Lightroom or Bridge?

Adob Photoshop guru Julieanne Kost discusses the pros and cons of using Bridge or Lightroom

Lightroom Collections: the Big Drawback

Before discussing the nuts and bolts of using Lightroom 2 to catalog our photo library, I do want to mention one cautionary note about "collections."

While the ability to create collections or smart collections or "nested groupings" (a concept developed by Peter Krough in his superb DAM Book) is one of the most valuable features of Lightroom, sadly they cannot be shared between and among multiple users, not yet at any rate.

The important thing is that, as I understand it, catalogs can be shared among different users, and that's something we'll look into more closely in future postings.

Image cataloging software: the browser approach

There are few low-cost database digital asset management systems available today, and with the growing trend toward cloud computing and storage that number is likely to decrease in the years to come.  Extensis Portfolio 8.5 (standalone), Adobe Lightroom 3, Apple Aperture 3 and Phase One EM2 are the only serious reasonably-priced DAM options available. But even those programs can become costly when you starting adding up the licensing fees for multiple users.

If you need to organize your organizations image collection and can't afford an enterprise-level digital asset management system  or  a catalog-based (i.e., database) program your best bet is a browser-driven program.

Perhaps the best known browser program is Adobe Bridge CS4 that ships with nearly all Adobe image editing and suite programs. Easy to set up and easy to use, Bridge is in some ways a more sophisticated "Finder" (for the Mac).

A stand-alone program, Bridge also possesses a very robust set of organizational tools. In fact, my browser of choice for the Johnson & Wales University image library is Bridge CS4.  But Bridge is not, as we discussed in a previous entry, a cataloging program, and as a result has several important drawbacks, particularly non-accessibility offline and the need to continually update the local cache.

Bridge is ideal  primarily for its ease of use, ubiquitous nature and of course cost (free). But it is, really, only a stopgap method for any large image collection. If you're using Bridge (like we are) you must start planning for the next phase in managing your image library. Given the nature of software Bridge will eventually reach its breaking point -- you need to be prepared for that eventuality.

Next: catalog or database software for image archiving.