Lars
Active member
Peter - I'm not so sure about that integration. LR is a separate product from CS, built by a separate, small, innovative team. CS OTOH is all massive legacy code, some 80 million lines of it is what I heard.
The problem with integration of separate products at that scale is that for anything shared, each product team has - must have - a veto right to safeguard the quality of its own legacy product. So while low-level shared components can boost productivity, at a higher level - like using LR as file browser for all of CS - sharing and integration effectively stalls innovation.
Also, from a market perspective there is little benefit as LR caters to a different market than CS. Yes many of us photographers use CS, but it's not really made for us. LR is, we just need to pull in PS for editing once in a while. Then when we put on our publishing hat it's of course a different situation, but that is a role that all photographers do not have.
If I was product manager for LR I would fiercely defend its independence from CS. Bridge can remain a file browser for CS users, but hands off my photo workflow app!
The problem with integration of separate products at that scale is that for anything shared, each product team has - must have - a veto right to safeguard the quality of its own legacy product. So while low-level shared components can boost productivity, at a higher level - like using LR as file browser for all of CS - sharing and integration effectively stalls innovation.
Also, from a market perspective there is little benefit as LR caters to a different market than CS. Yes many of us photographers use CS, but it's not really made for us. LR is, we just need to pull in PS for editing once in a while. Then when we put on our publishing hat it's of course a different situation, but that is a role that all photographers do not have.
If I was product manager for LR I would fiercely defend its independence from CS. Bridge can remain a file browser for CS users, but hands off my photo workflow app!