Adobe Faces Harsh Backlash After Removal of Features and Stability Issues Plague

[Anthony]

I am a big fan of PhotoMechanic.  It is far beyond my needs, but importing and reviewing are very fast and easy to use.  It integrates well with other programs, including Photo Ninja and Photoshop.

Another interesting candidate is Fast Raw Viewer http://www.fastrawviewer.com.

[Bjørn J]

I am a big fan of PhotoMechanic.  It is far beyond my needs, but importing and reviewing are very fast and easy to use.  It integrates well with other programs, including Photo Ninja and Photoshop.

Another interesting candidate is Fast Raw Viewer http://www.fastrawviewer.com.

I have barely tried PhotoMechanic a few times, it's incredibly fast. And one of the best features is extensive IPTC-support.

[Bruno Schroder]

When you look through shots from a shooting session, the least important aspect has to be building previews for each and every file, and catalogue them. What one needs is the ability to go quickly through the file collection and if necessary, check those [few] files that hold a promise of further processing. Only the checked files should be worthy of "importing" and maybe renamed after specified criteria by the user and/or EXIF information.

FastRawViewer has been developed precisely with that in mind. It is also working on the raw, not on the embedded jpeg

[elsa hoffmann]

I have only heard good things about MEchanic

[chris dees]

FastRawViewer has been developed precisely with that in mind. It is also working on the raw, not on the embedded jpeg

If I have a lot of images to process I use FastRawViewer for culling.
First I put the images on my harddisk with Nikon Transfer which has more or less the same possibilities as LR import with changing filenames
I give the images I want to process 1 star, the deletes 3 stars and then import (add) everything into LR (with keywords).
Then selecting the 3 stars and change them to "x" and no star (press 'x' and '0'), then selecting 1 star and change them in "flag" and no star (press 'p' and '0'), generate previews for the flags.
The changing is only a few clicks and takes a minute or so. Culling is soooo much faster in FastRawViewer.

[Andrea B.]

Photo Mechanic +1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1
Everyone has heard me say it more than once, that PhoMech is stellar. It bears repeating, perhaps?

PhoMech's file naming feature is impressive. You can use all kinds of exif in the naming string, if desired. Also date formats, random numbers, and more.

PhoMech can display your choice of exif for each photo in the info panel. Or under the thumbnails.
It has excellent tagging, colour classing for culls and sorts. You can display contact sheets according to type (nef, jpg) or colour or a chosen exif variable. Favorite naming strings can be saved as presets. The IPTC/keyword stationery is easy to use and nicely laid out. There is a side-by-side comparison feature for choosing the best version of a photo.

For example, in folder contact sheet I tag the photos I want to work on, display in a tag-only contact sheet and then send each photo to my favorite converter/editor with a keystroke.

PhoMech also permits cropping and conversions from raw to jpg or tiff. And has a watermark tool. Very handy for quick web displays after the raw has returned from the editor.

There is a nice PhoMech forum for asking questions, and the PhoMech team is very responsive
I think they are working on a cataloguing feature, but that does not interest me currently.

(No, I am not affiliated with Photo Mechanic!!)

[PeterN]

Latest news:
See http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2015/10/lightroom-62-import-update.html?PID=3485381

[Bjørn Rørslett]

PhotoMechanic is OK, but its GPS tagging really sucks.

[Sash]

I wonder why so few photogs here use Capture One. I find it way better than LR.

[HCS]

I wonder why so few photogs here use Capture One. I find it way better than LR.

Or ... maybe they are not as vocal about it as some others.

[elsa hoffmann]

Capture1 - I seem to recall it costs a pretty penny (when I checked about 2 - 3 years ago when moving away from Aperture)
add that to the cost of PS - it didnt make sense to me

[John Geerts]

Yes, 229 euro, for Capture1.

[elsa hoffmann]

Far too pricey to add to PS for me. And I dont do pirate programs

[HCS]

Capture1 - I seem to recall it costs a pretty penny (when I checked about 2 - 3 years ago when moving away from Aperture)
add that to the cost of PS - it didnt make sense to me

It does cost its money, just like PS. But, it does what PS doesn't do (and vice versa).

However, if PS gives you what you want, don't change.

[pluton]

I wonder why so few photogs here use Capture One. I find it way better than LR.

When I got my first really nice, calibratable monitor, I looked at an earlier version of Capture 1...it was about three years ago.
Compared to Lightroom, it's facility for printing direct from C-1 compared unfavorably to Lightroom(and Aperture) at the time.
I did notice that C-1's default raw conversions of Nikon files looked really nice, especially the choice of color hues.
I'll look at it again in due course, I suppose.