Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Is Luminar worthwhile?  (Read 7111 times)

nemophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 770
    • Nemo Niemann Photography
Is Luminar worthwhile?
« on: November 07, 2017, 03:35:20 PM »

I saw Macphun Luminar at PhotoExpo. It seemed interesting. Of course, at this point, I literally have a zillion plugins, RAW converters, etc. If I acquire yet another piece of software, I will know I'm an addict (never truly in doubt). The PC version will be released shortly. It's on pre-sale for $59. That seems like a pretty good deal for what looks like a nice piece of advanced software.

My question: Is it worthwhile to add to my extensive list of software titles?

Cem

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
    • Photographs
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2017, 08:04:18 AM »

I saw Macphun Luminar at PhotoExpo. It seemed interesting. Of course, at this point, I literally have a zillion plugins, RAW converters, etc. If I acquire yet another piece of software, I will know I'm an addict (never truly in doubt). The PC version will be released shortly. It's on pre-sale for $59. That seems like a pretty good deal for what looks like a nice piece of advanced software.

My question: Is it worthwhile to add to my extensive list of software titles?
I am wondering the same. I already have PS/LR, DxO, Capture One, On One RAW and Affinity Photo. Do I need yet another program? ;)
Logged
Kind Regards,
 Cem   [URL=https://www.fli

Kevin Raber

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1219
  • Kevin Raber
    • Kevin Raber
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2017, 08:12:50 AM »

Luminar is one very well thought out program as well as their Aurora HDR Program.  They have won all sorts of awards with it.  I did a class yesterday and demoed it.  It has become part of my workflow.  I believe you can download a trial version.  Watch the tutorials so you can see how it works.  The price is reasonable especially for what it can do.
Logged
Kevin Raber
Publisher - luminous-landscape.com
[email protected]

Cem

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
    • Photographs
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2017, 08:18:12 AM »

Thanks for the feedback Kevin, appreciated.

I am on Windows and they don't have a download version yet. I think that the pre-order deal available now will disappear by the time the software is actually released. So it is either a matter of taking a leap of faith now or paying more later. Mind you, the price difference is not significant anyway.
Logged
Kind Regards,
 Cem   [URL=https://www.fli

Pictus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 211
    • Retouching
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2017, 10:08:58 AM »

I have used lots of tools, but nowadays for CaNikon I decided to simplify and  stay
mostly with ACR+Photo Ninja, from what I could see from a beta version, probably it will be
my main RAW converter, specially good how it recover highlights and render color/tones.
It gives-me the desired result with few clicks.

Logged

Alan Smallbone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 752
    • APS Photography
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2017, 10:13:22 AM »

I ordered it, I did the beta when they had that for Windows but it was limited in features, a lot were there but a huge amount was left out. It seemed ok, and for the price it will be probably worth getting. But it is just another workflow. Most software today uses DCRAW for conversion at some point under the hood, or at least most of them do. So it comes down to the after conversion editing. Luminar is supposed to work with most PS plugins, so those will still be available in theory. It is another tool for the toolbox. There is also Topaz Studio, On1 Photo Raw, etc. Currently most of them have issues to work out, and I am sure Luminar will as well.

Alan
Logged
Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA

Cem

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
    • Photographs
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #6 on: November 08, 2017, 10:17:11 AM »

I ordered it, I did the beta when they had that for Windows but it was limited in features, a lot were there but a huge amount was left out. It seemed ok, and for the price it will be probably worth getting. But it is just another workflow. Most software today uses DCRAW for conversion at some point under the hood, or at least most of them do. So it comes down to the after conversion editing. Luminar is supposed to work with most PS plugins, so those will still be available in theory. It is another tool for the toolbox. There is also Topaz Studio, On1 Photo Raw, etc. Currently most of them have issues to work out, and I am sure Luminar will as well.

Alan
Makes a lot sense Alan, thanks.
Logged
Kind Regards,
 Cem   [URL=https://www.fli

drralph

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #7 on: November 11, 2017, 08:32:06 AM »

Luminar is one very well thought out program as well as their Aurora HDR Program.  They have won all sorts of awards with it.  I did a class yesterday and demoed it.  It has become part of my workflow.  I believe you can download a trial version.  Watch the tutorials so you can see how it works.  The price is reasonable especially for what it can do.

I am interested in the DAM capabilities of the upcoming Luminar 2018.  Did they have a demo of that, Kevin?  I would love something allows organization of my image library more along the lines of Aperture: intuitive file structure, easy to search and browse.
Logged

luxborealis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2547
    • luxBorealis.com - photography by Terry McDonald
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile? How about for...
« Reply #8 on: November 14, 2017, 08:09:04 PM »

A) Printing? I live the Lightroom workflow for printing in being able to save presets and prints separately. Does Luminar do the same? Have they come up with a better way or it not there yet?

B) Reading LR raw settings?

C) Reading LR metadata (keywords, flags, stars, colour sorting)

D) Replicating LR Collections

E) Replicating LR Publish Services?

F) using Mogrify for LR, or adding multiple borders and text upon export

These are some of the less-written about features that are important to my workflow.

Could someone who is actively using Luminar respond? I realize (a) I could download a trial and (b) the DAM module isn’t available yet, but perhaps someone is beta-testing or perhaps someone from MacPhun could respond.
Logged
Terry McDonald -

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13626
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile? How about for...
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2017, 10:28:55 AM »

A) Printing? I live the Lightroom workflow for printing in being able to save presets and prints separately. Does Luminar do the same? Have they come up with a better way or it not there yet?

B) Reading LR raw settings?

C) Reading LR metadata (keywords, flags, stars, colour sorting)

D) Replicating LR Collections

E) Replicating LR Publish Services?

F) using Mogrify for LR, or adding multiple borders and text upon export

These are some of the less-written about features that are important to my workflow.

Could someone who is actively using Luminar respond? I realize (a) I could download a trial and (b) the DAM module isn’t available yet, but perhaps someone is beta-testing or perhaps someone from MacPhun could respond.


A. I'm with you; worth the price of admission just for that IF you print a lot.
B. Nope, proprietary parametric edits. Gobbledygook.
C. Yes, any decent DAM should read non proprietary metadata like keywords, flags etc.
D. Dumb collections no, proprietary. Smart Collections possible if one can rebuild the criteria and I suspect that's all manual by user.
E and F, don't know. Kind of doubt it but not impossible I believe.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2787
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #10 on: November 16, 2017, 11:30:07 AM »

https://macphun.com/luminar/compare

If you're just looking at features this might help some.  How well it works in the real world in a workflow isn't addressed.  DAM won't be available until sometime in 2018.

I've had good results with MacPhun products (I like their Creative Kit) so I'm not dismissing them.  I just downloaded the 2018 upgrade to Luminar (w/o DAM) on my Mac.  The upgrade price was very reasonable and that made it worth taking a look. 

My first test will be to see if it does a better job of demosaicing my Fuji X-Trans III files than Lr Classic.   I currently add a workflow step in Lr to utilize Iridient X-Transformer and sometimes Iridient Developer to achieve results I prefer to Lr demosaicing.  Then its back to my usual Lr/PS workflow. 

FWIW I think that Luminar 2018 will appeal more to those who haven't invested years in Lr. 
Logged
Regards,
Ron

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2787
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #11 on: November 17, 2017, 09:30:40 AM »

Serge Ramelli video on LR and Luminar

https://youtu.be/jE0trtliF1I
Logged
Regards,
Ron

drralph

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile? How about for...
« Reply #12 on: November 17, 2017, 04:50:34 PM »


A) Printing? I live the Lightroom workflow for printing in being able to save presets and prints separately. Does Luminar do the same? Have they come up with a better way or it not there yet?

A. I'm with you; worth the price of admission just for that IF you print a lot.


For a relative LR neophyte, can you explain exactly what is saved separately?  I have been frustrated that an image can appear perfect on the monitor, and be unsatisfactory in print, requiring further tweaking.  Is this what you are referring to?  Does LR allow you to maintain one file for digital purposes, and another file for print only?
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13626
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile? How about for...
« Reply #13 on: November 17, 2017, 06:18:42 PM »

For a relative LR neophyte, can you explain exactly what is saved separately?  I have been frustrated that an image can appear perfect on the monitor, and be unsatisfactory in print, requiring further tweaking.  Is this what you are referring to?  Does LR allow you to maintain one file for digital purposes, and another file for print only?
LR saves print templates for one so you setup the size, profile etc and even the printer settings, it is all stored in that preset. You can literally click on an image, go to the Print module, click one template and the Print button and you're done. You can save Virtual Copies of the soft proof with output specific edits based on the paper profile and rendering intent. It too is 'set to go' for output with a Print template.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2787
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #14 on: November 19, 2017, 01:09:50 PM »

I've started playing with Luminar 2018 on my iMac.  This is VERY initial thoughts on it.

- DAM which will come in 2018 therefore no LIBRARY module
- no PRINT module
- no MAP module
- no BOOK module
- no SLIDESHOW module

Where it currently excels is in what in Lr is the DEVELOP module.  There are a LOT of features in Luminar 2018 that don't exist in Lr Classic DEVELOP.  The ability to quickly tweak photos to taste will appeal to a lot of people.  Its extensive enough that many people will avoid trips to plugins and PS to achieve what they want.  There are a LOT of textures and presets available that will quickly get people close to the look they're after.  These can be tweaked and saved as new presets. 

It's easy to round trip from Lr to Luminar 2018 so you can easily maintain your LIBRARY and PRINT as you do today. 

I've not had enough time with it to judge its ability to handle RAW files demosaicing and applying "Lens Corrections" based on the meta data that are in my Fuji X files. 

With regards to PRINT I'm waiting to see what Qimage for the Mac will do.  I'm pretty happy with Lr Print but I was very happy with Qimage before switching to the Mac. 
Logged
Regards,
Ron

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13626
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #15 on: November 19, 2017, 01:14:25 PM »

The ability to quickly tweak photos to taste will appeal to a lot of people. 
Not a limitation in LR. If you know how to use it and create presets.
IF you ask LR customers, some will tell you they can tweak photo's to taste!  ;D
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2787
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #16 on: November 19, 2017, 01:25:10 PM »

Not a limitation in LR. If you know how to use it and create presets.
IF you ask LR customers, some will tell you they can tweak photo's to taste!

No argument about that.  I do it daily.  I do think that the Luminar approach will appeal to a wide group of perhaps newer photographers.

Two things that I haven't found in Luminar 2018 is "Merge to Pano" and "HDR".  MacPhun though has Aurora HDR 2017 for the HDR task. 

BTW, I'm not knocking Lr at all.  It is what it is though and hasn't garnered a lot of love over the last few years from Adobe for the desktop version.   I've been using Lr since the first public beta over 10 years ago. 
Logged
Regards,
Ron

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13626
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #17 on: November 19, 2017, 01:29:58 PM »

I do think that the Luminar approach will appeal to a wide group of perhaps newer photographers.
Perhaps if the product has the chops needed and as importantly photographers desire to move to a totally new product which cost time and money (something they seem to be trying to avoid due to subscription so who knows how it pans out for them).
The ability to quickly tweak photos to taste appeals to a lot of people who have an existing solution called LR so this product needs a bit more than that to warrant a switch for me and I'd suspect others.  ::)
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2787
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #18 on: November 19, 2017, 08:09:39 PM »

Agreed.

The heart of Luminar is the very strong list of "filters" that come standard along with painting, masking and layers. 

https://macphun.com/luminar/filters

Logged
Regards,
Ron

Bob Rockefeller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 534
  • Mac, iOS, Olympus OM-D E-M1, Epson 3880
    • Bob Rockefeller
Re: Is Luminar worthwhile?
« Reply #19 on: November 30, 2017, 08:24:13 AM »

- DAM which will come in 2018 therefore no LIBRARY module
- no PRINT module
- no MAP module
- no BOOK module
- no SLIDESHOW module

Where it currently excels is in what in Lr is the DEVELOP module.  There are a LOT of features in Luminar 2018 that don't exist in Lr Classic DEVELOP.  The ability to quickly tweak photos to taste will appeal to a lot of people.  Its extensive enough that many people will avoid trips to plugins and PS to achieve what they want.  There are a LOT of textures and presets available that will quickly get people close to the look they're after.  These can be tweaked and saved as new presets. 

It's easy to round trip from Lr to Luminar 2018 so you can easily maintain your LIBRARY and PRINT as you do today. 

I've not had enough time with it to judge its ability to handle RAW files demosaicing and applying "Lens Corrections" based on the meta data that are in my Fuji X files.  .

Have you been able to do any testing in this area? If raw demosaicing isn’t top notch, there’s little need for fancy filters.
Logged
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA   www.bobrockefeller.com
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up