Bob W wrote:
It's true that you have to do the import step for scanned
files, and can't
as Mark said, use LR's facilities without importing, but
that's the way LR
was designed to work from the beginning. Complaining about
it is like
complaining that a car is not as good as a pram because you
have to put
petrol in it.
That's called a False Analogy, Bob.
Putting petrol in a pram would have no benefit and is not something
anyone would realistically want to do.
Converting raw images without importing them into Lightroom
is useful,
desirable to some photographers on this list and not an unreasonable
request of a tool that has raw conversion and image manipulation
capabilities like Lightroom.
A closer analogy would be that Lightroom is like a car that
is equipped
with air conditioning and won't let you drive without it switched on.
It's certainly a very useful feature, but it's one that some people
would occasionally like to deactivate.
It isn't a false analogy - you just haven't grasped it!
Find me a person who actually wants to put petrol in a pram and you'll
convince me it's not a false analogy.
> Anyway, here's a
better one. You need a steamhammer for your work which involves driving
enormous piles into the ground. You also occasionally need to tap a tack
into a piece of wood. You complain because the steam piledriver is no good
at tapping little tacks into wood.
That's still wrong: Lightroom isn't anything as crude as a piledriver.
No one would reasonably expect to be able to use a piledriver for
tapping little tacks. A reasonable photographer *would* like to be able
to use a tool whose desirable features are raw conversion and image
optimization for... just raw conversion and image optimization.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
