Photoshop Insider

Camera Raw, Bridge, or Lightroom?

By Scott on Thursday, April 24th, 2008 at 5:47 am | updates.

Yesterday I was going through the session evaluations from my Photoshop World “Photoshop Seven-Point System” class (I take these evaluations very seriously, and I read every single evaluation from every class I teach).

I was really gratified to see that the class really struck a chord with attendees (so much so, that I’ll be teaching it again in Las Vegas at Photoshop World this September), but I saw an evaluation that really stood out to me, which read:

“One says Bridge; One says Camera Raw; One says Lightroom—I’m confused!”

With 80 sessions at Photoshop World, and 41 instructors, as you might imagine there are a lot of classes that include, or are based on, either Camera Raw, The Bridge, Lightroom, or all three, which is what I think is behind this attendee’s comment. After reading it, I realized that he probably isn’t alone, so I thought I’d try and unconfusify him (and anybody else) here with a quick Q&A:

Q. So, which one should I use?
A. Camera Raw in Photoshop CS3, Camera Raw in The Adobe Bridge, and the Develop Module of Lightroom 1.4 are all the same. All three have the same sliders, in the exact same order, they have the same tools, etc..

Q. So what’s the difference?
A. Camera Raw has a light gray background, and Lightroom’s Develop Module has a dark gray background.

Q. That’s it?
A. That’s it.

Q. Oh come on!
A. Well, if you want to split hairs, technically Lightroom has one extra tool (The Targeted Adjustment Tool), buried down in two of the panels, but other than that, they’re exactly the same.

Q. So why would anyone want to use the Camera Raw in Bridge rather than the one in Photoshop CS3?
A. You’d want to use it to process a bunch of raw photos in the background, which frees up Photoshop CS3 for other tasks.

Q. So, the Bridge can be processing photos, and then I can do something completely different in Photoshop?
A. Yup.

Q. That’s pretty cool.
A. I know.

Q. So why would I want to use Lightroom?
A. It’s way better than the Bridge.

Q. Really?
A. There’s a reason why the Bridge is free.

Q. Oh. So Lightroom is better than the Bridge?
A. For photographers, Lightroom replaces the Bridge, Camera Raw, and does a whole lot more, because it’s a whole workflow tool (which is its strength—it’s for managing ALL your photos; thousands of them, and processing new photos in the quickest, most efficient manner yet), using five separate modules (The Library, The Develop Module, The Slideshow Module, The Web Module, and the Print Module).

Q. How do these stack up against the same features in Photoshop?
A. It’s just my opinion (as is this entire Q&A), but here’s how I feel they stack up:

The Library Module in Lightroom, absolutely blows away the Bridge. To me, there’s no comparison, and the features, workflow, and whole process of organizing, sorting, and managing your photos is much easier, more efficient, and fun in Lightroom.
The Develop Module is actually just Camera Raw on a darker gray background, but in Lightroom there are some features (including the Targeted Adjustment Tool) that just aren’t in Camera Raw in Photoshop CS3 or the Bridge. Plus, in Lightroom there are all sorts of other advantages (like White Balance previews for one) that just aren’t available in Camera Raw. (Note: In the Public Beta of Lightroom 2.0, the Develop Module leap frogs Camera Raw even more, but that’s a different topic. Kinda).
Lightroom’s Slideshow Module, while not perfect, creates slideshows way beyond what the Bridge can do. For one, you can add Music (and that’s just the start).
The Web Module in Lightroom goes far, far beyond any Web gallery you could create in Photoshop or the Bridge. It’s not even close.
Lightroom’s Print Module alone is worth switching to Lightroom. Once you print out of Lightroom 1.4.1, you’ll never want to print out of Photoshop CS3 again. Sorry, but it’s true. What it does to the printing process is just amazing, and in the Lightroom 2.0 Public Beta, Adobe took the print features up a big notch.

So basically, all the things that Lightroom and Photoshop have in common, Lightroom does much, much better. That’s why I spend about 70% of my time in Lightroom. I only use Camera Raw when I need to edit an image that I didn’t import into Lightroom for some reason (maybe someone sent me the file, or I just needed to quickly edit one photo).

Now, to sum it all up, I’ll answer the original question:

Q. One says Bridge; One says Camera Raw; One says Lighroom—I’m confused!
A. They’re all the same; Once you learn one, you’ve learned them all because Camera Raw in the Bridge is the same as the Camera Raw in Photoshop CS3, and is the same as the Develop Module in Lightroom 1.4.

My advice: If you’re a photographer, I would focus on learning the Develop Module in Lightroom, because Lightroom has been designed from the ground up as a tool for photographers, and it’s the future for pro photographers, but if at some point you wind up needing to use Camera Raw—you’ll already know how to use it.

I hope that helps the person with the question (who didn’t sign their evaluation form), but name or not—I read ‘em all, and when I do the session in Vegas, I’ll be sure to address this in the class.

Comment form for this post

^#1

Hi Scott,

Ok, you’ve answered the question admirably and I’m of the understanding that Lightroom is for ‘Photographers’. In the same vain, perhaps you would answer (via your blogg) whether you see a time that photographers will no longer need/require Photoshop. In other words, do you see Lightroom being a one-stop shop that will fulfill ALL the requirements of the photographer? My reason for asking this is that basically Photoshop CS3 costs us Europeans an arm and a leg to put it mildly, and whilst it’s a good application I would obviously prefer one single application that met all my photographic requirements. Thanks.

ElliR on April 24th, 2008 at 6:08 am

^#2

Currently, there is one HUGE difference between Lightroom 1.X and Bridge. If I process an image in Lightroom 1.X, with virtually all the same processing ability as Bridge, I can open the resulting image in Photoshop CS3 but I cannot open it as a Smart Object.

But if I process the same image in Bridge, I have the ability to open the resulting image in Photoshop CS3 as a smart object, duplicate that smart object via “New Smart Object Via Copy” and then reprocess that duplicate in Camera RAW again.

As I say that is currently because according to the beta trial Lightroom 2.0 will apparently include the ability to open as a smart object, but now you cannot and that is a big drawback. I would go so far as to say that failing to include opening images as smart objects in Lightroom 1.X was a big mistake.

David on April 24th, 2008 at 6:46 am

^#3

Scott,

OK, so I’m convinced that Lightroom is a great tool. I own it but haven’t put a lot of time into learning it. Here’s why: I am a Nikon shooter and everyone I talk to says that Nikon Capture NX has a better RAW converter. I’d love to integrate BOTH NX and Lightroom into my workflow but I don’t see a good way to do that. Any suggestions?

Bob from Jersey

Bob from Jersey on April 24th, 2008 at 6:56 am

^#4

Hi, Was wondering if this was in the update 1.4

“Lightroom has one extra tool (The Targeted Adjustment Tool), buried down in two of the panels, but other than that, they’re exactly the same.”

Thanks

Joe on April 24th, 2008 at 7:24 am

^#5

I still can’t use Lightroom for various reasons….
Firstly it is slow than Bridge.

Secondly and this is the biggest gripe I have is that you can browse files. You have to “import” your files to access them. You can work on various network drives this way. You can quickly jump around to various folders unless you “import” everything… If they would allow for file browsing in Lightroom it would be quite nice.
The whole preview thing and history palette is clunky as well.

Looking at lightroom beta2 it doesn’t look like I will be using it anytime soon.

Brian on April 24th, 2008 at 8:23 am

^#6

To ElliR:
At this point, we definitely still need Photoshop to do serious retouching, anything with layers, selections, professional looking type, filters, and well…I could go on and on, but I could see a day where we just use Lightroom (For example, Lightroom Public Beta 2.0 added features that require us to go over to Photoshop less than we needed to in 1.4), but in the end, that decision will be made by Adobe, as they decide how Lightroom evolves.

To David:
As you noted; in Lightroom 2.0 they’ve addressed the Smart Object thing,

To Bob:
If you want to use three applications (Capture NX, and Lightroom, and Photoshop) to process your photos, you certainly can, and if you charge by the hour, you probably should, eh? However, I wouldn’t imagine that Adobe would be building in functionality to make other raw converters work with their raw converter. Just my take on it.

To Joe:
It’s in the HSL/Color/Grayscale Panel and in the Tone Curve panel. Always has been. (it’s that little target looking icon in the top left corner of the panels).

Hope that helps.

-Scott

Scott on April 24th, 2008 at 9:11 am

^#7

Scott - just a follow up on the NX question. I would really love to do all my work in Lightroom but am currently doing a mix of NX/Lightroom.

I know you shoot a D300 on occasion, which is the camera I use. How do you get your images to have accurate color in Lightroom?

I tried doing a Camera Calibration ala Bruce Fraser, but so far I have not come up with settings that are really close.

If you have Camera Calibration settings for your D300, would you mind sharing them?

Thanks for everything you do. I have learned a lot from you!

Les on April 24th, 2008 at 9:19 am

^#8

Scott, in your book, you teach a couple segments using Smart Objects. Smart Objects in Lightroom are not available until 2.0, right?

Dan Foust on April 24th, 2008 at 9:20 am

^#9

Scott,

Thanks for this clarification regarding Bridge, Photoshop and Lightroom. I missed your “Seven-Point System” class at Photoshop World but there’s always Vegas.

I wanted to comment on something you maneuvered around. You say “If you’re a photographer…” I’m a creative director/designer/photographer and a Photoshop CS3 Adobe Certified Expert (ACE) So I know a thing or two about Photoshop and Bridge. I’ve been stuck trying to figure out the best way to manage my thousands of images that I use in my designs. Some of these images I have taken myself, some are stock like iStockphoto.com and some have been supplied by my clients.

So where are I going with this? Well some days Bridge makes sense to use in my work flow. Other days Lightroom offers some very powerful options. But there are days when I want something super simple like iPhoto. My multiple personality disorder [dissociative identity disorder] has created an image management mess. I’m considering moving my mess to Lightroom. Any comments or suggestions?

Roger on April 24th, 2008 at 9:25 am

^#10

People who haven’t used Lightroom haven’t seen the light yet. It rocks! Only about 5% of my images ever see Photoshop CS3 any more.

Todd on April 24th, 2008 at 9:30 am

^#11

Scott,

As for printing in LR I think it’s a flaw that you can not soft proof a photo with a dedicated ICC profile (e.g. a profile from a print lab). As it comes to sharpening: you can not resize a photo in de develop module and sharpen it for that size (or you should export it with the right sizes and import it again and add some sharpening to it!?).

If you have workflows for this problem just let us know!

Hans on April 24th, 2008 at 9:33 am

^#12

That analysis will be very helpful to people who are not thoroughly familiar with Lightroom or Bridge.

It should be pointed out that the processing in Lightroom is “non-modal,” meaning you don’t have to open or save a document to process it. You can move between evaluating, post-processing, and printing photos without any steps required to save a document. If you close Lightroom, all work in process will be in the same state you left it the next time you open Lightroom again.

Also, in Lightroom you can make virtual copies of a photo to compare or utilize alternative adjustments. Virtual copies add very little to disk or other resource overhead.

This is why the comment regarding importing is beside the point. In order to provide the tremendous workflow benefits of non-modal processing, it is necessary for Lightroom (or Aperture) to create a database of photos to be processed.

Finally, Lightroom has the best printing capabilities of any application I have used. I have been a long-time user of QImage, and I still use it from time to time to print photos that, for one reason or another, I have not placed in Lightroom. I have always considered QImage to be the best all-around photo printing application available for Windows, but Lightroom beats it for ease of use, even for batch printing.

Stan Robins on April 24th, 2008 at 9:41 am

^#13

GREAT SUMMARY!

Stefan on April 24th, 2008 at 9:53 am

^#14

Thanks for this post Scott, I was looking for some quick’n'dirt answers for this apps just yesterday. I’ll focus on lightroom from now on

I just have one question that is stuck into my head?

How about Aperture? It has a nice interface and looks like easier to manage, what do you think?

Estêvã Soares from Brazil on April 24th, 2008 at 9:59 am

^#15

I have to agree with the comment concerning the need to import. I like the folder structure. I haven’t been able to figure out how to import and maintain that structure in the Lightroom folder listing. (Of course, I could get into renaming to make my pix clearer, but …)
So, I really like what Lightroom can do, and I use it a lot. But when I want to work with pix that haven’t been imported (perhaps an earlier folder?), I don’t see the need to import it into Lightroom when I can use Bridge and process it that way.
So, both are very useful, and needed. But either one alone would also provide a nice workflow. It’s just a matter of preference, and perhaps history.
Lightroom does a lot, I agree, but I’ve found I basically have to always go into Photoshop for final work before printing. So, all three are useful, and needed.
I’m looking forward to Lightroom Two, but I haven’t downloaded it, mainly because of the previous experience with Lightroom Beta. Why do all this work in Lightroom Two when it can’t be used later? Plus, I’m wondering if Lightroom Two will be a new program, that will cost more money, or if it will be provided as a free update to current Lightroom users? I imagine it will be a new program.
Howard

Howard on April 24th, 2008 at 10:04 am

^#16

Alright, this might be an ignorant question, but I’ll ask anyway.

The reason I didn’t buy your 7 Point System book is because you needed CS3, and I only have CS2. However, I believe you said on a podcast that the reason you had to do it in CS3 and not CS2 is because of Camera Raw. Based on this post, could I use the 7 Point System with CS2 and the develop module of Lightroom?

JoBu on April 24th, 2008 at 10:42 am

^#17

Scott,

Thanks for the clarification. While I didn’t attend your class, the person who submitted the question must have been psychically linked to me. I’ve been asking the question for a few weeks.

I’m new to really editing my photos, so I’ve been drilling through your 7 point system and your Lightroom book. Just about done with the 7 point system, and I wondered, “What’s the best way?” Thanks for the answer.

By the way….Lightroom has worked amazingly well for me. Shooting series of climbing photos I needed a way to manage larger series of shots. A friend suggested Lightroom. The more I use it, the more I like it.

What’s the Lightroom upgrade going to cost???

Rich

Rich C on April 24th, 2008 at 10:43 am

^#18

Q. So what’s the difference?
A. Camera Raw has a light gray background, and Lightroom’s Develop Module has a dark gray background.

Q. That’s it?
A. That’s it.

Well ACR has point curves, LR doesn’t.
ACR has ColorMatch RGB for encoding, LR doesn’t (nor does it need it some would argue).
ACR has 4 contrast preset options (if you count custom), LR has 3.
One of the really big differences is the Histogram and RGB feedback. LR uses Melissa RGB for everything, ACR (which I prefer) uses the encoding color space you select in the Workflow Popup menu. So you get the actual RGB values (in a different scale) than LR which uses a scale that isn’t ever used for processing. You also have percentages versus 0-255 which actually makes more sense for newer users.

There are other useful UI tweaks in LR (the crop tool is far cooler) as just one example.

Andrew Rodney on April 24th, 2008 at 10:43 am

^#19

When Lightroom first came out in beta, I couldn’t believe that people would use it over Bridge. Bridge was great. But once Lightroom came out, I never looked back. I wish that this Q&A came out when beta was out

I use Lightroom much more than Photoshop and I am disappointed that Lightroom 2 will only work with CS3. I have CS2 and don’t plan on upgrading any time soon because I do use Lightroom so much.

BTW, don’t forget to schedule a Lightroom seminar in Baltimore this year!

Stacie Morris on April 24th, 2008 at 10:55 am

^#20

Scott,
I gave up on Lightroom because I have not been able to get a specific print size. My margins are .12,.12,.12., and .56. I read that I needed to go into my Epson 2200 printer and change to borderless to get the .56 to match the other .12 margins. I did that. On 8.5×11.5 paper, I set the margins to .12 and set the cell size to 7.5×9.5 and NEVER got that size image. What am I missing? I can’t tell how much time I’ve spent trying to rectify the problem all to no avail. You and Matt gloss over printing and never evplain how to get a specific size image. Please address this aspect. Thanks

Gil Grammar on April 24th, 2008 at 11:05 am

^#21

Hi Scott —
I’m totally sold on Lightroom, which I’ve used for two years. Equally sold are my Photoshop students, who find it easy and intuitive. My boss, who heads the Technology Department at our school, is being seduced by our Apple rep to switch to Aperture; the principal inducement seems to be price. How can I convince my boss that Lightroom is the superior program?
Love Photoshop User TV, your books, and Photoshop World when I can get to it. Please bring it back to Boston!
—brenda Godwin

Brenda Godwin on April 24th, 2008 at 11:53 am

^#22

>When Lightroom first came out in beta, I couldn’t believe that people would use it over Bridge.

Bridge is a browser, Lightroom is a database. Totally different animals!

Andrew Rodney on April 24th, 2008 at 12:06 pm

^#23

Scott,

I asked about this in another area, but this seems more appropriate.

In your book 7-Point System, Lesson 2, Step 4 has you open an image in Photoshop as a Smart Object. Easily done as described from Camera Raw, but Lightroom does not provide that option. This would appear to be a major difference between Lightroom and Camera Raw unless I have missed something. Can one open an image as a Smart Object directly from Lightroom and return as in Camera Raw?

Thanks.
Dale

Dale Nelson on April 24th, 2008 at 12:32 pm

^#24

Hi again Scott,

Thanks for taking the time to reply to my question - much appreciated. Have a good weekend as I certainly will here in Frankfurt, that place with a ‘U’ remember.

ElliR on April 24th, 2008 at 12:32 pm

^#25

Scott:
Although print set up is easier in LR than CS3, I don’t believe it is possible to soft proof in LR, so the output from LR Print Module is still hit and miss correct? As a result, it is necessary to export the image from LR to CS3 and then reimport for printing. As a result, it is easier to simply print in CS3 than to come back into LR unless you are doing some sort of multiple print set up. It will be a great step forward for LR when soft proofing can be done in LR. I didn’t see it in LR 2.0.

David Robertson on April 24th, 2008 at 1:03 pm

^#26

Scott: This was a truly helpful summary! Thank you again for all the work you do to clarify the “mysteries” for us all. I would echo Stefan’s request above (and Gil Grammar’s query): could you please now summarize the difference between Adobe’s Lightroom and Apple’s Aperture for us neophytes? Thanks in advance!

Doug Wilson on April 24th, 2008 at 2:00 pm

^#27

Scott….
I just switched over to Lightroom….and am loving it. The only thing that I think is better about Bridge is the tagging system. It seems like it is a lot easier to apply tags in Bridge with the search box, which then quickly finds them in your list of tages, and then also applies the other tags in your tag hierarchy. (For example, if I type in rose, which is a sub-tag of flowers,which is a sub-tag of plants, all of these tags get applied when I hit the return button.) Is there an easy way in Lightroom to do this that I am missing?

Leo Stern on April 24th, 2008 at 2:41 pm

^#28

Obviously, since Scott’s in bed with Adobe, there’s no way he’d give Apple’s Aperture a fair audition.

But, Aperture whole heartedly kicks Lightroom’s lilly-white butt!

Trevor Carpenter on April 24th, 2008 at 3:26 pm

^#29

Scott, big fan, long time listener - first time caller. I know you’re an Adobe guy. But what about Apple’s Aperture? I don’t see how you can just ignore it when writing this kind of article. If you do, I begin to wonder if you’re simply being paid by Adobe? I understand the whole corporate sponsor thing, but I’d love to see you write about Aperture. It’s definitely a player in this space.

I’ve used both, and I find Lightroom to be rather clunky in comparison to Aperture. Any thoughts?

thanks

Mike Fullerton on April 24th, 2008 at 3:55 pm

^#30

I just wanted to add my two cents here. Chances are, if you are reading this on Scott’s blog - you probably know by now a couple of things: 1. He uses Photoshop. 2. He uses Lightroom. The topic of this post was a response to a comment about using Camera Raw, or Lightroom, and he answered that.

I cant believe it… “how can he ignore Aperture when writing about Lightroom and ACR” Because he’s in bed with Adobe?

He can ignore Aperture because he wasnt -talking- about it. He doesnt -have- to talk about it, because he’s a consumer.. and has already made a choice on a piece of software. Im sure, being a techy person he has played with Aperture.. but that wasnt the point of this post..

If you want a review of Aperture.. its pretty simple.. Walk into a store and plop down the money to buy it. Or download a demo of Lightroom and compare it yourself.

I get really tired of seeing a couple of things. 1. This is an opinion based blog, and when someone gives an opinion it needs to be hijacked to turn it into a conspiracy or a darn help desk. 2. Everyone sees it as an automatic invite to jump in and nitpick the opinions?

OMG.. ACR has point curves? Histogram and RGB Feedback? What the? Colormatch RGB Encoding? How -dare- lightroom only have 3 presets.. Sounds like those dorky kids who like to run around and correct the teacher..

Scott.. thanks for your opinion.. Its appreciated.

Ross Billingsley on April 24th, 2008 at 10:18 pm

^#31

Hi Scott

Thanks for above discussing and I just want add a thing that is necessary in my task flow: the keyword assignment. It’s TOO much better on Bridge. And I’ve seen 2.0 beta don’t include it. I expect it on 2.1.

(sorry about poor english-language)
Thanks

Xavier Marcet on April 25th, 2008 at 6:39 am

^#32

Hi Scott,

Great summary. One sentence completely intrigued me though. “Once you print out of Lightroom 1.4.1, you’ll never want to print out of Photoshop CS3 again.” I’ve been using Bridge/Photoshop but I’ve never been totally happy with the printed output. I’m using a Macbook Pro and a Canon IP4300 and I’ve calibrated it using Spyder Express 2. I’ve done a ton of research on color management to get the colors right but sadly the colors just didn’t come out right. So when I read the above quoted sentence, I immediately borrowed a buddy’s machine which had Lightroom on it and I was really happy with the printed output. I’ve downloaded a trial version to play around with Lightroom some more. I’m sold.

Kyle Bendijo on April 25th, 2008 at 9:04 am

^#33

>And I’ve seen 2.0 beta don’t include it. I expect it on 2.1.

You’re working with a beta that is NOT feature locked, so don’t discount anything you don’t yet see in the beta (I can say this being an alpha tester). You haven’t seen everything yet!

>OMG.. ACR has point curves? Histogram and RGB Feedback? What the? Colormatch RGB Encoding? How -dare- lightroom only have 3 presets.. Sounds like those dorky kids who like to run around and correct the teacher..

If there’s anything technically incorrect about what I wrote, I’m all ears. And to be clear, LR doesn’t need ColorMatch RGB IMHO! But the point is, there ARE a few more differences than discussed. If you understand the underlying color processing (something I suspect you may not), or you work using numbers in LR and Photoshop, the differences are pretty important. If that sounds dorky, I plead guilty. If that sounds like I’m correcting the teacher, well I’m also a teacher. And like all good teachers, we learn from each other. I’ve learned a ton from Scott, so don’t assume otherwise.

Andrew Rodney on April 25th, 2008 at 9:48 am

^#34

You know Scott you continue to make me smile. Thank you for always taking the time to be real. I also find it funny that so many people take their time to “correct” you. Especially being that your answering a question in its simpliest form.

Keep smiling!

Kyle Barnett on April 25th, 2008 at 10:01 pm

^#35

Regarding the differences between Lightroom and Adobe Bridge, They each have their own strengths and are designed to be used by two different groups of pixel pushers. Lightroom is a fantastic program that addresses the workflow of photographers. Adobe Bridge, on the other hand is a Godsend for graphic designers. You can preview illustrator files, pdf files, movie files, flash files and on and on in Bridge. You can’t do that in Lightroom, nor should you want to. For media professionals, Bridge is king. For photographers, it’s Lightroom. Just because the camera raw feature overlaps in these two fine apps, I don’t even see a need for a comparison because they are two totally different tools. Kinda like arguing which is better a screw driver or a hammer…..depends on what you’re trying to do. Anyway, that’s my two cents.

Toby Fairchild on April 26th, 2008 at 1:00 am

^#36

I’m still confused. If I get Lightroom do I still need CS3, or will Lightroom do “everything” I will need it to do (I shoot DNG raw)?
Thanks!

akira on April 26th, 2008 at 2:20 am

^#37

First of all, Akira, what do you mean by ‘CS3′? By that do you mean photoshop cs3? or the creative suite? Secondly, what is “everything” you need to do? Some photographers can get by just fine without photoshop….just using lightroom. Depends on what you are going to use the photos for. If you are going to use them in other mediums (i.e. print, web or video) you probably want to have photoshop nearby. If you are strictly a photographer you may not have as big a need for photoshop, but then again I don’t know any photographers personally, that don’t have photoshop. Think of it this way. Lightroom is an eyes, ears and throat doctor for your photos and photoshop is a brain surgeon. Again, depends on what you want to do with your photos. I have and use lightroom and photoshop depending on what the task at hand is. I recommend subscribing to Kelby Trainings online video tutorials to help you better understand each of these programs, then you can better decide which way you want to go.

Toby Fairchild on April 27th, 2008 at 1:00 am