On Jul 12, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Matthew Hunt wrote: > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Ah, but in my opinion, that's not the best of both worlds. I' ve tried >> lightroom and just don't like the conversion workflow or the structured >> routines. I don't like the cutesy names, like "brilliance" for conversion >> factors. > > If you don't like the Lightroom workflow at all, that's a different > matter. I only meant "the best of both worlds" in the sense of getting > Lightroom's cataloging operations, while maintaining your preferred > file structure. > > (Also: I have no idea what you mean by "cutesy names" or "brilliance". > I don't have Ps or ACR, but my understanding is that ACR and Lightroom > use pretty much the same names for their processing controls.) >
ACR's function names are different and generally more descriptive of what is happening, IMO. The midrange brightness slider, for example, is merely "brightness." Color temperature is "temperature." Highlight recovery is "Recovrery." Fill light is ""fill light." Saturation is "saturation." Then there's the graphic tone curve with sliders for highlights, lights, darks, and shadows. Plus, I was heavily into RAW conversion by the time Lightroom emerged, and really wedded to the ACR workflow. If I had started with Lightroom, it might have pleased me more. Paul > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
