Any Bibble users still around?

[kbreit]

Since Lightroom and Aperture came about, it seems like most people use one of those two. I still am on Bibble Pro. Anyone else using it instead of moving to the more popular alternatives? If so, what is keeping you back?

[RDU-Hoo]

I'm still using it. I'm more comfortable with it then LR.

[kbreit]

So I expand on this question. If you moved from Bibble to LR or Aperture, why?

[mbellot]

I'm still using Bibble Pro.

I'm avoiding LR for several reasons, not the least of which is Adobe's continuous escalation of their licensing insanity. Not to mention the fact they don't support Windows 2000 (my OS of choice).

On top of all that the centralized database concept has never sat well with me. Numerous reports of corrupt databases bringing users to their knees doesn't do much to assuage my fears.

Aperture only runs on Macs, not computers, so thats out too. :p

Bibble desperately needs an update, but its still the best tool for me.

[kbreit]

I tried LR and didn't love its workflow. I love Bibble how it has the workqueues which I just add photos too. Then I am narrowed down to a few photos which are my favorites. It changes the scope of what I'm working on and makes it feel more manageable.

I also don't like the centralized database concept. It seems dangerous. Meanwhile, Bibble places small files which are just there next to the RAW files.

Bibble runs great on my Mac ;)...and my Windows box...and my Linux box.

Yes, Bibble really needs an update. Bibble 5 should be good based on the time they've been working on it. I can't believe it won't be out this year though, so I'm hanging in for the ride. If I do leave Bibble (I don't see it now) I don't know what I'll go to.

[Rellik]

On top of all that the centralized database concept has never sat well with me. Numerous reports of corrupt databases bringing users to their knees doesn't do much to assuage my fears.

That's where backup comes into play. Anyone who doesn't is just playing with fire. And this applies to any important data.

[kbreit]

That's where backup comes into play. Anyone who doesn't is just playing with fire. And this applies to any important data.

Unless you're using revision based backups, I'm not convinced that this is a good method. I'd have to believe that the entire database doesn't have to get corrupted, just a portion of it. So if one folder gets corrupted, even if you back it up, you still have a broken database. Version control lets you step back in time to find where the problem occurred which makes it one better. But one database still can be corrupt for a long time without the user knowing.

[frankgindc]

I still use both LR and Bibble, but started using LR more than Bibble for two reasons: 1) DAM/cataloging functions and 2) speed on my old Powerbook (this is no longer an issue with my new laptop, but Bibble was much slower than LR on the old one).

Meanwhile, Bibble probably does better RAW conversions than LR, has editing plugins, and has *far* better NR and sharpening options (which are not tied to another $600 program made by Adobe)-- and it has the best tech support forums I've every seen for any product, with lots of programmer activity and a good user group.

So.......I've got my $129 Bibble Pro Lifetime license so I CAN'T WAIT for version 5. Then we'll see how it compares to LR. If Bibble handles the DAM functions fairly well, I could see myself jumping back. If it handled DNG that would be a no brainer b/c then I could maintain my editing recipes for each image that I did in LR.

Anyway, the next few months will be interesting.
Frank

[kbreit]

I wouldn't mind cataloging functions in Bibble. But for today, I just use the Finder on my Mac and it works fine. My photos are sorted by date. So cataloging would be nice. Importing, tagging, and rating thousands of photos seems terrifying.

I do love some of the functions that Bibble has. Their workflow, automatic correction based on lens and camera type, a few things like that.

Version 5 should be good. It's taken them most of forever. I do think it'll beat Duke Nukem Forever out though.

[agedbriar]

I'm not attracted to Adobe's marketing attitude, pricing included.

I have Bibble Lite. It's powerful. Almost all the adjustments are done within it. For the occasional additional tweaks and regular sharpening with Focal Blade, I use Serif's PhotoPlus at 1/10th the PS price.

[condyk]

Since Lightroom and Aperture came about, it seems like most people use one of those two. I still am on Bibble Pro. Anyone else using it instead of moving to the more popular alternatives? If so, what is keeping you back?

You serious?

Bibble gives superior results and they come out with versions for new camera's quickly.

[lungdoc]

I really like Bibble Lite, I can do 95% of my PP needs with it in a quick and easy fashion; I use PS for the rare picture that is worthy of more detailed editing with layers etc. One thing I hate with Adobe is that they don't support new camera models for older software versions - if I buy a 40D I can't use CS2/Bridge on the RAW files anymore. Bibble upgrades that stuff for free, with Bibble for RAW I can use CS2 "forever" or at least until I find something I really need that it can't do. I don't have complex DAM needs, I just store files by year/month/shooting date with a folder in each month for the processed jpgs.

[NorCalAl]

I think I have every raw convertor known to man. Bibble is basically my favorite. For some shots I like DxO a little more - like for blown highlights, but Bibble is superior for most things, to me anyway. For simplicity (and where not many changes/fixes are needed), sometimes I use DPP. C1 is also up there for me. A lot of times, I'll do a bunch of tests, use C1, DPP, DxO and Bibble just to see differences. Bibble and C1 usually win.

As to LR, I used it and don't really care for it. I don't remember why - I used it when it first came out.

For the record, also used (and like the results of, but not the interface) Raw Therapee. Good price tho!!

[kbreit]

You serious?

Bibble gives superior results and they come out with versions for new camera's quickly.

Oh, I'm not bashing Bibble. I use it, love it, and don't really have much of a desire to move off it. But all my friends use Aperture or LR and I am curious why they moved away from Bibble (or whatever they were using).

[PixelMagic]

Perhaps one of your friends who moved away from Bibble to Lightroom could correct the misinformation in this thread. First of all, Lightroom users aren't locked into a central database...a user can elect to write metadata directly to the images; thus creating XMP sidecar files for RAW images and for other formats like DNG, TIFF, JPEG - saving editing instructions directly in the file header.

Also, catalog corruption is hardly a problem. Lightroom catalogs are created in mySQL, the most popular open source database in the world. That means that anyone with the interest or desire could learn to understand how it works. The few problems I've seen reported about corrupted databases are usually resolved simply by optimizing the catalogs and there are two easy ways to do that in Lightroom. I have what most people would consider a HUGE catalog and simply by occasionally CTRL+clicking on the Lightroom desktop icon I can optimize my catalog.

Given the wholesale adoption of products like Lightroom and Aperture there has to be more reason to it than band wagon jumping.

[condyk]

I think I have every raw convertor known to man. Bibble is basically my favorite. For some shots I like DxO a little more - like for blown highlights, but Bibble is superior for most things, to me anyway. For simplicity (and where not many changes/fixes are needed), sometimes I use DPP. C1 is also up there for me. A lot of times, I'll do a bunch of tests, use C1, DPP, DxO and Bibble just to see differences. Bibble and C1 usually win.

For the record, also used (and like the results of, but not the interface) Raw Therapee. Good price tho!!

yeah, sounds about right. I liked the results in DxO but they didn't have a x64 version so I discounted it. Raw therapy I didn't like but as you say it is free ;-) C1 I didn't take to the interface and was slow. No one is better IMO but Bibble ticks most boxes.

Given the wholesale adoption of products like Lightroom and Aperture there has to be more reason to it than band wagon jumping.

It's all about personal preferences and to an great degree marketing spend influencing choice. Each to their own. I'd use anything that did the job for me in a way that producted high quality results, was simple and quick. Many people take whatever they know about and if it works they stick to it. Most therefore use either an Adobe or Apple product. Not many can be bothered researching, downloading and working through all the smaller company options.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Bibble convert myself.
I was a Rawshooter and Capture 1 fan, but Adobe ate Rawshooter and shat out Lightroom, and it stinks,.

C1 always made me pay them more every time I bought a new camera,...


... so now I use Bible and DPP only. ( about 80% bibble 20% DPP )

[TonyKInTexas]

I'm a BP fan and user. LR and Aperture both have issues for me in that I have to use their DB to import my stuff in (at least that is what my reading tells me). My workflow does not work that and I reject being forced in to someone else's concepts of workflow. :)

To say I'm excited about the BP5 screen shots is an understatement. But why did they have to take a photo of 6th street where Katz's is. I miss that place!

[TonyKInTexas]

Until BP4, I used BreezeBrowser, Capture One and the Canon supplied software.

Since BP4 I've let all the others, save for Canon's DPP, to go away and when I moved from Windows to OS X, only BP4 and Canon's software got installed. Well, okay Adobe Raw is on here only because it came with CS3. :)

Later,

Bibble convert myself.
I was a Rawshooter and Capture 1 fan, but Adobe ate Rawshooter and shat out Lightroom, and it stinks,.

C1 always made me pay them more every time I bought a new camera,...


... so now I use Bible and DPP only. ( about 80% bibble 20% DPP )

[PixelMagic]

<snip>


It's all about personal preferences and to an great degree marketing spend influencing choice. Each to their own. I'd use anything that did the job for me in a way that producted high quality results, was simple and quick. Many people take whatever they know about and if it works they stick to it. Most therefore use either an Adobe or Apple product. Not many can be bothered researching, downloading and working through all the smaller company options.

Your response does not take into account former Bibble users who dropped it and crossed over to Lightroom. I would imagine that there are a substantial amount of such people, hence the question in this thread if anyone is still using Bibble.

Interestingly enough, the Bibble developers are probably thinking, "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em." John Beardsworthy has a blog posting this weekend that suggests that Bibble is taking the same approach as Lightroom to cataloging and localized adjustments in version 5. So those who complained earlier in the thread about databases are probably not going to upgrade :)

http://www.beardsworth.co.uk/news/comment.php?id=1170_0_1_0_C


Competition

It's not a secret that I find Lightroom the best application for reviewing, adjusting and applying initial metadata - I'd pretty well finished processing last weekend's 2,100+ raw files by Wednesday morning. Equally obviously, it's not the only program that aspires to manage and process large numbers of pictures. I'm immediately referring to the Mac-limited Aperture, but it's interesting to see others moving into this database+processing arena. There are hints of a SmartFlow from Microsoft, and Robert Edwards pointed out some of the features that are going to be in Bibble 5 (http://bibblelabs.com/products/bibble5/). Click one screen grab and you'll see the cataloguing system, click the other and there's local adjustment within the application (ie not via some pixel rendering plugin .

I can't shake off the feeling that right now there's no Manchester United that wins the DAM+P market with style - man, yesterday (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/7381807.stm) was so tense - but just a bunch of functional Chelseas (without the kleptocratic funding of course). Eventually a winner will emerge, but let's hope that there's plenty of competition between at least four teams.

[mbellot]

Interestingly enough, the Bibble developers are probably thinking, "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em." John Beardsworthy has a blog posting this weekend that suggests that Bibble is taking the same approach as Lightroom to cataloging and localized adjustments in version 5. So those who complained earlier in the thread about databases are probably not going to upgrade :)

I saw the two "preview" screenshots this weekend and had much the same thought (database oriented).

I'll give it a whirl when it comes out, but I'm really hoping its not just a Lightroom wannabe.

[mantra]

i still use bibble
and the 5 version is going out
and is amazing fast rich of feature
:D

[frankgindc]

I'm (in)vested in both LR and Bibble right now. I'm mostly in LR for its cataloging capabilities, but I'm very hopeful about Bibble 5. I think there's going to continue to be an ongoing motivation at Adobe to jkeep LR hitched up to CS3/4/5 in a way that is just not affordable or efficient for users like me. On the other hand, I'm pretty confident that Bibble 5 will offer something *closer* to a LR/CS type functionality, without requiring the $500 version of CS.
Frank

[CyberDyneSystems]

IF Bibble adds lightroom style database features, I would not hate that, I would HOPE they would allow me to turn this feature off, and I would BET that no matter what Bobble will continue to run leaner and faster than Lightroom.

What Bibble does better;

Image quality. (better more accurate color with less work, and less noise introduced)
Noise handling (not talking NR, which I still tend to do in PSCS, but Bibble has that too)
Performance (faster conversions, leaner install and overhead, simply light on it's feet)
Stability: I've never had Bibble crash. I wish I could say the same for LR
Works well with multiple monitors (gee funny idea, multiple monitors in a graphics app? what a novel cutting edge concept? I'd imagine the graphics heavy weight Adobe would understand the importance here? No? how odd... )
Multi threaded. Will use as many CPU cores as you can throw at it.
Multi Platform: Pick and OS, any OS.

64Bit? Not yet, but they were the first with multi threaded, I bet they will be the first with a 64 bit version.

[mbellot]

Stability: I've never had Bibble crash. I wish I could say the same for LR


Never? I'll agree Bibble is great in just about every way you outlined, but when I work with a large ( > 1000 ) number of images in a single directory crashing becomes a fairly common thing.

I do hope Bibble gives the user control over how much (and even if) the database features get used. I've got my own wacky filing system, I don't need some company imposing their idea of the "right way" on me.

[DizzyV6P]

I need to figure out how to get my Bibble lite to go faster....lol. Any suggestions? I love my Bibble over LR and I can't wait to see Ver 5.