buy the
basic Lightzone as a plugin to Lightroom, using LR as the browser and
organizer, for $99 at the moment.
Actually the heart of LZ, the tone controls, are pretty much the same
as those in LR once you get used to it.

Lightroom doesn't currently support plugins; perhaps Don meant PS?

IAE, my betting is on LR. I use it extensively, and while v1 has some
bugs, they are not across the board, so it works fine on my Macs. I
tried Aperture some time ago, but just didn't have time to give it a
real work out.

--
John McWilliams
John, maybe plugin is the wrong term, but LZ and LR interconnect.
Regards,
Don

Lightroom will NEVER support plug-ins. It will once Adobe gets the
development kit out support third party modules. But it will never support
Photoshop plug-ins.

As for Lightzone being used with LR you can use LZ as an export option so
that you can export an image from LR to LZ for editing and then go back to
LR. That has nothing to do with plug-ins or modules.

=(8)

=(8) wrote:

here's where judicious quoting helps....

Lightroom will NEVER support plug-ins.

Never say never!

It will once Adobe gets the
development kit out support third party modules. But it will never
support Photoshop plug-ins.

I didn't imply it would support PS plug-ins.

As for Lightzone being used with LR you can use LZ as an export option
so that you can export an image from LR to LZ for editing and then go
back to LR. That has nothing to do with plug-ins or modules.

Thanks; didn't know that.

--
john mcwilliams

"John McWilliams" wrote in message
...
=(8) wrote:

here's where judicious quoting helps....

Lightroom will NEVER support plug-ins.

Never say never!

It will once Adobe gets the development kit out support third party
modules. But it will never support Photoshop plug-ins.

I didn't imply it would support PS plug-ins.

As for Lightzone being used with LR you can use LZ as an export option so
that you can export an image from LR to LZ for editing and then go back
to LR. That has nothing to do with plug-ins or modules.

Thanks; didn't know that.

--
john mcwilliams

In this case NEVER is NEVER. Lightroom doesn't have the foundations to
handle Photoshop Plug-ins. This was talked about in a Podcast not long ago.
Lightroom is lacking many of the things that allows Plug-ins to work. Also,
this is not the area that Lightroom was designed for, it is the area that
Photoshop was designed for. Just like Photoshop will never allow you to use
Lightroom modules because it too doesn't posses the code needed to support
them.

When you use the term plug-in you are referring to Adobe Photoshop Plug-ins.
Lightroom uses modules which are not plug-ins. Now you may think this
picking a nit but it is not. Adobe personal will also correct you. There is
also no need to confuse newbie's needlessly unless one derives pleasure from
seeing other people in a panic when they can't get a Photoshop plug-in to
work.

=(8)

=(8) wrote:
"John McWilliams" wrote in message
...
=(8) wrote:

here's where judicious quoting helps....

Lightroom will NEVER support plug-ins.

Never say never!

It will once Adobe gets the development kit out support third party
modules. But it will never support Photoshop plug-ins.

I didn't imply it would support PS plug-ins.

Snipped bits out


In this case NEVER is NEVER. Lightroom doesn't have the foundations to
handle Photoshop Plug-ins. This was talked about in a Podcast not long
ago. Lightroom is lacking many of the things that allows Plug-ins to
work. Also, this is not the area that Lightroom was designed for, it is
the area that Photoshop was designed for. Just like Photoshop will never
allow you to use Lightroom modules because it too doesn't posses the
code needed to support them.

When you use the term plug-in you are referring to Adobe Photoshop
Plug-ins. Lightroom uses modules which are not plug-ins. Now you may
think this picking a nit but it is not. Adobe personal will also correct
you. There is also no need to confuse newbie's needlessly unless one
derives pleasure from seeing other people in a panic when they can't get
a Photoshop plug-in to work.

You do go on. I'm quite clear that LR does not, nor will it in the
forseeable future, support PS plugins.

There may be add-ons in the future, developed by third parties, that may
or may not be called plugins, but which will act like plugins to a
degree. They will not work in PS, and it's very unlikely that anyone
will go to the trouble to develop a plug in that'll work in both apps.

Unless you're Thomas Knoll or Cox, or Schewe, or .... someone in the
know from Adobe...

Who are you?

--
John McWilliams

"John McWilliams" wrote in message
. ..
=(8) wrote:
"John McWilliams" wrote in message
...
=(8) wrote:

here's where judicious quoting helps....

Lightroom will NEVER support plug-ins.

Never say never!

It will once Adobe gets the development kit out support third party
modules. But it will never support Photoshop plug-ins.

I didn't imply it would support PS plug-ins.

Snipped bits out


In this case NEVER is NEVER. Lightroom doesn't have the foundations to
handle Photoshop Plug-ins. This was talked about in a Podcast not long
ago. Lightroom is lacking many of the things that allows Plug-ins to
work. Also, this is not the area that Lightroom was designed for, it is
the area that Photoshop was designed for. Just like Photoshop will never
allow you to use Lightroom modules because it too doesn't posses the code
needed to support them.

When you use the term plug-in you are referring to Adobe Photoshop
Plug-ins. Lightroom uses modules which are not plug-ins. Now you may
think this picking a nit but it is not. Adobe personal will also correct
you. There is also no need to confuse newbie's needlessly unless one
derives pleasure from seeing other people in a panic when they can't get
a Photoshop plug-in to work.

You do go on. I'm quite clear that LR does not, nor will it in the
forseeable future, support PS plugins.

There may be add-ons in the future, developed by third parties, that may
or may not be called plugins, but which will act like plugins to a degree.
They will not work in PS, and it's very unlikely that anyone will go to
the trouble to develop a plug in that'll work in both apps.

Unless you're Thomas Knoll or Cox, or Schewe, or .... someone in the know
from Adobe...

Who are you?

--
John McWilliams

The reason on go on is because you don't get it. In Lightroom they or
modules just like the Library module, develop module, print module,
slideshow module, web module. They will be actual full new areas of the
program, not a little dialog box called up. They will be nothing like a
plug-in. Add to that they will work on RAW data without having to convert to
bitmap and that even more makes them not like a plug-in.

Adobe has made it clear. No plug-ins. However, there will be modules which
will be entirely new areas of the program .

=(8)

=(8) wrote:
"John McWilliams" wrote in message
. ..

Snipped bits out

You avoided the:

Who are you?

Are you a developer? Adobe insider? A person with a real name that you'd
be willing to state?

--

john mcwilliams

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
- Albert Einstein