Should I be using Adobe Bridge?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Member's gallery
TheLRC said:
Many users aren’t fully aware of everything Lightroom has to offer, so they don’t realize what features they might be missing out on.
Click to expand...

True, but there are also plenty that know and don't care, preferring Bridge+ACR. I'm not one, but I've discuss this with many that are.

TheLRC said:
Adobe Bridge + ACR includes essential file browsing, basic editing, and organizational tools without catalog or advanced automation features.
Click to expand...

I'm curious, how does Bridge+ACR give you organization tools? (I mean, aside from making a hierarchal folder structure, which Bridge is not required for.)

Chris
 
Member's gallery
Not A Speck Of Cereal said:
I'm curious, how does Bridge+ACR give you organization tools?
Click to expand...
Adobe Bridge + Adobe Camera Raw provides organization tools, though they're more basic compared to Lightroom Classic.
Here’s how Bridge supports organization:
  • Folders and File Browsing
  • Keywording and Tagging
  • Ratings, Flags, and Labels
  • Collections
  • Metadata and Search Tools
 
I'd say editing in acr is every bit as advanced as lightroom classic.
 
Not A Speck Of Cereal said:
The Develop module in LrC *is* ACR. They're the same thing under the hood. So is the Camera Raw filter in Ps.

What's wrapped around those is what differs.

Chris
Click to expand...

It is very similar and based on the same software engine, yes, but there are some differences. For example now one can run the denoise AI in ACR without creating a DNG. Plus the UI is different. But I agree. I was reacting to the earlier comment that said lighroom was more advanced editing than ACR.
 
Member's gallery
Yes, the thing about ACR advancements is that they don't roll out at the same time for all the places the engine is used in, so things you see in one instance—such as the no DNG required for Denoise—is likely to show up in the other variants sooner or later.

LR doesn't necessarily get updated as soon as we see a new ACR standalone release, because that code is embedded in the LR project and has a whole different build/test and release system/cycle.

As you say, there are also some UI differences, but much of that is simply because of where they live. The filmstrip in standalone ACR, for instance, makes no sense in Lightroom.

Chris
 
Member's gallery
There are definitely some differences, but I agree—they’re quite similar overall. It’s clear ACR has evolved since I last used it! Here are a few differences in editing tools and features:
  • Point Color Adjustments: Fine-tuning of hue, saturation, and luminance blending is not available in ACR.
  • Match Total Exposures: This feature is missing in ACR.
  • Reference View: Not available for side-by-side comparisons in ACR.
  • Local Adjustment Presets: No preset options for brushes, radial filters, or similar tools.
I’d say Lightroom isn’t necessarily more advanced in editing, but rather a bit different in its approach and features.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
ACR does have the point color tool.
Click to expand...
Yes, but not the same fine-tuning of hue, saturation, and luminance blending as in Lightroom.

1731595489458.png
 
Member's gallery
TheLRC said:
There are definitely some differences, but I agree—they’re quite similar overall. It’s clear ACR has evolved since I last used it! Here are a few differences in editing tools and features:
  • Point Color Adjustments: Fine-tuning of hue, saturation, and luminance blending is not available in ACR.
  • Match Total Exposures: This feature is missing in ACR.
  • Reference View: Not available for side-by-side comparisons in ACR.
  • Local Adjustment Presets: No preset options for brushes, radial filters, or similar tools.
I’d say Lightroom isn’t necessarily more advanced in editing, but rather a bit different in its approach and features.
Click to expand...

The Point Color is there in the Color Mixer for both. There's a Local Adjustment Preset option in both, but in Lr it is filled in with canned presets; you can still make your own.

The other items are not within the Develop panel in Lr, which is what I think is fair to compare to ACR (and what I thought we were doing because otherwise, that list is even larger).

Chris
 
Member's gallery
Member's gallery
Not A Speck Of Cereal said:
I wasn't trying to correct you over which came first, just stating that for historical clarity.

Bridge + ACR will never have all of the features of any version of Lightroom because it's not really (and never will be) a Lightroom variant.

Those that prefer Bridge + ACR are not interested in the other things that Lightroom offers.

To me, the comparison is Lightroom vs. Lightroom Classic. Personally, I don't really care of Lr ever gains parity with LrC because I'm not interested in any kind of cloud storage.

Chris
Click to expand...
Yeah…I was just trying to grok the statement that ACR and Bridge were all ypu ever need…because while I’ve launched both a couple of times neither has ever featured in my workflow…I went from Aperture to LrC and while I don’t either hate or love the catalog because it is just there for me…if and if it’s a big if LR ever reaches true feature parity I think at that point Classic is on the way out…but with parity and local storage using LR instead of Classic isn’t a big deal for me. But since LR doesn’t include printing or Maps…the question of parity is still a big if.
 
Member's gallery
TheLRC said:
Bridge doesn't have the following Lightroom Classic features - these are the ones I remember on top of my head
  • Face Recognition
  • Virtual Copies
  • History Panel
  • Photo Sync with Cloud
  • Slideshows and Book Creation
  • GPS and Location Mapping
  • Third-Party Plugin Support
Click to expand...
Thanks…so for me and I think a majority of folks the Bridge/ACR combo isn’t all we would ever need…I was trying to understand and justify that suggestion Which seemed weird…but then I don’t use Bridge so wanted to make sure there wasn’t some good reason to do so that I missed.
 
Member's gallery
Not A Speck Of Cereal said:
To me, the comparison is Lightroom vs. Lightroom Classic. Personally, I don't really care of Lr ever gains parity with LrC because I'm not interested in any kind of cloud storage.
Click to expand...
I’m not really either…and if/when parity comes and Classic dies I will just use local storage in LR…and that won’t bother me; but I ain’t holding my breath that parity will ever happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top