Moving away from Lightroom for import - Breezebrowser vs Photomechanic

[Mikehit]

I have been using LR for a few years now and really like it for the keywording and simplified editing tools. But viewing files can be painfully slow when all you want to do is a quick check to see if the photo is worth importing in the first place.
Also, when I am shooting RAW+Jpeg (with the RAW file as a safety net) and set it to treat RAW and JPG files as separate, if I want to delete the file I need to tag the RAW and JPG files separately for deletion which is a pain. And if I set it so the JPG is treated as the same file I see no purpose to RAW+Jpg.

So my question is along the lines of what are the relative strengths of the two alternatives. I am willing to pay for the PhotoMechanic license if the benefits are tangible. And I understand both programs do what I would like regards deleting RAW+jpeg with one action.



I really like the databasing in LR but sometimes I wonder if I am being over-enthusiastic with keywording simply because I can. If my choice of downloader works well I can see myself moving to either the CC subscription and (horror!) tackling the full-fat Photoshop or even switching to using DPP which I have become more impressed with and being more selective in which images I care to process.
But let's tackle the download first...

 

[Orangutan]

I have been using LR for a few years now and really like it for the keywording and simplified editing tools. But viewing files can be painfully slow when all you want to do is a quick check to see if the photo is worth importing in the first place.

I have a not-fast computer, so I've changed my settings to create no preview on import. I can import 600 photos in a minute or two. The raw file has a small built-in preview, which may be adequate for what you describe. I can take a first pass through the photos to discard the garbage, then generate full-size previews when I'm ready.

 

[tonyespofoto]

Hello Mikehit,
I don't have any experience with Photomechanic, but I have been using Breezebrowser for many years, in fact since around 2000, when I got my Canon D30. Used as a browser, it is excellent. It is stable, fast and has all the views you could want. File renaming, both individually or batch is excellent. Importing is smooth and swift. I greatly prefer it to Bridge or Lightroom. In my experience, it is a great deal faster for all tasks. For many years I also used it to process RAW files. It relies on Canon's RAW processing engine. Around 2007, when I got my 1Ds Mk III, I switched to ACR for RAW processing only, so I cannot comment on how well it does with RAW processing for newer Canon cameras. However,I use it as a browser daily. It is the ONLY program I will use to import files or browse folders. I like it very much and do not anticipate changing when I get my next camera. I repeat that it is much faster than Bridge or Lightroom on all browser functions. When I used it for processing RAW files, it would create TIFF or Jpegs from 1DS Mk II files in about 12 secs each if I did not check the lens correction button and about 30 secs each if I did. I routinely fed it 350-800 frames to process and then would go to supper or bed. When I returned to the machine, the job would be complete. Reliability and stability of this program is excellent. Image folders open quickly, much faster than either Bridge or Lightroom. Renaming is also much faster. It is possible to open multiple iterations of BB at the same time, making folder comparison easy. It is also possible to have multiple iterations of RAW processing going at the same time. If you do this, expect your machine to slow down. The processing engine will just chug reliably along. I don't have anything bad to say about BB, only praise. I can recall, back in the bad old days, that I had a question requiring support. Chris Breeze, the software writer, was the prompt respondent. I don't recall the issue, however. The last thing I want to say is that I use BB professionally, not as a hobbyist, so my expectations are much higher and my tolerance for flaws lower. I give BB 5 stars.

 

[canon1dxman]

I guess that was a typo above as the 30D didn't release until 2006 but interesting comments on BB. I did spot that many guys at the 2012 Olympics were using Photo Mechanic (putting a 100-400 to good use between races so I am interested to see what others think of this too.

 

[tonyespofoto]

Sorry about the D30 - 30D error. I've corrected it.

 

[Mikehit]

Thank you for your replies so far.

orangutan - your comments have got me thinking about how I am using LR now because when someone reports no real issues it makes you wonder what you are doing!
The catalog is a database and apparently one reason LR can be slow for importing files is the need to update that database and although my catalog is not particularly big (40k images) I guess if I have been over zealous on keywording it may have contributed buy increasing the database size. Worth looking at again maybe.

Tonyespofoto - good comments, thank you. it is always good to hear from someone who has specific requirements and efficiency is a pretty important one for a professional. Being ree I guess there is nothing to lose apart from a few hours playtime.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Thank you for your replies so far.

orangutan - your comments have got me thinking about how I am using LR now because when someone reports no real issues it makes you wonder what you are doing!
The catalog is a database and apparently one reason LR can be slow for importing files is the need to update that database and although my catalog is not particularly big (40k images) I guess if I have been over zealous on keywording it may have contributed buy increasing the database size. Worth looking at again maybe.

Tonyespofoto - good comments, thank you. it is always good to hear from someone who has specific requirements and efficiency is a pretty important one for a professional. Being ree I guess there is nothing to lose apart from a few hours playtime.

Being a database is what makes LR fast. Its creating previews, which means processing raw images to apply all your presets, etc and saving a copy of them in a database that is slow.

If you do not want to see converted / adjusted images, or keyword them, it will be much faster.

I downloaded Photomechanic and processed a thousand images. I found it to be the same or slower than LR.

I believe Breeze Browser uses Canon API'[s, so you are getting another view of DPP in a way. I have not used it, I use Breeze DSLR Tethering software and like it. It uses Canon API's, but presents the same functionality in a different manner.

I think that both have a trial, import a thousand or two images, time the process and see how it works on your computer with your import settings. Those settings can make a huge difference as can the computer.

 

[LDS]

But viewing files can be painfully slow when all you want to do is a quick check to see if the photo is worth importing in the first place.

When importing photos, even the card and card reader speed can make a difference (i.e. USB 2 vs USB 3) for the import windows previews (in the past I had even an issue with an USB 3 card reader firmware which made it really slow).

LR also does lookups to see which photos has been already imported. Then while importing it reads metadata, create previews/DNGs (if enabled) and applies presets. All tasks that may slow down operations from a simple file copy. Usually the price paid while importing is offset by faster operations later (LR speed could be improved, but it doesn't look #1 priority for Adobe now).

Using a database has advantages and disadvantages. Keywording is very useful if you routinely use them for searching and creating collections, regardless of where they are stored.

Writing data into a database may slow down importing a little, ensure LR verifies and optimize the database at least once a month (or more often, if you import a lot of images often). It will speed up SQLite operations by defragmenting and compacting it (it can take some time, on a large database). Keeping the database on the disk(s) with faster random access will of course help.

 

[YuengLinger]

The older, "all camera models" version of Canon's DPP works great for me. Excellent previews, super fast...The rating system is compatible with LR.

I'm using DPP for a 5DIII.

I use DPP to bring the files into a folder on my desktop's HDD, then cull in that location by rating, not immediately deleting, then drag the rated files to the folder that will be part of the LR catalog. Once in LR I simply "Synchronize" and, bam, catalog is up to date with the new images.

Once LR process for standard size previews, I find the browsing fast enough.

 

[Nelu]

I`m surprised no one mentioned "FastPictureViewer" for culling photos. It`s wicked fast but unfortunately it`s only available for Windows.
My workflow is really simple: I rate one star all out-of-focus photos and then I use a custom filter to delete them all.
I import to Lightroom what`s left and I`m done.

In Lightroom I use the "Library" module when going through lots of photos because rendering previews is way faster than in the Develop module.

Nelu

 

[pwp]

I guess that was a typo above as the 30D didn't release until 2006 but interesting comments on BB. I did spot that many guys at the 2012 Olympics were using Photo Mechanic (putting a 100-400 to good use between races so I am interested to see what others think of this too.

He's right, the D30 is a year 2000 camera. Check Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_D30
Often confused, the 30D is a different camera which shipped in 2006. The model sequence was D30, D60, 10D, 20D, 30D etc...

Back to the topic. I use a bit of everything. Agreed, useful large project browsing is best avoided in Bridge and Lr. There are powerful, dedicated alternatives.

1. Download: The workflow that I have evolved over the past 15 years is to Import from card with BreezeBrowser Downloader Pro. http://www.breezesys.com/Downloader/ I prefer this over Photomechanic Ingest as it has the options to download not only into two destinations simultaneously, but also automatically create via "Job Code" a new custom named folder in the directory of your choice plus a whole lot more. Chris Breeze offers a useful free trial period. For a dedicated Download app, there's nothing like it. The download function in PhotoMechanic, Ingest, is also highly featured, but BreezeBrowser DownloaderPro just outguns it for features.

2: Browsing: After Import I sort, rank, keyword etc in the king of browsers, PhotoMechanic. This is such a richly featured program it's difficult to ignore. From PhotoMechanic I import into Lr and get on with the rest of the post-production. Perversly, I also have a license for BreezeBrowser Pro http://www.breezesys.com/BreezeBrowser/ BB Pro is not as fully featured as PhotoMechanic, but nothing on Earth beats it for speed. It's a very light, efficient program and it loads/renders massive folders of TIFFS at speeds that should embarrass software writers around the planet. Again, there is a generous free trial period to try it out.

Unless there are compelling budget constraints or simply a small number of modestly sized projects, why anyone would voluntarily use Lr or Bridge for the functions that PhotoMechanic or BreezeBrowser Pro excel at is beyond me.

-pw