Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: LR to C1...why?  (Read 19445 times)
ippolitois
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #20 on: July 07, 2013, 02:02:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been using LR since it came out and I always hated the noise control and skin tones.  They were always too blue and the noise was horrible.  LR4 solved the noise issue to a large extent but is still not as good as Silkypix. However, the worst thing about LR is that you have to use the catalog. I have never liked the catalog at all as I prefer to use my folder structure. That is a personal issue but for me, I could never understand why Adobe wouldn't let you choose.

Recently I ran the trial version of Capture 1 and fell in love with the skintones. There is no doubt that the skintones are far superior out of the box without tweaking them. The noise control is far better than LR4 and the highlight recovery tool is a tiny fracture worse than LR. Regarding highlight recovery, I'm splitting hairs here,  but as a wedding photographer, pulling details out of the dress is important. CO also allows you to choose between using the catalog or sessions which is the same as using folders structure. The UI can be customized to your needs and it does use ICC profiles which I think is great so that you can soft proof on the go.

CO does have it's negatives too. For one thing, it requires a pretty powerful GPU and a powerful system to get the most out of it. I had to upgrade my power supply and GPU to accommodate the new engine in CO 7. Since then, it's very fast and very stable. When it came time to choose between upgrading from LR4 to 5 or go with CO7, I invested in Capture One 7. In fact, since I got my new SSD drive, I haven't even installed LR on my drive.

To recap, Capture One in my opinion offers better skintones, noise control, and the option of using the catalog system. As for the example in this thread, CO default settings will give you a much punchier look over LR.  LR4 has a very flat  default look which always needs a little kick to make it look crisper.

There are other things like keystoning, various default tone curves like linear that really help when you really screw up and, a very good B&W module. You can also process files, full jpg, proofs, and tiff's all at the same time using the process tab.


Hope this helps.

Paul
Logged
jwstl
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #21 on: July 07, 2013, 02:37:59 PM »
ReplyReply

However, the worst thing about LR is that you have to use the catalog. I have never liked the catalog at all as I prefer to use my folder structure. That is a personal issue but for me, I could never understand why Adobe wouldn't let you choose.

I'm using my own folder structure with LR 4.x. I copy all my Raw files to the main drive using the folders I create and then go to LR and select Import. I then navigate to the files in the folders and LR Adds the images by creating the links to the images in my folders. They are not stored in the LR catalog.

I've been using LR and testing C1 Pro 7 but haven't made the switch due to a few issues with C1.
Logged
ippolitois
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 82


« Reply #22 on: July 07, 2013, 06:00:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Actually, I always used the same system as you with the folders, but remember every time you do an import, you are adding those files to the catalog. Move one of those files out of the folder and see what happens in LR. In Capture One, you can move the folders around from one hard drive to another as long as the sessions file floats with the files, you'll have everything in tact.

What problems are you having with CO 7? Just curious? Until I upgraded my graphics card, CO 7 was painfully slow, but now that I have upgraded to an AMD 7950, the system works great. I have an i5 with 16gb or ram so it's not a super speedy computer. LR is a little more polished than CO 7, but oh, the skin tones!

Hope this helps.

Paul
Logged
Bryan Conner
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 521


WWW
« Reply #23 on: July 07, 2013, 11:27:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Actually, I always used the same system as you with the folders, but remember every time you do an import, you are adding those files to the catalog. Move one of those files out of the folder and see what happens in LR. In Capture One, you can move the folders around from one hard drive to another as long as the sessions file floats with the files, you'll have everything in tact.



You can move files around to anywhere on your hard drive, or even to another hard drive with no problems when using Lightroom.  The key is that you have to tell Lightroom where it is.  The easiest way, and most logical way in my opinion, is to use Lightroom itself to move the files.  This way, Lightroom knows the new location of the files. 
Logged

jeanvalentin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 112


« Reply #24 on: July 09, 2013, 02:18:37 PM »
ReplyReply

The image on the left (with number 2) is C1.

Full size images look a little bit different. As you can see from the responses, it's all subjective. It's what you like personally. The notion that C1 gives you files "better" out of the gate it's not true anymore (it was when LR just came into play).

You can make defaults in LR that will suit your look (I for example changed the profiles from Adobe to Canon Neutral). You can make ANY change you want and set it as a default. I primarily photograph weddings and currently LR still has better highlight recovery. Yes, v7 improved over v6, but LR 4 still gets more detail out of them.

Personally, if you don't use a DB, the steep price of C1 compared to LR is really not worth it. But that's my personal opinion. Best is to download the trial and see for yourself.
Logged

Best,
Valentin
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2870


WWW
« Reply #25 on: July 09, 2013, 03:11:24 PM »
ReplyReply

I never really got the argument that C1 is expensive.

Even if you only own a 5D3 and kit lens and a set of Alienbees then C1 will be a very small % of your total photo-expenses and is likely to be upwards of 50% of your total time spent doing photography (obviously depends on what genre of work you do).

I think C1 is significantly better in many areas (and a bit deficient in others). But even if it (or some other primary-workflow software tool) was only a smidge better I think it would be worth 10x what C1 costs (especially given that upgrades are and will be $99 are are only once every 18-24 months).

Of course I do not hide that my opinion is strongly biased.
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
jeanvalentin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 112


« Reply #26 on: July 09, 2013, 03:18:58 PM »
ReplyReply

I never really got the argument that C1 is expensive.

Even if you only own a 5D3 and kit lens and a set of Alienbees then C1 will be a very small % of your total photo-expenses and is likely to be upwards of 50% of your total time spent doing photography (obviously depends on what genre of work you do).

....

The comparison should be made against the competition, not what gear used. It doesn't matter if you have a 60D or a 1Dx. It matters what comes out of the software. Currently, compared with LR (the main competition), it is much higher priced without an objective gain. Skin tones is very subjective (as seen from current responses as well). At this time, unfortunately for Phase and fortunately for users, C1 doesn't have the advantages it used to have years ago. If the output quality difference would be great, the price difference wouldn't matter. When the output is comparable, price matters.

In the end, it doesn't matter what I or you say ... it's what the user believes (and many times, users are influenced by marketing hype Smiley ).
Logged

Best,
Valentin
dwood
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 277



« Reply #27 on: July 09, 2013, 05:16:58 PM »
ReplyReply


I think C1 is significantly better in many areas (and a bit deficient in others).

I'd be very interested in hearing what you feel are the 'significant' advantages of C1 over LR, and what the current deficiencies are.

thanks,
Doug
Logged

Gulag
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 237


« Reply #28 on: July 09, 2013, 09:23:57 PM »
ReplyReply

one of advantages is that more than one catalog or session can be opened simultaneously in C1Pro.
Logged

“For art to be art it has to cure.”  - Alejandro Jodorowsky
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2892



WWW
« Reply #29 on: July 10, 2013, 05:40:54 AM »
ReplyReply

one of advantages is that more than one catalog or session can be opened simultaneously in C1Pro.
Which could equally be cast as "one of LR's advantages is that it discourages you from fragmenting control of your work"....

Particularly when comparing two strong products, many aspects come down to such very fine margins which can be argued either way, or are more a case of personal preference. For example, is it better that in C1 you aren't forced to use a catalogue? I'd dispute that, and I feel C1's catalogue/sessions are an awkward marriage, but there will be others - such as Doug Wink - who never wanted a catalogue to be integrated with the raw processor.

But as a Lightroom user who only looks over the fence at C1, where I think you can see " 'significant' advantages of C1 over LR" are:

- tethering - C1 controls exposure, live view, Capture Pilot
- focus mask - not perfect but still handy

Yes, that's a short list but I am limiting it to significant advantages, and there are other things I think are implemented better in C1. However, those are marginal and I'll avoid listing things LR does better or where there's no equivalent in C1.

John
« Last Edit: July 10, 2013, 05:42:54 AM by johnbeardy » Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7906


WWW
« Reply #30 on: July 10, 2013, 06:11:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Having paid for both, I don't feel that the price argument matters a lot for me. Workflow matters a lot.

I don't think that many users will switch. You know your ways with the product you use, with another product you need to learn, make the mistakes and find workarounds. Lots of effort to switch, nothing you do for the fun of it.

Best regards
Erik




The comparison should be made against the competition, not what gear used. It doesn't matter if you have a 60D or a 1Dx. It matters what comes out of the software. Currently, compared with LR (the main competition), it is much higher priced without an objective gain. Skin tones is very subjective (as seen from current responses as well). At this time, unfortunately for Phase and fortunately for users, C1 doesn't have the advantages it used to have years ago. If the output quality difference would be great, the price difference wouldn't matter. When the output is comparable, price matters.

In the end, it doesn't matter what I or you say ... it's what the user believes (and many times, users are influenced by marketing hype Smiley ).
« Last Edit: July 10, 2013, 12:35:43 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2870


WWW
« Reply #31 on: July 10, 2013, 12:46:19 PM »
ReplyReply

The comparison should be made against the competition, not what gear used. It doesn't matter if you have a 60D or a 1Dx. It matters what comes out of the software. Currently, compared with LR (the main competition), it is much higher priced without an objective gain. Skin tones is very subjective (as seen from current responses as well). At this time, unfortunately for Phase and fortunately for users, C1 doesn't have the advantages it used to have years ago. If the output quality difference would be great, the price difference wouldn't matter. When the output is comparable, price matters.

In the end, it doesn't matter what I or you say ... it's what the user believes (and many times, users are influenced by marketing hype Smiley ).

Relative price is only ever part of the story when deciding between two options.

If one week-long beach vacation is $100 and another is $500 and the $500 one is a bit nicer I'll spring for the $500 one even though it's "5 times the price". My vacation time is extremely valuable to me - that is the main expense of the trip. Any reasonable expense to improve/maximize that time is worth every penny to me.

If one damn-good-beer is $10 in a bar it doesn't matter to me if Budweiser is $1 or $8 - I'm happy to spend the $10 on the damn-good-beer. I'm a home brewer and training for a marathon so I value good beer and every beer costs me another mile+ of running.

On the other hand if one pair of sunglasses is $10 and the other is $20 I'm choosing the $10 almost every time as long as it's "good enough" almost without regard to how much better the $20 sunglasses are - I don't (personally) value sunglasses and tend to lose or break them quickly.

Price is always partly relative to other options, but also partly relative to one's available resources (including time and stress along with $$) and how much the object-in-question is worth to you.

My argument is that if workflow software is key to your professional life and you're spending massive amounts of time with it the difference of $200 is almost meaningless. But I spend so much time in front of a computer I'd spend just about anything that will produce better results in less time.
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2870


WWW
« Reply #32 on: July 10, 2013, 01:44:09 PM »
ReplyReply

I'd be very interested in hearing what you feel are the 'significant' advantages of C1 over LR, and what the current deficiencies are.

Off the top of my head (I don't keep a list - things change too frequently):
- Better Color (subjective but found consistently enough by myself and a high enough % of customers to say with confidence) especially with strongly saturated colors, purple/pink/red crossovers, skintones, and in steep tonal transitions like strongly side-lit portraits.
- Better tonality especially in deep shadow detail
- Noise/Grain/Texture/Microcontrast which looks better if your aesthetic is to allow grain but want that grain to be gaussian, fine, and film like rather than clumpy and digitally blob-like. On the other hand if you're shooting fairly high ISO with a dSLR and want the "clean commercial look" LR4/5 does a better job of what I'd call the "sledgehammer" approach of noise reduction if you abhor noise/grain and want no part of it.
- More pro tools for tethering:
--- live view
--- camera controls
--- fixed-focus windows (e.g. for four-corner-and-center analysis in a product/catalog environment)
--- focus mask (especially powerful for first-round edits and shoots involving tilts/swings)
--- overlay (great when matching another shot, or fitting a layout, also useful for random applications like matching color in art repro settings or corporate color settings)
--- more detailed/flexible controls (assumes/requires more education and a desire for more power/nuance over first-glance-simplicity) like full RGB levels with numerical entry, more specific noise reduction sliders,
- LCC tool which is required for tech cameras, but useful in a variety of niche applications including art reproduction and catalog shooting and automatic dust removal
- Chromatic aberration and purple fringing tools that work better on a broader range of files with far less work/twiddling
- A better laid out system for local adjustments (I think I'm in the minority here)
- Far more customization of the user interface, especially handy on very small (e.g. 10" MBA) or very large monitors (e.g. 30" Eizo) or in multi-monitor environments. Every tool can be floated/added/removed/collapsed or put on a second monitor. Including keyboard shortcuts which are every power user's dream.
- Better laid out tools for manual keystone/perspective correction (also auto-integration with newer Phase One digital backs, though that only helps those shooters)
- Completely/immediately portable session layout. For anybody who uses multiple computers in their workflow this is a huge help. You don't have to export/splice/import/merge or do anything at all to move a C1 session from one computer to the other. Everything resides in the folder.
- Massively better color editing tool (Color Editor) which is harder to learn but far, far more powerful than the LR equivalent.
- Far more flexible process recipes/definitions/presets. I've set up some very sophisticated ones for clients which saved them many many hours every month.
- Much better support. P1 has no "low level" support folks. You don't need to get "elevated" to get past the person who can only really help with basic problems. Support cases are answered in hours (very often faster), not days. Dealer support (at least the value added dealers who have dedicated tech departments) includes weekend/holiday/night/crazy-emergency support and includes workflow/productivity style help not just "this button doesn't work"
- Faster processing in most cases (somewhat computer configuration dependent) with accurate time-to-completion times and preemptive scheduling (you can push a job to the front if you have a long queue that isn't a priority)

Downsides include:
- sometimes (though not always) being a few weeks behind LR on support of brand new cameras (since they are implementing the full SDK of the camera allowing live view, camera controls etc).
- higher learning curve (often requiring capture one classes)
- no prosumer features like Book/Map
- pretty limited print functionality (some printing workflows C1 can handle on it's own, but more could be handled in LR on it's own)
- spot removal tool is as good as LR4 but not as good as LR5. Not a deal breaker for my own personal work as I'd be hard pressed to not finish an image in Photoshop which requires pixel-level retouching, but for some workflows probably notable. Maybe C1v8?
- no history panel (maybe C1v8?)
- no highlight/shadow recovery in local adjustment system (you can accomplish the same thing with exposure/contrast tools but it requires more work)
- small ecosystem of education/training like with Adobe. This is greatly alleviated by having a good dealer who can easily answer your confused question when google/youtube fails you.

There are many more reasons (on both ends, pros and cons). But in general I see C1 targeting the pro market and making image-quality and pro-tools a high priority of design while LR tries to target pro and prosumer at the same time with the expected results of doing both quite well, but neither excellently.

I'd NEVER tell someone they should just run out and buy Capture One (or any other software for that matter). There is a 60 day fully functional trial for a reason. If it's not clear that it will benefit you enough to justify the cost then you don't spend a dime.
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
dwood
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 277



« Reply #33 on: July 10, 2013, 02:44:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Off the top of my head (I don't keep a list - things change too frequently):
- Better Color (subjective but found consistently enough by myself and a high enough % of customers to say with confidence) especially with strongly saturated colors, purple/pink/red crossovers, skintones, and in steep tonal transitions like strongly side-lit portraits.
- Better tonality especially in deep shadow detail
- Noise/Grain/Texture/Microcontrast which looks better if your aesthetic is to allow grain but want that grain to be gaussian, fine, and film like rather than clumpy and digitally blob-like. On the other hand if you're shooting fairly high ISO with a dSLR and want the "clean commercial look" LR4/5 does a better job of what I'd call the "sledgehammer" approach of noise reduction if you abhor noise/grain and want no part of it.
- More pro tools for tethering:
--- live view
--- camera controls
--- fixed-focus windows (e.g. for four-corner-and-center analysis in a product/catalog environment)
--- focus mask (especially powerful for first-round edits and shoots involving tilts/swings)
--- overlay (great when matching another shot, or fitting a layout, also useful for random applications like matching color in art repro settings or corporate color settings)
--- more detailed/flexible controls (assumes/requires more education and a desire for more power/nuance over first-glance-simplicity) like full RGB levels with numerical entry, more specific noise reduction sliders,
- LCC tool which is required for tech cameras, but useful in a variety of niche applications including art reproduction and catalog shooting and automatic dust removal
- Chromatic aberration and purple fringing tools that work better on a broader range of files with far less work/twiddling
- A better laid out system for local adjustments (I think I'm in the minority here)
- Far more customization of the user interface, especially handy on very small (e.g. 10" MBA) or very large monitors (e.g. 30" Eizo) or in multi-monitor environments. Every tool can be floated/added/removed/collapsed or put on a second monitor. Including keyboard shortcuts which are every power user's dream.
- Better laid out tools for manual keystone/perspective correction (also auto-integration with newer Phase One digital backs, though that only helps those shooters)
- Completely/immediately portable session layout. For anybody who uses multiple computers in their workflow this is a huge help. You don't have to export/splice/import/merge or do anything at all to move a C1 session from one computer to the other. Everything resides in the folder.
- Massively better color editing tool (Color Editor) which is harder to learn but far, far more powerful than the LR equivalent.
- Far more flexible process recipes/definitions/presets. I've set up some very sophisticated ones for clients which saved them many many hours every month.
- Much better support. P1 has no "low level" support folks. You don't need to get "elevated" to get past the person who can only really help with basic problems. Support cases are answered in hours (very often faster), not days. Dealer support (at least the value added dealers who have dedicated tech departments) includes weekend/holiday/night/crazy-emergency support and includes workflow/productivity style help not just "this button doesn't work"
- Faster processing in most cases (somewhat computer configuration dependent) with accurate time-to-completion times and preemptive scheduling (you can push a job to the front if you have a long queue that isn't a priority)

Downsides include:
- sometimes (though not always) being a few weeks behind LR on support of brand new cameras (since they are implementing the full SDK of the camera allowing live view, camera controls etc).
- higher learning curve (often requiring capture one classes)
- no prosumer features like Book/Map
- pretty limited print functionality (some printing workflows C1 can handle on it's own, but more could be handled in LR on it's own)
- spot removal tool is as good as LR4 but not as good as LR5. Not a deal breaker for my own personal work as I'd be hard pressed to not finish an image in Photoshop which requires pixel-level retouching, but for some workflows probably notable. Maybe C1v8?
- no history panel (maybe C1v8?)
- no highlight/shadow recovery in local adjustment system (you can accomplish the same thing with exposure/contrast tools but it requires more work)
- small ecosystem of education/training like with Adobe. This is greatly alleviated by having a good dealer who can easily answer your confused question when google/youtube fails you.

There are many more reasons (on both ends, pros and cons). But in general I see C1 targeting the pro market and making image-quality and pro-tools a high priority of design while LR tries to target pro and prosumer at the same time with the expected results of doing both quite well, but neither excellently.

I'd NEVER tell someone they should just run out and buy Capture One (or any other software for that matter). There is a 60 day fully functional trial for a reason. If it's not clear that it will benefit you enough to justify the cost then you don't spend a dime.

Thanks for taking the time to list all of this stuff, Doug. It's quite helpful. I had downloaded the trial version a while back but time got away from me, and the 60-day period lapsed before I had the opportunity to really get into the program. I recently asked Phase One if they'd consider extending the trial period for me, but this is apparently something that they're not able to do. So, here I am, just trying to get as many opinions as possible. Thanks again, and to all here, for your thoughts on the subject.

-Doug
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7906


WWW
« Reply #34 on: July 10, 2013, 03:16:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I don't really agree on quite a few points.

Colors are a highly subjective matter. It may be that that Capture one has nicer skin tones but it my tests I have seen that Lightroom has more accurate colors. I am a landscape shooter and now little about skin colors, I may add.

I also regard the focusing mask a joke. It detects high contrast edges.

C1 has a few odd defaults, like "film curve" that blows out highlight detail.

I made one interesting observation, when working with both C1 and Lightroom and my newly acquired P45+. I generated DNG profiles for my back. The DNG profiles definitively gave better response for difficult colors in the magenta/violet range, but I found that the Adobe Standard profiles give far more natural greens.

I don't think it is a clear cut case. Lightroom is a mature product, or at least should be. C1 seems to be in a state of rapid development. On the other hand, I have some massive issues with MacOS X, Lightroom, Epson drivers and color profiles right now, and that doesn't really feel like a stable environment, but more like 'casilero del diablo'.

Best regards
Erik

Thanks for taking the time to list all of this stuff, Doug. It's quite helpful. I had downloaded the trial version a while back but time got away from me, and the 60-day period lapsed before I had the opportunity to really get into the program. I recently asked Phase One if they'd consider extending the trial period for me, but this is apparently something that they're not able to do. So, here I am, just trying to get as many opinions as possible. Thanks again, and to all here, for your thoughts on the subject.

-Doug
Logged

tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #35 on: July 10, 2013, 04:19:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Colors are a highly subjective matter.
to some degree, yes. But color differentiation is more a objective matter. C1's (Advanced) Color Editor provides tools to pronounce very small differences in color tones. For example on grass/plants in a landscape in C1 you can enhance the difference of "warmer" greens and "cooler" greens extremely good. There's no such option in LR's color editing tools (at least not that I know of...). Color-Contrast / Color-Differentiation can have a huge impact on the expression of an image (a "vivid" look without enhancing the actual contrast of the image).

Quote
C1 has a few odd defaults, like "film curve" that blows out highlight detail.
the "Standard" film curves (for any camera I've ever processed in C1) are somewhat steep, I agree. You have to keep in mind that P1 designed the film curves to work accurate with traditional lighting meters (18% gray etc.). Therefore ... IMHO... you should not expose too much to the right with Phase backs (at least not with the Kodak Sensor backs I know ... maybe P1 changed the design of the film curve in more recent DBs... I don't know). Then again the standard film curve applies a "look" - so the highlights are actually not blown out (unless you've overexposed the capture). You can bring back all captured highlight tones with a few clicks in the tools of your choice (if you want to, you can also save the respective settings as a "Style" and apply this "Style" on import of all your captures).
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1990


WWW
« Reply #36 on: July 10, 2013, 05:20:05 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't think it is a clear cut case. Lightroom is a mature product, or at least should be. C1 seems to be in a state of rapid development.
Curious observation.
C1 has been around since before LR and is in a continual process of improvement. LR arrived later to market, but with some massive differences that C1 seem to have tried to match and incorporate themselves. The feature set of both seems to be getting closer year by year.
Logged
jeanvalentin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 112


« Reply #37 on: July 10, 2013, 10:12:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Relative price is only ever part of the story when deciding between two options.
....

Totally agree. That's why I said "it is much higher priced without an objective gain". I don't mind paying more for better quality. And I personally, don't see the difference you are seeing.
Logged

Best,
Valentin
jeanvalentin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 112


« Reply #38 on: July 10, 2013, 10:24:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Again and again I see this mention of "better" something. Yet, nobody posts any proof of that. Let's see some images that shows this "better" output (be it, skin tones or other things).

In therms of workflow, LR has a better, one hands down (OK, maybe for me Smiley ). And don't get me started in how "intuitive" C1 is.

They are BOTH good and you can get excellent images out of BOTH of them. In some instances (like the details of a white dress in bright sun) you can get better output from LR. Other times (like some sunset scenes) you can get a better output from C1.

Just saying "C1 out has better output out of the gate" .... it's just someones opinion. Every in depth review I've seen (not biased), says otherwise: aka, they are both very good at this point.

Side note: isn't the main dude that did the C1 development working for Adobe? If I remember correctly, he left and created RawCapture which was bought by Adobe (that was back in v3.xx).

And yes, C1 was the king with no competition back about 10 years or so. And even when LR was created was much worse than C1. That's not the case anymore.

Another note: when a user watches the video tutorials from the company and still has a boat load of questions of how things needs to be done ... that's a big problem.
Logged

Best,
Valentin
wattsies
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


« Reply #39 on: July 11, 2013, 12:55:34 AM »
ReplyReply

I think it's horses for courses.

I started with C1 and recently picked up LR4 and now LR5 owing to a need for support for the Leica monochrom. I have also used Raw developer and Aperture in the early days.

I personally like the C1 interface and the way some of the tools work, but that may be because that is what I started with, largely because my M8 came packaged with it. I'd love to see proper side by side soft proofing in C1, as well as before and after switches for each of the tools. Lightroom has the edge here.

In the darkroom we often used more than one developer....
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad