Lightroom vs Capture One For Phase Backs?

[Mort54]

Hi all. I've been comparing RAW conversions of a few of my P45 files using Lightroom and Capture One. My initial opinion is that I like the results from Lightroom better. Specifically, I like the colors a bit better (at least in daylight shots with a sunny WB setting), and Capture One conversions seem a little oversharpened to me (my defaults are set to amount=25 and threshold=3, which I believe are the standard defaults for Capture One). I'm not sure what my Lightroom default sharpening is set to. Also, I'm seeing a significant difference in brightness between conversions from the two apps, with Lightroom conversions being darker (and in my opinion, more pleasing and more true to my in-camera exposure). Of course, from a workflow point of view, there's no contest - Lightroom wins by a mile IMHO.

I'm wondering if anyone else has done the same comparisons, and whether you're seeing the same results.

[RobertJ]

Mort, I don't have lightroom, but what about LR compared to C1 sharpening set to standard, 0 amount, 0 threshold?  That's my default.

[bradleygibson]

Hi all. I've been comparing RAW conversions of a few of my P45 files using Lightroom and Capture One. My initial opinion is that I like the results from Lightroom better. Specifically, I like the colors a bit better (at least in daylight shots with a sunny WB setting), and Capture One conversions seem a little oversharpened to me (my defaults are set to amount=25 and threshold=3, which I believe are the standard defaults for Capture One). I'm not sure what my Lightroom default sharpening is set to. Also, I'm seeing a significant difference in brightness between conversions from the two apps, with Lightroom conversions being darker (and in my opinion, more pleasing and more true to my in-camera exposure). Of course, from a workflow point of view, there's no contest - Lightroom wins by a mile IMHO.

I'm wondering if anyone else has done the same comparisons, and whether you're seeing the same results.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117367\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I see quite a bit more digital artifacting from the Lightroom conversion versus C1.  I see both false detail at 100% in the finest details, as well as more color fringing along high contrast edges.  In addition ACR tends to blur fine color detail unless the color noise reduction slider is set at less than 2.

Personally, I prefer the quality of the C1 output (with sharpening disabled), but it is a much less convenient workflow.

Incidentally, ACRv4 which ships with Photoshop CS3 seems to do a much better job of not producing the artifacts I've mentioned above compared to Lightroom.  I was a bit surprised to see such a difference between the two.

In terms of color, I think you can get nice color out of both ACR and C1, but they do make you work at it differently.  If you find Lightroom's method working well for you, it may not be worth the (slight) quality difference (and significant workflow change) to use C1.

Hope that helps,
Brad

[Mort54]

I see quite a bit more digital artifacting from the Lightroom conversion versus C1.  I see both false detail at 100% in the finest details, as well as more color fringing along high contrast edges.  In addition ACR tends to blur fine color detail unless the color noise reduction slider is set at less than 2.

Thanks Brad. I was expecting to see better results with C1 also, so I was surprised with my results. With the C1 factory default sharpening settings, I'm seeing just the opposite - I'm seeing sharpening artefacts in my C1 conversions. I'll try setting the default to zero sharpening and see how that looks. I still feel I'm getting better color and exposure from Lightroom. So far I haven't seen any color fringing on high contrast edges with my Lightroom conversions, but maybe I haven't been looking hard enough.

[eleanorbrown]

In my experience, right now Lightroom or ACR works far and above better than C1 with high dynamic range images because C1 has no way to get detail in shadows and highlights in one single conversion.  However the major C1 upgrade coming soon will have that ability I've been told.  Eleanor

[pss]

i prefer LR for my P30 files....i see no artifacts, i only sharpen (even anything at all) in CS3.....i don't think that LR is better, the workflow in LR is just much better.....i spend a lot less time in CS3 now....almost everything is done in LR.....the only problems i have is that at 800 asa, all files have a line through the middle, so i guess i am seeing 2 half of the sensor? the line is not there in C1.....

color controls, the tone sliders, highlight/shadow recovery alll these make LR just the obvious choice for me....even if the quality was 2% less (which it isn't) from LR, i would still use it.....

i wish LR had the loupe from bridge.....

i know that C1 v4 will have several features that LR has now, but i am afraid phase has missed the boat here....i would not be surprised if we see a substantial upgrade to LR at the time C1v4 actually ships.....i wish phase would swallow its pride and provide a module for LR for capture....i owuld even pay for it....

[DocLock]

Currently, the phase one + backs (at least the p45+) are back to the raw files not be recognized by CS3 or Lightroom.  Only imports the preview file.

[James Russell]

I have not seen a line at 800 iso in lightroom with my P30 though so much of this stuff seems to be camera and software specific.

Given that I still use C-1 for 95% of my Phase conversions, if only because I think it has a little more film like look that Lightroom, but that is a very subjective call.

I'm hoping C-1 V4 has better highlight recovery like lightroom and a few more single channel color controls.

In the end I think having options is good, but I would hate to see Adobe become the only raw convertor or the only capture software for digital backs.

I think in the end we would all suffer from this.

Still, today for capturing, batch correcting and batch processing C-1 still is IMO the gold standard.

JR

i prefer LR for my P30 files....i see no artifacts, i only sharpen (even anything at all) in CS3.....i don't think that LR is better, the workflow in LR is just much better.....i spend a lot less time in CS3 now....almost everything is done in LR.....the only problems i have is that at 800 asa, all files have a line through the middle, so i guess i am seeing 2 half of the sensor? the line is not there in C1.....

color controls, the tone sliders, highlight/shadow recovery alll these make LR just the obvious choice for me....even if the quality was 2% less (which it isn't) from LR, i would still use it.....

i wish LR had the loupe from bridge.....

i know that C1 v4 will have several features that LR has now, but i am afraid phase has missed the boat here....i would not be surprised if we see a substantial upgrade to LR at the time C1v4 actually ships.....i wish phase would swallow its pride and provide a module for LR for capture....i owuld even pay for it....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117497\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[pss]

Currently, the phase one + backs (at least the p45+) are back to the raw files not be recognized by CS3 or Lightroom.  Only imports the preview file.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=0\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

is this when importing directly from card? or also when copying the files into a folder and importing from the folder? phase raw files cannot be imported directly from cards, this also goes for the non plus models.....

[DocLock]

is this when importing directly from card? or also when copying the files into a folder and importing from the folder? phase raw files cannot be imported directly from cards, this also goes for the non plus models.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=117716\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I had posted this on an earlier string.  Unfortunately something has changed and even when files are downloaded to folders on the hard drive first,  they just are not recognized, in fact if downloading via Lightroom from CF card, the preview is all that is saved to disk-

In Bridge CS3...
..P45 file identified as a Camera Raw Image in meta data and 7240x5433. If you open it it opens to Camera Raw.
..P45+ file identified as a TIFF image, although file sizes are noted at mid 30MB to high 40MB depending on file, the size is listed as 300x220 dpi and that is all that opens. Camera Raw never acitvates as it never sees anything but the preview.

In Lightroom..
..P45 EXIF says 7240X5433dpi and opens via the RAW converter
..P45+ EXIF says 300X220 dpi and that is all that opens.

In PS CS3, same thing... P45 raw opens via camera raw 4.0, while p45+ raw just opens as a 300 x220 dpi file in PS.