davidb wrote:Mike Farley wrote:Whereas I find that the new features added in LR5 are genuinely useful, other than the aforementioned performance tweaks most of what is new this time around will have little benefit for me
OK, this upgrade doesn't suit Mike so Adobe might as well cancel it
I nearly spat my morning coffee on the monitor there, well done
For my own processing, I use various tools for the job depending on the pictures, quantity of them and types of adjustment needed. E.g. corporate photoshoot where I controlled the lighting I used lightroom to make a standard set of adjustments and applied it to all of them. Likewise if I have an image that needs perspective correction I use lightroom. However, I start everything in Bridge - lightroom's review process is slow still, comparing images side by side to assess which is sharper before deleting one is awful and so on. I also don't think the portfolio management side of things is fast enough or even reliable enough. I've assigned star ratings in Lightroom and it simply refuses to save them.
Lightroom's performance over a network from my storage array is just painful, I now don't bother, and while Bridge is slow it's still noticeably better. The application itself is as slow as a dog too.
Once I have the images I want to use I then use LR if there's a specific tool I need (perspective correct, lens correction, gradient tool - I find the LR gradient tool much easier than photoshop). Otherwise it's ACR and into photoshop.
I like to do my images, for my own work, one at a time. Photoshop is the better processing tool, has all the plugins of LR and more. For instance I have a dedicated noise reduction plugin that LR simply can't come near.
So don't get me wrong, if I want to slowly and painfully edit a large number of similar images or correct a skewed building I'll use lightroom. For individual images where I want the best quality I'll use ACR into Photoshop.
