[RGlasel]

it does add extra layers of complexity for the future, porting files, corruption, backup size, etc.

No more complex than living within the Photoshop ecosystem and in most LR user scenarios the final image is going to be exported to a different file format for printing, publishing online, etc. For most photographers (as opposed to digital artists) LR abstracts away much of the housekeeping duties of digital asset management and offers one-click (or at least quick and intuitive) methods for accomplishing most of the post-processing tasks photographers typically want to do. If for some reason LR is no longer supported for current operating systems, the original image files will be left just the way they came out of the camera to be edited in a different program, so obsolescence isn't really an issue, unless preserving every editing detail for every image for perpetuity is an absolute necessity.

[BarryE]

No more complex than living within the Photoshop ecosystem and in most LR user scenarios the final image is going to be exported to a different file format for printing, publishing online, etc. For most photographers (as opposed to digital artists) LR abstracts away much of the housekeeping duties of digital asset management and offers one-click (or at least quick and intuitive) methods for accomplishing most of the post-processing tasks photographers typically want to do. If for some reason LR is no longer supported for current operating systems, the original image files will be left just the way they came out of the camera to be edited in a different program, so obsolescence isn't really an issue, unless preserving every editing detail for every image for perpetuity is an absolute necessity.

Helpful again. It's is handy to have this Pentax community ...

[Bruce Clark]

If you don't wish to use Lightroom's database features, then don't even think about using Lightroom. If an image is not in Lightroom's database (catalog), Lightroom does not even know it exists, let alone be able to locate and edit it. It is simply not possible to edit an image in Lightroom without using the Library Module and it's powerful catalog. If you are in the habit of managing files using your computer's operating system, then Lightroom will lose track of them. The Windows command "Open with Lightroom" does not exist.

Lightroom and Photoshop are complimentary and you can switch between the two using the strengths of each. There is much that Lightroom cannot do, text, layers, etc for which Photoshop or equivalent is essential. There are editing functions I can do in Lightroom that I can't do in Photoshop and vice versa.

[RGlasel]

it has been suggested I shoot in RAW first.

Saving your images as RAW files in your camera is like keeping your negatives, if you save your images as JPEG files in your camera, it is like getting Polaroid images instead (high quality Polaroid images, but still developed by the camera, with no option of going back and using a different technique for developing your pictures.) What you need to develop RAW files is a program that allows you to adjust things like the brightness and contrast of your pictures and save those adjustments in a new file. The K10D gives you the option of storing RAW files as PEF (Pentax' own file format) or DNG, there are lots of free photo "developing" programs that will work with DNG files, including Photos for OS X.

[Kerrowdown]

FYI, both Photoshop and Lightroom use "Adobe Camera RAW" a.k.a. ACR.

+1, that's my understanding too, they are both the same beast.

[emalvick]

It is possible to use LR and its database without tying yourself down to the database in the future with essentially the same results as you'd get from an ACR based workflow.

1. You can set LR to save all edits you make to the XMP data so that your develop settings are in the metadata and not just in the catalog. ACR will even show those edits if you open the RAW in ACR later on. Similarly, LR will show you your ACR edits, assuming that Photoshop/Bridge/ACR save them to metadata.
2. If you find that you are moving on from LR, and you want all your edits, you could export your files to JPG/Tiff/PSD files for later use if that is a concern. The database is not the end all.

I actually don't mind the database, even though I use it strictly for navigating and processing. I use a different software for cataloging / DAM, and the keywording I do is accessible in LR. I also use other metadata and then a couple of smart collections in LR to identify images I want to process or edit. In a sense, LR's catalog is read-only view of my real image management (in that I don't change any keywords, ratings, folders, etc. in LR). I also use other software for processing my RAW images (DxO, Silkypix, LightZone, and RawTherapee), so it isn't uncommon for me to just export snapshots from all those software so I can see what I have in my everyday catalog software. Sometimes snapshots are transient (keeping favorites only).

[BarryE]

It is possible to use LR and its database without tying yourself down to the database in the future with essentially the same results as you'd get from an ACR based workflow.

1. You can set LR to save all edits you make to the XMP data so that your develop settings are in the metadata and not just in the catalog. ACR will even show those edits if you open the RAW in ACR later on. Similarly, LR will show you your ACR edits, assuming that Photoshop/Bridge/ACR save them to metadata.
2. If you find that you are moving on from LR, and you want all your edits, you could export your files to JPG/Tiff/PSD files for later use if that is a concern. The database is not the end all.

I actually don't mind the database, even though I use it strictly for navigating and processing. I use a different software for cataloging / DAM, and the keywording I do is accessible in LR. I also use other metadata and then a couple of smart collections in LR to identify images I want to process or edit. In a sense, LR's catalog is read-only view of my real image management (in that I don't change any keywords, ratings, folders, etc. in LR). I also use other software for processing my RAW images (DxO, Silkypix, LightZone, and RawTherapee), so it isn't uncommon for me to just export snapshots from all those software so I can see what I have in my everyday catalog software. Sometimes snapshots are transient (keeping favorites only).

Emalvick, that approach offers up some distinct possibilities. I'll investigate what you've written. Thanks for taking the time ...

[Oldbayrunner]

+1, that's my understanding too, they are both the same beast.

The engine and sliders are ostly the same but there are some additional tools in ACR not available with Lightroom and visa versa.

[reeftool]

Use whatever you feel comfortable with. For me, I found using ACR slow and cumbersome if I was going through several hundred Raw photos. Most of the features are the same and PS is still there if you need it. I just found Lightroom much, much quicker and easier. The best editing software is the one that YOU like and works best for YOUR photos.

[Oakland Rob]

Emalvick, that approach offers up some distinct possibilities. I'll investigate what you've written. Thanks for taking the time ...

But you can essentially save XMP metadata (all that IPTC, exif stuff) to files using Bridge without having to use Lr's database. And smart objects save image adjustment info. Basically both are a way of saving in files what Lr saves in a database. Lr does save some stuff in the database that CANNOT be saved in files, like collection membership, publishing status, flags, etc. But much of the that info can be saved in other ways in the files.

Basically, without more info about what you need that you don't have, there isn't a reason to introduce Lr into your workflow.

Hi- Newby here- is the Pentax Browser and Lab3 software sufficient if I can get a copy or does apple photo currently using for point and shoot or picasa have enough editing and cataloguing? Cant afford LR or PS. I downloaded Gimp but am way over my head on this stuff. I do have a penchant for getting nice shots so who knows where it will lead- it has been suggested I shoot in RAW first. I just got a K10D body and am rustling a lens before I can fire it up. I live in a scenic place so I expect the Pentax can do it justice, soon as I get an adapter for the old smc 50mm . cheers and thanks for the tips

Software is here: Software Downloads : Support & Service | RICOH IMAGING

Picasa is being discontinued; don't use that.

Apple Photos can work fine. I'm not a fan, but hey, it's free (although the iCloud Photo Library gets rather expensive if you use that). It's probably preferable to Pentax software.

If you need to sync, try Mylio. The free version lets you sync I think 3 devices. It stores edit and adjustment info in XMP files, and is compatible with Lr if you ever decide to go that route. Another option is Xnview MP; free, although a bit of a clunky interface.

[BarryE]

Thanks to you all. I'm now more informed about LR - I knew little before.

There's nothing I can really see to persuade me to move to LR for now. (At least I can counter the 'dinosaur' insults with a little more knowledge). So I'll be sticking with an ACR/Bridge - Smart Objects - Photoshop workflow.

I played around today improving my workflow, adding more batch and action processes and standardising a few more processes, where possible. I've tailored the automation to handle different output requirements, eg profile conversions, paper, scaling, adding a canvas border, output sharpening etc. I've a few more processes to automate, but then I'm done - maybe !

Whether it's easier/better/smoother to do what I've developed in LR, isn't too much of a concern now.

Thanks again - it was helpful to discuss these options as it made me think and question what I was doing and why ...

[Na Horuk]

Btw, you can also check out online videos to "see" what Lightroom workflow looks like. And you can also try a trial version for free, I think.
But yeah, if you don't need cataloging and presets/batch processing, then LR is probably not your priority. Maybe something like RawTherapee, if you want PS alternatives? Its a photo software for individual photos, doesn't have the full PS functionality, as its more focused on developing photos, not editing them.