danielbrown

While there shouldn't be (and generally isn't) a huge shift in code between beta and "GM" (Golden Master) versions of the app, there are occasions when, at the last minute, one chunk of code which is "safer" gets swapped out for one that's "optimized". With that said, I'm hardly "in" on what happened here. I showed off Lightroom 1.4 at the Bonaire Digital Shootout in June, and have dabbled in (but not hammered on) LR 2.0 since then. A glance through the Adobe Support forums for Lightroom 2.0 under the topic of performance: http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.59b604cf Shows several complaints, and several people wondering what the other people are talking about. There are some optimization tricks that seem to help, but my hunch is that people are using the retouching tools in LR 2.0 the same way they would in Photoshop and they are VERY different animals. I'm sure they'll patch it quickly as the Lr team can be a bit more nimble and flexible than the Photoshop team. Hang tight. As for Lightroom versus Aperture, I've no opinion either way since I no longer work for Adobe (though that may change...) My impressions of the two applications come from: 1. The fact that Lightroom is "cross-platform" and based on the number of responses from people on Windows machines, once can imagine that to be appealing. 2. The impressions I've received from talking to about 200 people who have used both intensively and prefer Lightroom over Aperture (rather vocally in some cases.) In the end, it's personal preference; use what pisses you off the least 'cause, sooner or later, every piece of software is gonna do it. Danielsan--> "Wish I could take enough pictures worth keeping to slow Lightroom down" www.downloadculture.com

Ettore, Don't let the good-natured teasing put you off. Whether you call your camera a 40D or a D40, you made a nice choice. (I'm saying that because I just bought one as well.) I've had a 20D and, well, I just couldn't justify buying a housing for a camera that old (with a viewfinder that small). The 5D was CONSIDERABLY more expensive (though complaining about price in underwater photography is a bit ironic when you explain to "normal" friends and family how much you spent "just" to take pictures under water.) Thanks to the gang at Backscatter (www.backscatter.com), I was able to "test dive" a 40D in a Sea&Sea housing at the Bonaire Digital Shootout this year and, I gotta tell you, that was a nice ride. I'm fortunate to have friends who loan me bigger rigs (1DS Mark III's in Seacam housings) and it's always tough to drive another car after a fully-loaded Mercedes, but this Sea&Sea does it for me nicely. I considered a clear housing if, for no other reason than you can see when it's flooding much more quickly. But if you take care of your gear, and treat o-rings well, that shouldn't be a problem. I guess make that another vote for Sea and Sea. Daniel Brown www.downloadculture.com

The reality is that, with any workflow/cataloging program that attempts to read RAW files, you're going to wait. The only exception I know if is Photo Mechanic and its speed is due to the fact that it relies almost exclusively on the embedded JPEGs in your RAW files. Both Aperture and Lightroom parse the RAW files and generate larger previews. One notable difference is that Lightroom and Photoshop share the same RAW engine which means that adjustments made to a RAW file in either application can be read in the other. Aperture assumes you want to hand off a "rendered" version of the file. daniel Brown http://www.adobeevangelists.com/uw

Hmm... Here's my take (the short version). * Great point that a filter subtracts light that, regardless of color, the camera needs to account for in deciding exposure. HOWEVER... * A filter is a one-trick pony. Unless you plan to shoot at the same depth for the whole dive, the filter is either subtracting too much or too little of the "wrong" light. In a perfect world, the camera would be able to introduce a variable-density colored filter based on light readings. But that's a bit tricky. Maybe someone can build one on a rotating wheel that would sit in front of the lens... then you could dial-a-filter... daniel--> http://www.adobeevangelists.com/uw

It'll be engaging, exciting, a tad dangerous, and provide a good dose of adrenaline, and that's just the Photoshop and Lightroom session! Cheers! Daniel Brown