ACDSee or Bridge

For the sake of a simple picture browser, what does the most PS users make use of? ACDSee or something similar, or Bridge?
I am not keen on Bridge, and even ACDSee have to many facilities. I do not want a album with photo adjustment tools but simply want a browser for finding a picture fast between gig's of photos. What is the suggestion?

Dave

What version of Bridge are you in? CS3 does me just fine...but, Adobe really wants you to love Lightroom....IMHO anytime I have to leave the adobe interface, I am losing time which equals money...so, despite Photoshop and Bridge being far from perfect, my time is more valuable and I can process about 5000 images weekly fairly efficiently.

"Dave" wrote in message

For the sake of a simple picture browser, what does the most PS users make use of? ACDSee or something similar, or Bridge?
I am not keen on Bridge, and even ACDSee have to many facilities. I do not want a album with photo adjustment tools but simply want a browser for finding a picture fast between gig's of photos. What is the suggestion?

Dave

I use Lightroom all the time -- but not just for a file browser. If all you need is a browser, I'd choose Bridge. Far from perfect, but a better choice than ACDSee or something else -- especially if you have CS3.

"robert_b" wrote in message

What version of Bridge are you in? CS3 does me just fine...but, Adobe really wants you to love Lightroom....IMHO anytime I have to leave the adobe interface, I am losing time which equals money...so, despite Photoshop and Bridge being far from perfect, my time is more valuable and I can process about 5000 images weekly fairly efficiently.

"Dave" wrote in message

For the sake of a simple picture browser, what does the most PS users make use of? ACDSee or something similar, or Bridge?
I am not keen on Bridge, and even ACDSee have to many facilities. I do not want a album with photo adjustment tools but simply want a browser for finding a picture fast between gig's of photos. What is the suggestion?

Dave

Dave wrote:

For the sake of a simple picture browser...

Irfanview or FastStone

--
Cliff

I use Lightroom all the time -- but not just for a file browser. If all you need is a browser, I'd choose Bridge. Far from perfect, but a better choice than ACDSee or something else -- especially if you have CS3.

What version of Bridge are you in? CS3 does me just fine...but, Adobe really wants you to love Lightroom....IMHO anytime I have to leave the adobe interface, I am losing time which equals money...so, despite Photoshop and Bridge being far from perfect, my time is more valuable and I can process about 5000 images weekly fairly efficiently.

For the sake of a simple picture browser...

Irfanview or FastStone

Cliff

Many thanks for all the responses.
A special thank you to Cliff.
First time hearing about FastStone.
I downloaded both, Irfanview and FastStone,
installed both and immediatly liked 'FastStone'.
Even exif reading..!

Thanks Cliff

Dave

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:24:13 +0200, Dave wrote:

I use Lightroom all the time -- but not just for a file browser. If all you need is a browser, I'd choose Bridge. Far from perfect, but a better choice than ACDSee or something else -- especially if you have CS3.

What version of Bridge are you in? CS3 does me just fine...but, Adobe really wants you to love Lightroom....IMHO anytime I have to leave the adobe interface, I am losing time which equals money...so, despite Photoshop and Bridge being far from perfect, my time is more valuable and I can process about 5000 images weekly fairly efficiently.

For the sake of a simple picture browser...

Irfanview or FastStone

Cliff

Many thanks for all the responses.
A special thank you to Cliff.
First time hearing about FastStone.
I downloaded both, Irfanview and FastStone,
installed both and immediatly liked 'FastStone'.
Even exif reading..!

Thanks Cliff

Dave

I've been using BreezeBrowser Pro for a while; not bad.

On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:27:27 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:24:13 +0200, Dave wrote:

I use Lightroom all the time -- but not just for a file browser. If all you need is a browser, I'd choose Bridge. Far from perfect, but a better choice than ACDSee or something else -- especially if you have CS3.

What version of Bridge are you in? CS3 does me just fine...but, Adobe really wants you to love Lightroom....IMHO anytime I have to leave the adobe interface, I am losing time which equals money...so, despite Photoshop and Bridge being far from perfect, my time is more valuable and I can process about 5000 images weekly fairly efficiently.

For the sake of a simple picture browser...

Irfanview or FastStone

Cliff

Many thanks for all the responses.
A special thank you to Cliff.
First time hearing about FastStone.
I downloaded both, Irfanview and FastStone,
installed both and immediatly liked 'FastStone'.
Even exif reading..!

Thanks Cliff

Dave

I've been using BreezeBrowser Pro for a while; not bad.

Thanks - (and wow..! How many of these are there..!)
I am busy reading the description at
http://www.breezesys.com/BreezeBrowser/
and will try it.
I intend to reinstall an Ghost Image this evening, which means now is the time to do some experimentation.

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:06:08 +0200, Dave wrote:

For the sake of a simple picture browser, what does the most PS users make use of? ACDSee or something similar, or Bridge?
I am not keen on Bridge, and even ACDSee have to many facilities. I do not want a album with photo adjustment tools but simply want a browser for finding a picture fast between gig's of photos. What is the suggestion?

There are two types of albums. I don't know the technical terms but I call them "live" and "database".

"Live" apps like IrfanView have to make the thumbnails every time you access a folder.

"Database" viewers like ThumbsPlus store the thumbnails once made so the next time you access a folder, all the thumbnails are pre-made.

"Live" is slow viewing access but requires no storage. "Database" is quick viewing access but takes some disk space to store the thumbs.

Put 10k images in a folder and the database method is quicker by miles. It may take 20secs to load the thumbs but try browsing 10k image thumbs with Irfanview. Reviewing images on cds or dvds makes the "Database" viewer even more efficient (if you have previously made and stored the thumbs in a database) since making thumbs from images on disk can be really slow.

Another advantage of "Database" viewers is that you can choose to make or not make the thumbnails automatically. If you are loading lots of images into the pc, you can choose to make the thumbnail only after you have reviewed or processed (or whenever you wish). Of course you can choose to always make thumbs.

There are many other advantages in using a "Database" viewer since the database can store all sorts of other info and allow sophisticated sorts/queries.

I don't use Bridge so I don't know where that falls in the scheme of things.

Starman*

Most of my images are on PhotoCD, DvD and CD. What sold me on ACDSee and ThumbsPlus was the ability to deal with images that were stored offline on DvD. I eventually went with ACDSee but it was a close decision.

I don't believe Bridge addresses this.
--
Mike Russell - www.curvemeister.com

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:06:08 +0200, Dave wrote:

For the sake of a simple picture browser, what does the most PS users make use of? ACDSee or something similar, or Bridge?
I am not keen on Bridge, and even ACDSee have to many facilities. I do not want a album with photo adjustment tools but simply want a browser for finding a picture fast between gig's of photos. What is the suggestion?

Dave

ACDSee Classic

http://www.brothersoft.com/acdsee-classic-778.html

BB:)

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:27:31 GMT, "Mike Russell" wrote:

Most of my images are on PhotoCD, DvD and CD. What sold me on ACDSee and ThumbsPlus was the ability to deal with images that were stored offline on DvD. I eventually went with ACDSee but it was a close decision.
I don't believe Bridge addresses this.

Wonder whether FastStone will save info on images stored on DVD. I'll test it. You can very well try it, Mike. Quite nice, free and slightly more than 4MB.

Dave
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p48939368.html