Breeze Browser Pro [Archive] - BirdPhotographers.net

Jay Gould

06-03-2009, 04:48 AM

Hi, I notice that a fair number of the BPNers are using BBP and/or DP in addition to LR2 and CS4.

What part of the PP are you doing in BBP?DP that you could do and choose not to do in LR2? Why?

Those of you using BBP/DP - have you previously done the same tasks in LR and decided that BBP/DP did it better or more efficiently?

Thanks,

Nancy A Elwood

06-03-2009, 06:39 AM

I use Downloader Pro to engest my images. I then view them and cull in Photo Mechanic, then import them into my catalog program, Expression Media 2. I do not have LR for I PP my nef's in NX2, and already had EM2 as my catalog program. Downloader Pro labeling seems to be compatible with all my programs.

Charles Glatzer

06-03-2009, 08:00 AM

Bob Ettinger

06-03-2009, 03:36 PM

Alfred Forns

06-03-2009, 10:25 PM

Jay any of the browsing programs will use the embedded jpeg, others like LR will skip and make their own. They are slower but of higher quality.

I like doing the initial sorting with PhotoMechanic then import into LR for the final edit. Its all personal choice and what works for you.

btw at the start of digital we used to shoot RAW and small jpeg for faster viewing !!!! ... no longer a need !!!

Simon Bennett

06-04-2009, 05:10 AM

Jay, I understand that Breezebrowser uses the Canon SDK, and so will probably render enhancements like Highlight Tone Prioity more truly than some other raw convertors.

Robert Amoruso

06-04-2009, 06:32 AM

Jay,

I use BB PRO only for my initial editing, before importing all images into LR2. BB uses the embedded JPEG rather than creating new ones, thus it opens the images extremely fast for initail review.

Best,

Chas

Another advantage and the biggest one for me is that BBPro sharpens the embedded JPG for viewing during browsing allowing you to quickly ascertain critical sharpness. When editing bird images I look (in most cases) for critical sharpness on the eye. IF it is not sharp it is deleted. I can edit 100's of images in a short period because of this feature.

I have not used another program yet that is this fast and pre-sharpens the view for making this critical assessment.

Alfred Forns

06-05-2009, 08:19 AM

For final editing I would not recommend BB since is using the embedded jpeg Would only use to get rid of obvious duds. Sharpening a low quality jpeg will still give you a low quality image.

If you import the images into LR or any program that will generate their own jpes the difference will be obvious. In LR you can apply capture sharpening by as a preset. Have two kinds Landscape and Portrait. They refer to a stronger and weaker sharpening with the portrait being better for people images.

If you haven't tried it you don't know what you have been missing ... like anything else Similar is different and different is not the same.

Roman Kurywczak

06-05-2009, 08:31 AM

Hey Jay,
I too use BB pro the same way Chas, Bob, and Robert do.....strictly for speed and editing. Remember......when you have 100's or sometimes 1000's of images to sort.....speed rules!

Tell Dickinson

06-05-2009, 08:54 AM

Hi Jay, I use BBPro mainly for culling as it is so easy and fast, but I do not normally process with it. I also use it if/when I need to quickly change a colour space, rename a batch of files, sort on shooting data and all the obscure things that I may need to do.

Jay Gould

06-05-2009, 02:46 PM

Hi Guys,

You know I am just learning. :confused: Thus far my workflow has been one dimensional - Lightroom 2. Now I am about 1/3 of the way through my first attempt at learning: CS4 - Adobe CS4 Classroom in a Book (CS4 Classroom). It is a well organized start and I would recommend it to someone that does not know Photoshop.

CS4 Classroom used Bridge to first identify an image on your drive before opening into CS4.

I am aware that you can go directly from LR to CS4 simply by indicating that the image should be edited in CS4 - I do that all of the time to stitch panoramas.

Currently I shoot only RAW and PP in LR; I download from a card reader directly into LR at the same time I am downloading onto my hard drive.

My first step is to review the images and permanently delete the junk - 80+% of what I shot. From my six month trip last year to the USA I brought home 16,000 images; they were immediately reduced to 2,500 images for my travel blog. During this next trip I hope to do more review and culling as I travel; I anticipate substantially less "keepers" as a result of trying to raise my standards to meet BPN/YOUR standards :eek: ;).

Al, I have been doing all of my PP in LR and then saving as a jpeg for the web. Thus far I have done my printing through LR. One of the issues I am not clear about is why some work their images in CS4 as a tiff and some work as a psd. My brother works his images as a psd; most here on BPN seem to work as a tiff which is a much larger file.

I am trying to understand and create my own workflow.

Where in the scheme of things does BB fit along side Bridge - LR - CS4? Are there certain aspects of BB and DP that are - in your collective opinions - better than initially using either Bridge or LR?

Thanks for expounding further; I am sure others will find your answers helpful too.

Alfred Forns

06-05-2009, 08:34 PM

Hi Jay

Its faster to see images in BB or similar programs since they don't have to generate a jpeg (use the one within the raw image file). I normally go to PhotoMechanic and do the first couple edits then import into LR.

The Tiff and PSD are the same. Some versions back if you wanted to save layers you needed to save in PSD. The few files I have saved with layers I use the PSD to distinguish.

Roger Clark

06-05-2009, 10:37 PM

Hi Jay,

I use Bridge, but sometimes when I travel light, like only with an Epson 5000 or one of those small laptops (which bridge does not run well on), I shoot raw + jpeg. Then a simple windows viewer will enable viewing the images and allow full resolution examination of focus and depth of field. The epsons will see the embedded jpeg in a raw file, but only at half resolution. The jpeg will show as full resolution.

Hi Guys,

My first step is to review the images and permanently delete the junk - 80+% of what I shot. From my six month trip last year to the USA I brought home 16,000 images; they were immediately reduced to 2,500 images for my travel blog. During this next trip I hope to do more review and culling as I travel; I anticipate substantially less "keepers" as a result of trying to raise my standards to meet BPN/YOUR standards :eek: ;).

With all due respect, perhaps learn when NOT to take the picture. I grew up doing 4x5. I would often go for a long hike with 12 to 20 sheets of film in my backpack. With 3 images (bracketing) per scene that's only 4 to 7 scenes per day. I learned to make every shot count.

quote=Jay Gould;272550]
Al, I have been doing all of my PP in LR and then saving as a jpeg for the web. Thus far I have done my printing through LR. One of the issues I am not clear about is why some work their images in CS4 as a tiff and some work as a psd. My brother works his images as a psd; most here on BPN seem to work as a tiff which is a much larger file.[/quote]

Tif is an open standard and you can get free source code to read such files, ensuring you can always read them.

John Blumenkamp

06-06-2009, 06:57 AM

Hi Jay... I give another nod for using BB Pro as others have mentioned. In my opinion it is really a great tool for initial sorting/deleting of images. A big thumbs up from me for the program. :)

Jason Franke

06-06-2009, 01:27 PM

Jay Gould

06-06-2009, 02:51 PM

Hi Jay,

With all due respect, perhaps learn when NOT to take the picture. I grew up doing 4x5. I would often go for a long hike with 12 to 20 sheets of film in my backpack. With 3 images (bracketing) per scene that's only 4 to 7 scenes per day. I learned to make every shot count.

Roger, at 6.5/fps spending one day at Brooks Falls shooting bears catching salmon was good for almost 1,000 image; a week on a Alagnak River in Katmai fishing for salmon and shooting the bears also fishing for salmon was good for 1000s of images; two weeks on a cruise from Alaska to Russia through the Bering Sea and along the Aleutian Island chain with all of the sea and air life was good for thousands more! Now I know why you are able to carry enough CF cards so that in addition to you backups you bring home all full cards. ;) :p

Friends of ours did three months in South America including the one month Antarctic Cruise we are doing in January and they shot 38,000 images and are having trouble discarding images!

The images you produce are second to none, and since I enjoy your website galleries I am not about to suggest a change in your shooting habits; however, I guess old habits are hard to break - you can carry more cards! :eek: ;) :D

Cheers Mate, Jay

Roger Clark

06-06-2009, 11:12 PM

Jay, and Jason,

I think you misunderstood what I said. It's not the number of images, it the keeper ratio. Try and improve your keeper ratio. If you will just delete an image later, why take it in the first place? As you improve your keeper ratio, you might also find those you keep are better as you've developed a more critical eye and style.

Robert McColley

06-10-2009, 04:43 PM

Jay Gould

06-10-2009, 06:22 PM

I really like BBP and have turned off Bridge as I think BBP is so much better. I first view images directly from the CF card, do a quick and easy slide show in BBP.

Next I look at the thumbnails, in about 35mm slide size, of entire load of images and quickly cull them by ranking then batch deleting. I may process an image I like immediately by importing into CS3 from BBP. After that I can select images from the thumb nails then drag them to a folder in the tree to the right or make a new folder.

It is also great for direct comparison of up to 4 images at a time. I also like to select Grey scale for the images and review them for their potential for processing in monochrome.

I find PPB is so versatile, maybe no more than Bridge, but for me so much easier and faster. I have tried BBP for Raw converssion but prefer to convert in Adobe Photoshop.

Robert, you are going from BBP to PS. Do you also use LR? Is it redundant to go from BBP to LR to PS?

Also, the recent post by Cliff raises the question whether CR2 should be processed first in DPP. Are you on the light or dark side? ;)

<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CUsers%5CJay%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtm lclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CUsers%5CJay%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtm lclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CUsers%5CJay%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtm lclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><style>  </style> I've just seen the value of a CR2 file. On my last two major shoots, I've had strange halos around the heads of birds photographed against water or sky. It had happened with at least two lenses, so I was thinking it might be a sensor fault of some kind. I sent some samples to John Dimauro at Canon's Jamesburg facility, and John forwarded them to Rudy Winston at Canon's New York headquarters. Rudy's suggestion was to try converting the images in Canon's DPP software instead of Adobe Camera RAW. Incredibly, that completely solved the problem! How ACR, which I've previously viewed as great software, can create things in an image that aren't there is beyond me. I was not applying Shadow/Highlight or similar adjustments in ACR that might account for the artifacts.
Cheers, Jay