Digital Photo Pro or LR3

Importing is about building a database that Lightroom manages. Collections is about building portfolios and collections based on different criteria. I have opted for a single master directory with individual directories for shoots and subjects. Then I will use collections to better organize the entire library of images and be free from the physical requirements of file and directory naming and assignment. CS5 is an awesome tool and I suspect Bridge provides some kind of image management though I have so little experience in Bridge. Another amazing aspect is that a single raw file in Lightroom can be represented a number of ways without bloating the original file. I decided to convert all CR2's to DNG's for vendor abstraction. Tiff's remain Tiff's.

R1200GS wrote in post #11671556
I have LR3 here at work as well as CS5. We use CS5 for the captures we do with the Sinar and LR3 for the stuff we do with DSLR's and since I don't do any work with the DSLR I haven't needed LR3. That's why I'm not familier with it. I guess it's just a learning curve thing. I'd like to just drag a file to the LR icon in the dock. When I do that I get an import dialog box that asks me if I want to convert to a DNG. It's already a TIF. No, I don't want to convert to a DNG, just open it. I guess I just don't think like a cataloger. The whole "import" thing confuses me. I drag the same file to the CS5 icon and bam, it opens it. Besides like I said I really like working in layers. I'm not knocking LR. It seems to be a great tool lots of people like. Photoshop just work for me.

There may be a setting you need to set to allow the drag and drop.

Here is the link to LR3 forums. If you post the question, I am sure you will have your answer by days end.

http://www.lightroomfo​rums.net/forum.php

Thanks for the link

TomCross13 wrote in post #11661995
For some reason I feel like because the canon software is specifically made for Canon cameras it should produce better results.

Well, you own both, you can try it and see for yourself. DPP is good (and free! Woohoo!) but LR does a lot more than just convert raw images.

TomCross13 wrote in post #11661995
All I really do is adjust color temp, sharpness, and trim the images. Would LR3 be just as good for this purpose and are there other things I should be exploring in LR3 for better photos?

Like anything, if you only take a few pictures a week, there's not much you can do to streamline your work flow that will make a huge difference. For me, LR was the best thing ever to happen to my digital photography, but obviously different people have different preferences.

One thing LR is particularly good at is syncing settings - so if you take a bunch of pictures in similar lighting & similar exposure, you can adjust them all at once. You can also sync crop settings. I like that I can import them & tweak them fairly quickly, and then just export the ones I want to publish. it's tied in nicely with Photoshop and frankly, since I got LR I probably use PS on 3% of my photos instead of 97%. It's just set up nicely to mimic a photographer's thought process, while PS is really a much more powerful and flexible tool. Cataloging is great too, I think the print feature is easy.... much easier than printing from PS.

As for raw processing, some folks prefer the results from DPP, some prefer CaptureOne and some are OK with adobe.

I use both for different reasons. In LR3 I love the targeted adjustments like the brush and gradient filters. There are also many free presets and tutorials for LR3 available to help the learning curve.

It amazes me that there are so many similar threads. Anyone care to help work out a thread about, say... the top 5 PP solutions and compare/contrast them in an unbiased way?

I enjoy the NR capabilities of LR3, sepcifically, as I prefer to shoot with available light, and often am shooting at ISO3200 or 6400. I personally believe the cataloging of LR is far superior to Bridge (and there are dozens of threads that banter this point back and forth).

As for direct comparison to DPP, I've never been a fan. I've shot on a Canon dSLR since the 350D, and have tried DPP a few times through a few version. It feels, to me, exactly like a free utility. It's very basic, and gets some certain tasks done quickly. LR allows much more flexibility, in my opinion.