LR CC vs Bridge CC for organizing files

<p>I use LR for organizing all RAW files base on years, dates, and topics which is very helpful. But people told me that I should use Bridge CC instead of LR. In fact, almost 90% of internship require bridge CC knowledges. I really don't see why Bridge CC is helpful and useful program. It doesn't even organize and store all files together like LR. Any ideas why photography industry prefer Bridge CC?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>But people told me that I should use Bridge CC instead of LR.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I can find people who will tell you that you should smoke Meth. There are people who will tell you that you should use Canon instead of Nikon, or a Mac instead of a Windows machine (or vise versa). Pointless really. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I really don't see why Bridge CC is helpful and useful program.<br /></p>

</blockquote>

<p>As a LR user who needs a DAM and not a browser, neither do I. </p>

<blockquote>

<p> Any ideas why photography industry prefer Bridge CC?<br /></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Who speaks for the photo industry with any accuracy? Answer, no one. Opinions are like assholes; everybody has one. If you're happy with LR, be happy that you're happy. </p>

<p>Data organization has two parts. The first part is to store data in an organized fashion. The second part consists of rules to retrieve the data, where ever it's stored. The purpose is to "write once, read many."</p>

<p>I use the file explorer to create directories with a date code and brief subject description, and store images by date of capture. I could do the same thing with LR or Bridge, but why go through another step. Once that's done, I can import them into LR or look at them in Bridge. However LR has decent query tools, whereas Bridge has practically none.</p>

<p>The basic principles are those of a relational database (qv), set forth by an IBM employee named Cobb in 1970, henceforth used by practically everyone except IBM. (If you make things too easy for your customers, they don't need consultants from IBM to run their database.)</p>

Bridge is a wonderful and powerful file explorer that allows you

to do almost everything that Lr can do, but without the hassle

and trappings of a personal database. It's search function is

second to none as Lr only searches its own database. You can

also view all file types like .docx .pdf. etc in Bridge and this is

often needed in the professional photography world. In many regards, Bridge is quicker. I can drag 20 gb of raws from my cf card to a folder on my hard drive and start working in Bridge quicker than in Lr. Lr is quicker for global adjustments, keywording, and rating. Most

professionals and enthusiasts use both Lr and Bridge as each has its strengths and weaknesses. If you had to choose between one or the other, Bridge is more flexible and is why a lot of employers insist on you knowing it

"But people told me that I should use Bridge CC instead of LR."

 

Those "people" if they are just photographers are either wrong or misinformed.

 

 

" In fact, almost 90% of internship require bridge CC knowledge."

 

Bridge is great but it is best used as a connecter of your digital files and the various Adobe CS and CC programs:

Photoshop, Acrobat, Illustrator, Premiere, etc. If I were a multi-media studio, content producer, ad agency, or design firm looking to hire an intern I would want my interns to know how to use Bridge.

 

Bridge is only a browser: it can only see and locate digital files on drives, arrays, and disks that are connected to the

computer.

 

Lightroom is a Database catalog (plus image processing tools). If an image file is in a Lightroom catalog it knows where it

is.

<p>http://terrywhite.com/adobe-bridge-cc-vs-lightroom-5/</p>

As above. Stay clear from people who tell you to use Bridge for organizing files; just hope or pray that's their only

misconception.

<blockquote>

<p>"But people told me that I should use Bridge CC instead of LR."<br>

Those "people" if they are just photographers are either wrong or misinformed.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am neither wrong or misinformed. I user bridge much more than I use LR, but I do use both. I am a film photographer and LR is severely lacking in the tools I need to use for image cleanup. Using LR to do things in PS is a kludge at best.....It works well with bridge. Syncing my folders with my fresh scans is a PITA at the best of times. When using Bridge, the photos are just "there". Once I am "done" with clean up, off to LR it goes.</p>

<p>You are probably being told to Use bridge because it is free. Most graphic design shops that I have done work for don't own / use LR. For the most part it is an unnecessary expense. And yes, you can organize and manage your photos with Bridge. There was life before LR.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>You are probably being told to Use bridge because it is free.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It is?<br /> So it seems so: http://prodesigntools.com/free-adobe-bridge-cc.html<br /> Between that being free and the free DNG converter, the Adobe haters will be majorly upset!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>There was life before LR.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>True, but so less effective. </p>

<p>Another video (should you use Bridge or LR) from the lovely Julienne Kost:<br>

https://youtu.be/Tp2AThZiaBY</p>

<p>Both programs have their place and there is quite an overlap of things you can do in either of them.<br>

The biggest issue that I can think of LR for business/commercial use is that it is strictly single user, a major drawback for teamwork</p>

Mr. Peter Carter,

 

I agree with you about Photoshop CC being more suited for dealing with processing digitized film images simply because

Photoshop has a very effective spot healing toolset, layers, and the ability to work with an image in both LAB and CMYK

as well as RGB color spaces (look up Lee Varis' 10-channel color workflow videos on Vimeo) .

 

But image proceasing is a very different kettle of fish from the question Mr. Kim asked, which was about using Bridge

instead of Lightrroom or vice-versa ias an organizing tool.

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>The biggest issue that I can think of LR for business/commercial use is that it is strictly single user, a major drawback for teamwork</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is Bridge multi-user?

<blockquote>

<p>Is Bridge multi-user?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Bridge is just a browser so you might have more than one user accessing a folder. Also once you complete your work on an image, it is available to any other user without having to export first</p>

"Bridge is only a browser: it can only see and locate digital files on drives, arrays, and disks that are

connected to the computer."

 

Lr can only see and locate digital files on drives, arrays, and disks that are connected to the computer.

 

Bridge also does the same flagging, rating and keywording that many think only Lr can do.

<blockquote>

<p>Lr can only see and locate digital files on drives, arrays, and disks that are connected to the computer.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><strong>Wrong</strong>. That's why we build <em>smart previews</em>; to access and even edit files that are <strong>not</strong> connected to the computer. Once hooked up, because of the database storing these edits, it gets all applied to the data. <br /> Do yourself a favor and learn by watching the video's I provided above.<br /><br /></p>

<h2 id="AdvantagesofSmartPreviews">Advantages of Smart Previews</h2>

<p><a name="main-pars_text"></a></p>

<ul>

<li>Smart Previews are much smaller than the original photos. You can free up disk space on devices with smaller storage capacities (for example, SSD drives) by choosing to keep original files on a high-capacity external device (for example, NAS devices or external discs). For example, 500 raw images from a high-end DSLR camera may occupy 14 GB of disk space. The Smart Preview files for the same images amounted to 400 MB of disk space.</li>

<li><strong>Continue to work with your Smart Preview files even when the device containing your original photographs is disconnected. You can perform all edits that you would perform on the original file.</strong></li>

<li><strong>Automatically sync any edits made on Smart Preview files with your original files, as soon as the device is reconnected to your computer.</strong></li>

<li>Once created, your Smart Preview files are always up to date. When your storage device is connected, any edits you make to the original file are applied instantly to the Smart Previews as well.</li>

</ul>

<p>Oh and no, Bridge <strong>can't</strong> do that!</p>

<p>In addition to what Andrew Rodney said, if you only want to display your images (library, slide show) for keywording, rating, slideshow, etc, you just need the standard previews<br>

<br />Another big advantage of LR (for me) is that the logical organization of images through collections is independent of the physical organization (drives and folders) and you can have an image in more than one collections. E.G. I can have a collection for red cars and other for european cars. In a folder structure I have to choose either red cars or european cars or have duplicate of the images.<br>

<br />Most complaints I read in online forums are from users that want to use LR as a browser. Well, it is not, so if you can't stand the import process and preview creation, then keep using Bridge, which is a fine tool too.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Most complaints I read in online forums are from users that want to use LR as a browser. Well, it is not, so if you can't stand the import process and preview creation, then keep using Bridge, which is a fine tool too.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Exactly! Such complaints, and the recommendations to use one over the other is mostly provided by people who don't understand the differences in tools or the unique functionality of each as we've seen just here! <br>

The debate is even more silly than the "<em>Nikon vs. Canon</em>" or "<em>Mac vs. PC</em>" nonsense as both are <strong>very</strong> similar tools and the differences often boil down to subjective preferences. Bridge and LR are different tools just as MS Word and Photoshop are different tools with different goals despite the fact both have a type tool! <br>

People who wish to push one tool versus another onto other's who know just a bit less about their differences should spend less time pushing their tool preferences onto others and learn more about the differences in the tools first. Opinions are like assholes; everybody has one, and often the the biggest of both come from the same source <g>. <br>

"<em>The reason there's so much ignorance is that those who have it are so eager to share it"</em>. -Frank A. Clark</p>

<p>Interesting about "smart previews." I guess it helps to read the manual, which I tend to do only out of desperation.</p>

<p>I haven't used Bridge in years. It takes a long time for Bridge to render previews, so why do it a second time with LR. LR takes a long time to build smart previews, but it works in background, and prioritizes the image you select in the meantime.</p>

<p>Yes, RTFM or view the video's/articles/books by those who took the time to learn the various products and techniques.... certainly before posting <em>advise</em>! This is a general recommendation and not specific to Bridge vs. LR <g>. </p>

<p>>>> I can find people who will tell you that you should smoke Meth.<br>

<br>

But wouldn't Bridge work better?</p>

<p>I still don't find Bridge CC to be useful compare to LR CC. Finder can do same tasks as Bridge CC do. </p>

<p>That was rude, Andrew. I acknowledged learning something from this thread, which you might take as a compliment. I know a thing or two about database management, and DAM is but a small subset of this field. Manuals are useful when learning how to do what you must do, and perhaps later to learn what you might do. On the first part, I think I'm good ;)</p>

<p>By the way, "advise" is a verb. The correct usage is the noun, "advice."</p>

<blockquote>

<p>That was rude, Andrew. I acknowledged learning something from this thread, which you might take as a compliment</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A: It <strong>WAS</strong> rude.<br /> B: It wasn't directed at you. Apologies if that's what you thought. It was directed at the poster and future posters that provided incorrect and biased information about LR before checking his facts. <br /> C. Thanks for the grammar lesson. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Lr can only see and locate digital files on drives, arrays, and disks that are connected to the computer.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><strong> </strong></p>

<blockquote>

<p><strong>Wrong</strong>. That's why we build <em>smart previews</em>; to access and even edit files that are <strong>not</strong> connected to the computer. Once hooked up, because of the database storing these edits, it gets all applied to the data.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

How do you export a full size 16 bit tiff from a dng that is disconnected from your computer and stored across town in a safety deposit box? </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Who speaks for the photo industry with any accuracy? Answer, no one.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Can we see your photography website?</p>