Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: P25 RAW files in LIGHTROOM 2.0 ??  (Read 2459 times)

juiceboy99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 46
P25 RAW files in LIGHTROOM 2.0 ??
« on: October 15, 2008, 11:41:39 am »

I am shooting with a P25 Phase One Back and normally use C1 PRO 3.7.9.
but am considering using LightRoom 2.0 for RAW developing and workflow.....

Does anyone have any knowledge about using Phase files in LightRoom 2.0 ??

thanks for any advice !


cheers,     N
Logged

erick.boileau

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 468
    • http://
P25 RAW files in LIGHTROOM 2.0 ??
« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2008, 11:58:19 am »

I am using P45 files with lightroom 2 and it works with small adjustments
« Last Edit: October 15, 2008, 11:59:54 am by erick.boileau »
Logged

juiceboy99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 46
P25 RAW files in LIGHTROOM 2.0 ??
« Reply #2 on: October 15, 2008, 01:10:04 pm »

thanks !    yeah,      i could imagine Phase One not giving Adobe all the data on their RAW files
to make more people buy C1 PRO.

Logged

amsp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 810
P25 RAW files in LIGHTROOM 2.0 ??
« Reply #3 on: October 15, 2008, 06:19:06 pm »

It works great and results look gorgeous, just make sure to calibrate it like others have pointed out. Lightroom/ACR has far better controls and some nifty functions missing from C1, so in the hands of someone creative and skilled the end result will be much better with LR/ACR.

Logged

Boris_Epix

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 101
P25 RAW files in LIGHTROOM 2.0 ??
« Reply #4 on: October 15, 2008, 06:24:22 pm »

I really like Lightroom but often it just appears to look artificial or "digital" in a bad sense. I'm surprised by the kind words about the quality of LR.
Logged

amsp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 810
P25 RAW files in LIGHTROOM 2.0 ??
« Reply #5 on: October 15, 2008, 06:44:11 pm »

Quote from: Boris_Epix
I really like Lightroom but often it just appears to look artificial or "digital" in a bad sense. I'm surprised by the kind words about the quality of LR.
Sorry, but that's bullshit. A "digital look" has nothing to with which program you are using, but rather HOW you use it. Same with different brands of backs. It's all digital, so no software is going to be more or less adept at getting "film-like" results.

Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up