Bridge vs LightRoom

Just bought Lightroom, at a very nice NAPP member discount, for the job it’s meant to do — Digital Asset Management. With over 20k photos things were getting out of hand, but I was seriously horrified to realise how lax I had become WRT tagging the photos.  Over 12k had no keywords.  Another job to keep one amused for a while, and keywording from a structured keyword dictionary is slightly slicker  in Lightroom compared with Bridge, as Lr will bring up a list of the matching targets, while Bridge obliges one to “Find next”

The first infuriating thing I’ve found with Lightroom is that I can’t Geotag my photos once they’re loaded into Lr.  With Bridge, I would use a combination of GPSPhotoLinker which matches the timestamp against a GPS track to locate my photos or, when I didn’t have the GPS with me, Geotagger to find the right spot on Google Earth.  Bridge would happily re-read the exif, or the xml sidecar whereas Lr really does not want to know. Guess geotagging comes first in the workflow, before import, what a PITA.

Also been watching Scott Kelby and Matt Kloskowski’s “100 Ways Lightroom KICKS Bridge’s @$$” which is very amusing, but reassuringly demonstrates that they’ve not been serious Bridge users for a while. It is a very good introduction to the useful features of Lr, and well wort a working through, and successfully makes the case for Lr as the tool of choice for photographers (I had to start Firefox for this though, it stuttered horribly in Safari here)

Spread the love