| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Lightroom or Photomechanic
Marcell van Aswegen, Photographer
 |
Pretoria | GP | South Africa | Posted: 4:20 AM on 07.22.09 |
->> Firstly, I must state that ive been using lightroom since its release, actually ive been using it before that when it was still RAW Shooter. Most of the Agency photogs in South Africa, use PM in the field for sorting, ranking, and for the captioning.
All of which LR can do aswell. Im starting my own agency for freelance sport togs, and have a website designed basically like a stock site, where publications can view and buy photo's from the bigger events, while the event is still in process. Mostly Motorsport, but other sports aswell.
Who uses PM and why do you prefer it over LR?
Is it more compatiple with the FTP transfering etc...?
I havent used PM, so I have no idea why it would be better?
Sorry for the ignorance... :) |
|
Juerg Schreiter, Photographer
|
Fort Lauderdale | FL | USA | Posted: 7:04 AM on 07.22.09 |
->> Marcell,
why not download a trial version and give it a whirl ?
I don't use Lightroom so I can't compare, but PM is a great piece of software.
J |
|
Stanley Leary, Photographer
|
Roswell | GA | USA | Posted: 8:56 AM on 07.22.09 |
->> Photomechanic is a browser and Lightroom isn't.
I prefer to ingest with Photomechanic and do my edit as far as what to keep and discard.
Once I am done here then I ingest into Lightroom, but then I only ingest without moving the photos.
Lightroom is a database which allows you to edit. |
|
Bob Ford, Photographer
|
Lehighton | Pa | USA | Posted: 8:59 AM on 07.22.09 |
->> Marcell Photo Mechanic is MUCH faster than Lightroom for sorting, ranking, and captioning.
As Juerg suggested you should download the trial at http://www.camerabits.com and give it a whirl. I think you'll be impressed. |
|
Matt Barton, Photographer
|
Lexington | KY | USA | Posted: 9:00 AM on 07.22.09 |
| ->> I use both. I think PM is better/faster at renaming, editing and captioning. Then I import the folder into Lightroom for adjustments and keywording. I suppose I should use LR for everything but it's really hard to kick that PM habit. |
|
Kevin Krows, Photographer
 |
Forsyth | IL | USA | Posted: 9:25 AM on 07.22.09 |
->> Agree with Matt. Both. I think you'll find that each program specializes in critical workflow functions. Also suggest that you include PS to do the things that LR cannot (layers, design, etc.).
PM - the workhorse when it comes to ingesting files, sorting, culling, renaming, uploading ftp, etc.
LR - editing files (JPEG/RAW)
PS - advanced post production portrait cleanup, layers, design.
Not the least expensive route but you'll save a ton of time in post production by owning all three.
Just my thoughts. |
|
Matthew Sauk, Photographer
|
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 9:46 AM on 07.22.09 |
->> I use PM when ingesting work related images and later import into LR for archiving.
PM is without a doubt one of the best programs for captioning, sorting, deleting, etc... |
|
Darren Whitley, Photographer
|
Maryville | MO | USA | Posted: 9:48 AM on 07.22.09 |
| ->> I use Photo Mechanic for image selection and Lightroom as a digital darkroom. I do not like the Lightroom method of selecting images, nor do I like it as a catalog. The reason I do like Lightroom is that it will allow me to leave my original files from a multiple number of events in place and then export new files. In the past we would have to copy the files from multiple events elsewhere when we selected images for a project and then convert them. |
|
Joe Andras, Photographer
|
Orange County | CA | USA | Posted: 9:49 AM on 07.22.09 |
->> I use PM and LR together too, mainly because PM recognizes in-camera tagging and LR does not.
I tag my likely keepers in camera. I use PM to ingest my files, rename them, filter on tagged files, and then drag the tagged files to a LR folder from within PM.
Then, I open LR, import the tagged files from the LR folder, and apply something to them to distinguish them in some way (I assign one star, but you could color them red, whatever). If in a hurry, I work with the tagged files only to get some shots ready for publication.
Later on, or if I have time post-game, I drag and drop the remaining shots from the PM folder to the LR folder and, from within LR, import from the LR folder again. LR will ignore the already-imported files and just add the untagged ones to the same databse.
I do the rest of my editing and more careful review of both tagged and untagged files within LR. |
|
Neil Turner, Photographer
|
Bournemouth | UK | United Kingdom | Posted: 11:24 AM on 07.22.09 |
->> Sometimes I think that I use Photo Mechanic simply because I always have done. Then I try Aperture and Lightroom again and switch back to Photo Mechanic. It has a whole host of photographer friendly features that allow you to work quickly, accurately and with confidence. Keyboard shortcuts make life better and I find that PM uses them very well indeed.
Unlike everyone else I use Photoshop CS4 for my RAW conversions and find that the PM and CS4 combination to be a winning combination.
These days the IPTC standards are well defined and it no longer matters which application you use and that has to be the most important point for someone running an agency. |
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 11:29 AM on 07.22.09 |
->> I will throw this out there. I was a PM to PS person until a friend showed me how to use Aperture. If you have a Mac, I think Aperture is the way to go. Many of the best functionality of PM and LR are in Aperture - AND it is one stop shopping. Everything is in one program - sorting, editing, and (if you get Aperturetoftp from Uberupload for $25) transmitting.
We were at the Kentucky Derby editing photos and I was plodding along, PM, to PS, over and over. We both edited about 40 photos. He was done and I was only halfway done. I told him to show me how. Since then I have am literally saving 30-50% of the time I used to waste.
The workflow is simple. You can set up the folders an captions ahead of time, just like PM. You don't need to navigate in and out of programs to or multiple screens to edit and caption. There are three tabs on the left hand side. One for projects, one for metadata and the final for editing. Just click a tab to do what you want to do.
And, if you really want to go to Photoshop, or Genuine Fractals or whatever, you can. The editing is simple. Captioning easy with the presets. And, you can copy and stamp adjustments to photos or metadata with ease.
All good stuff. |
|
Derick Hingle, Photographer
|
Hammond | LA | USA | Posted: 11:44 AM on 07.22.09 |
| ->> I use both, I ingest and caption in photo mechanic then copy the files I intend to transmit to another folder and open those files in lightroom and make any minor tweaks to the images that may be needed. Both tools are invaluable to my workflow today. |
|
Steven Ickes, Photographer
|
Mechanicsburg | PA | USA | Posted: 11:52 AM on 07.22.09 |
| ->> Like many who've already posted, I use Photo Mechanic and Lightroom. Most of the time and depending upon what I'm shooting I only need to use Photo Mechanic which makes everything fast and simple. I'd rather take the time before hand to get my camera settings tweaked (WB, exposure, etc) so that I can simply ingest into PM, edit, apply IPTC pad, caption, and crop without having to open images in Lightroom. |
|
Louis Lopez, Photographer
|
Fontana | CA | USA | Posted: 11:59 AM on 07.22.09 |
->> Lightroom does not play well with all servers, images are not recognized and or causing freezes and crashes on some syndication systems. Not just one server either, multiple servers and from different agency and publications.
Have found the common thread in the cases that images were adjusted in lightroom.
The fix is quite simple resave all files in photoshop and problem solved. even easier just don't use lightroom at all.
my workflow is Photo Mechanic and Photoshop CS4. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 11:59 AM on 07.22.09 |
->> For speed, there is nothing better than Photomechanic. If you need a quick way to pick selects, caption and do file renaming and basic organization, you just can't beat photomechanic. For any quick turnaround field work Photomechanic is the gold standard.
Lightroom is a pig. They know it's a pig - they even implemented "background" processing to fake good performance because natively it's just too slow. But it also does a lot. If you have large batches of images that need similar color corrections, Lightroom is awesome. Lightroom does a pretty good job when it comes to organization - it's easy to sort/search with just about any combination of attributes imaginable. It plays well with photoshop.
I like Lightroom, but I always find the performance issues get in the way. Even on tricked out computers with lots of memory and fast disk drives it feels slow. I end up in photoshop for most things because for me it's a lot more efficient. Photomechanic and Photoshop seem to work as a team quite well for me. I find I use Lightroom for searching/sorting...however I've even been thinking about moving to something like Extensis instead (would love to hear opinions from people who have used both).
If I didn't have photoshop or wasn't comfortable in it, Lightroom would probably suffice for most of my image editing needs. But I'd still want photomechanic for quick and dirty edit/transmit. |
|
Wally Nell, Photographer
 |
CAIRO | EG | EGYPT | Posted: 3:51 PM on 07.22.09 |
| ->> Yes I echo that, PM is THE standard in ingesting, captioning and other browsing functions. I have tried LR and it is a hog on resources. (In my opinion anyway.) If I need to tweak images, I would normally do it on selective parts of the image, rarely on the whole image; and there is just nothing like PS that does that better. So PM and PS is what works for me. |
|
Marcell van Aswegen, Photographer
|
Pretoria | GP | South Africa | Posted: 5:12 PM on 07.22.09 |
->> whoah, lots of replies, thanx guys.
Seems there is a common understanding that PM is the faster route, although LR never felt slow for me.
Im interested to know how you guys would sort and discard in lightroom, as the method I use is very quick ( atleast I think so)
I set the filters to only show unflagged photos. then i use the "x" key to discard and the "p" key to pick, and each time i discard or pick the photo it dissapears because ive set the filter to show only unflagged shots. So I "x" & "p" until theres none left and then set the filter to show only my picks. Very fast in my opinion. I hope im not stating the obvious. I must admit working with LR for some time Ive picked up all the shortcuts so it is a lot easier for me.
I will download PM trial and try and figure out what you guys mean with the better speed, tagging etc.
@Scott Serio: I tend to afree with you, apperture's raw converter is a tiny bit better than ACR in PS & LR. But i miss certain features from lightroom, so decided on LR instead.
I will investigate the matter, and try out PM. I hope all you guys is just biased having used it for so long, haha :)
Thanx so far guys, its nice hearing everyones workflow's.
MvA |
|
Will Schneekloth, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
New Brunswick | NJ | USA | Posted: 5:14 PM on 07.22.09 |
->> As many here have said I have and do use both but I find myself going back and forth a lot.
Photomechanic is simply the best software for ingesting, captioning, sorting, and culling your set quickly and simply. PM just blows by LR's Library module in terms of how quickly it generates useful thumbnails, and it never feels like it's getting in my way.
I've been using Lightroom to do my batch toning and keywording, I love the search and database features that let me look through thousands of photos from multiple shoots, and the basic photo toning and spot editing is quite good, and I leave just the little bit of really specific work I have to do to Photoshop CS3.
So, like many, I import, caption and edit my shoot in PM, then ship them over to LR for keywords, toning, and uploading to Photoshelter/SmugMug/ftp to finish up the job. |
|
Marcell van Aswegen, Photographer
|
Pretoria | GP | South Africa | Posted: 4:42 AM on 07.23.09 |
->> Ok I installed the trial!
I see what you guys mean about the speed of which the high quality thumbs are generated, I havent figured everything out yet, but will give feedback of my experiences, hehe |
|
Nigel Farrow, Photographer
|
Suffolk | UK | United Kingdom | Posted: 6:10 AM on 07.23.09 |
| ->> Marcell, one point that I haven't seen mentioned yet re Photo Mechanic is the excellent customer service. Post a question re its use on the forum and you usually have a response from the developers within half an hour if not quicker. There is also a downloadable pdf manual which explains how to use the most basic functions within minutes and much of the rest fairly soon after. Add to that the developers willingness to consider feature requests (they are reported to be working on a cataloguing add on) and you can see why it is so popular in a business that so often has companies trying to tell us what we want. |
|
Marcell van Aswegen, Photographer
|
Pretoria | GP | South Africa | Posted: 7:51 AM on 07.23.09 |
| ->> That makes sense, thanx Nigel |
|
Matt Kartozian, Photographer
|
Scottsdale | AZ | USA | Posted: 1:41 PM on 07.23.09 |
| ->> I do thing a little different than most here it seems. I ingest, sort, edit and resize with LR then caption in PM. |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
|
Lake Oswego | OR | USA | Posted: 2:40 PM on 07.23.09 |
->> I am on the other camp, I guess. I took the D65 Workshop with Seth Resnick and was immersed into Lightroom and how to use it. I find with the way I have set up the preferences, it works as fast or as slow as I want it to. It IS a database, whereas PM is a browser, and in that end, I use Bridge. Not the best, but for my workflow, it is pretty fluid. I have a speed setting on my laptop when I am in the field, and when I come home, I have Lightroom set up for high quality previews which is slower, so, if I field edit, when I ingest into the master database, it's slower but I also am not generally at the computer when it does it.
I prefer Lightroom, but I had a workshop three weeks before the first time I used PM. |
|
Arthur Spragg, Photographer
|
San Angelo | TX | USA | Posted: 5:04 PM on 07.23.09 |
->> Mr. Trimble makes an excellent point about the D65 Lightroom workshop with Seth Resnick. If you're serious about learning to use Lightroom effectively and maximizing its amazing capabilities, there is no better workshop or teacher than Seth. Money and time well spent for hands-on instruction from a very sharp mind and talented member of Lightroom's development team. If nothing else, his images will inspire. Reading an instruction book about Lightroom is only scratching the surface of the program's capabilities. Photo Mechanic is an excellent program as well... whatever program best suits the individual photographer's needs and workflow is all that really matters. Select carefully and thoughtfully before committing the money and time to whatever you choose. Learn as much as possible (hands on) before you commit. You owe it to yourself to learn a program as thoroughly as possible if you choose to make an investment in it no matter what that program is...
I've embraced Lightroom from its beginning-it works for me so fully (and quickly) that I rarely use Photoshop (but I'm sure glad it's handy). |
|
Daniel Malmberg, Photographer
|
Huskvarna | Sweden | Sweden | Posted: 8:37 PM on 07.23.09 |
->> Personally i have done a hole lot of work to find a workflow that is as fast as possible.
Since i always shot in RAW i work with both Photo Mechanic and LightRoom 2.
If there is anyone reading this, and understands Swedish.
You might be interested in my blog.
Where i do some blogging about my workflow:
http://photo-it.net/fotoblogg/ |
|
Jack Kurtz, Photographer
|
Phoenix | AZ | United States | Posted: 10:38 PM on 07.23.09 |
->> I've been using Lightroom for a couple of years now. It requires a different workflow from PhotoMechanic (or Bridge) and Photoshop but once I figured out the workflow issues it was like a light came on. I hardly even start Photoshop anymore, I am able to do 90+ percent of my work in just LR. (The only time I use Photoshop is when I have to use Noise Ninja.)
jack |
|
Dirk Weaver, Photographer, Assistant
|
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 11:57 PM on 07.23.09 |
| ->> Just out of curiosity, is anyone using a Photo Mechanic/ Aperture combination? |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|