Do I really need Lightroom?

Question

I don’t have a problem, but I have questions regarding the need for Lightroom. I have Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom3. I use Photoshop, Camera Raw and Bridge. So far, I’ve used Lightroom3 in learning mode, and I’m not convinced it offers advantages over using Photoshop CS5/Camera Raw/Bridge. Here’s why.
I’ve not delved into Lightroom3’s Slideshow, Print or Web features, but Library appears to be a photographers file-control system that takes some control away from a user. Why should I care about a file-control system that establishes a catalog that I must ensure stays in order. Can’t I do that myself using Bridge? In Bridge, as in Lightroom, I have filters, Collections, Metadata, Keywording, syncing capabilities—as far as I can tell, everything I think Lightroom offers without giving control to a software cataloging system. Is Lightroom that much easier or more beneficial in other ways that I should use its Library module for file control instead of Bridge? As for the Development module, it replicates Camera Raw but perhaps missing one or two features that available in Camera Raw.
The bottom line for me is this. Am I wasting my time trying to develop proficiency in Lightroom when I’m not convinced it offers benefits over Camera Raw and Bridge—which, again, I use in conjunction with Photoshop. If I switched to Lightroom, I suppose it would be in place of Camera Raw and Bridge but still in conjunction with Photoshop. I’d appreciate any opinions/advice.
Efwess, AKA Fred

Answer 1

Trevor.Dennis wrote:
That's the sort of throughput that people argue you need LR for
That's what they say, but I agree that Bridge can deal with high volume equally well.
What I see as the main thing with Lightroom is that it's an entirely photographic workflow. That may sound like an academic point, but these subtle shifts in emphasis can have a surprisingly large effect on the final result. If the image is crap, nothing in Lightroom can save it. In Photoshop you can just turn it into something different if you have the time. As such, Lightroom inspires discipline and improved photographic skills. We can all use a dose of that.
In the short time I've used Lightroom I can already see that it has changed some of my habits, and I think for the better. Less emphasis on post-production, and more on the actual shoot. The net result is, surprise, time saved, and a better result overall. Of course I can still send the image to Photoshop, just as I can with ACR, but for some reason I find myself doing it less. I tend to push development as far as possible in Lightroom and often leave it at that.
Of course I love Photoshop way too much to ever give it up. But for now, I'm happy to follow my intuition and not try to fight it.
But, again, do you need Lightroom? No.