I use photo mechanic for quick reviews and only bring a subset into
Lightroom which is much slower

I never edit photos and abhor AI use in photos

Sent from Gmail Mobile


On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 4:07 PM Nancy Crowell via Tweeters <
tweeters at u.washington.edu> wrote:


> I have used both Photo Mechanic & Lightroom Classic. Although LR was

> originally designed to be a database, it now offers editing options that

> rival Photoshop, including generative AI (said without commentary on the

> ethics of AI). If you don't need all those bells & whistles, Photo Mechanic

> is fast and easy for organization. I found it to be used mostly by

> journalists, which is an endorsement for its speed and ease of use. I ended

> up leaning on Lightroom because I do want editing options, but was

> impressed with Photo Mechanic.

>

> Nancy

> "Images for the imagination."

> www.crowellphotography.com

> ------------------------------

> *From:* Tweeters <tweeters-bounces at mailman11.u.washington.edu> on behalf

> of Glenn Nelson via Tweeters <tweeters at u.washington.edu>

> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 11, 2024 3:55:45 PM

> *To:* tweeters at u.washington.edu <tweeters at u.washington.edu>

> *Subject:* Re: [Tweeters] photo-organizing software

>

> I second Paul's suggestion: Photo Mechanic (or Photo Mechanic Plus). I

> worked at The Seattle Times for almost a couple decades and I use Photo

> Mechanic because all the Times photographers did. It's pretty widely a

> professionals' choice. It's easy to tag and categorize and is especially

> fast to ingest photo files. It's made to be a database as opposed to

> software like Lightroom where DB functions are part of a larger suite of

> editing, etc.

>

> Best,

> Glenn

> Seattle

> _______________________________________________

> Tweeters mailing list

> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

> http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters

>