Digital BW, The Print

Having tried (and reviewed) a few image databases in the past I think 
Lightroom isn't bad. It's currently running a catalogue of over 250,000 
images for me, and really does pretty well. Mainly I rely on the 
keywording of images and Exif/IPTC data which I want to add to images 
anyway (and Lightroom lets you do fairly painlessly) though I'm also 
starting to use its collections.  It works better if you give some 
thought to renaming and storing files on input, and some photographers 
are pretty resistant to that. Getting a more powerful computer recently 
has made a difference for me. I certainly wouldn't consider going back 
to a separate database. LR isn't perfect, but it saves me a great deal 
of time and there is no real alternative.

LR has become almost a one-stop shop for digital images. Perhaps one in 
a thousand I need Photoshop for (and mainly to use a particular 
plugin.)  if you work on a Mac, then Aperture might be an alternative, 
but I use a PC. If I still worked mainly on film I'd probably have stuck 
to IMatch (http://www.photools.com/imatch-3-overview/ ) and Photoshop.

Peter

In Search of Atget: Paris 1984 http://is.gd/oRLosu
Still Occupied: A View of Hull 1977-85 http://is.gd/GwtO3o
Before the Olympics: The Lea Valley 1981-2010 http://is.gd/dp02K

Peter Marshall    -    Photographer, Writer: NUJ
petermarshall@...
_________________________________________________________________
>Re:PHOTO                       http://re-photo.co.uk
My London Diary                 http://mylondondiary.co.uk/
London's Industrial Heritage:   http://petermarshallphotos.co.uk/
The Buildings of London etc:    http://londonphotographs.co.uk/
River Lea/Lee Valley 1980-2010  http://river-lea.co.uk/
and elsewhere......


On 12/01/2012 13:56, mrjimbo wrote:
> I agree Eric.. Your post got me to  thinking.. As you folks know I use Lightroom.. Constructively , what might be replacement options.. Just Photoshop in it's present state doesn't get it. It lacks the visual cataloguing system Lightroom has... and it's worse then watching paint dry if your trying to processa few hundred images. It seems for many if it were added then that would end up being a detriment unless they did it totally differently.. So what are the options..I will openly admit that the catalogue system is not the greatest but how many would really take the time to use a real relational database properly..  I want to be a shooter not a data entry jock.. As far as the developing tools in Lightroom I actually like them for the most part.. Admittedly the program has holes but if this thread is really going to bring home any bacon maybe alternates should be discussed too.  Has anyone here actually  had a good data base their happy with? The only one I've fooled with is Cumulus.. Long ago I also built one in access but to be truthful that was a joke.
>
>
> jimbo
>