Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Lightroom vs. C1  (Read 14291 times)

allegretto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 660
Lightroom vs. C1
« on: October 03, 2011, 04:21:34 PM »

Hello all

New here and perhaps this topic has been gone over ad nauseum but I cannot find a thread with the Search tool

I work with .DNG files mainly, though I'm getting a Sony A77 for some fun shots.

What do you feel may be the advantages to using C1 (6.0) over LR (3.6)

Thanks for any help
« Last Edit: October 03, 2011, 04:23:43 PM by allegretto »
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9976
    • Echophoto
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2011, 05:36:32 PM »

Hi,

Lightroom is a workflow solution. It takes care of the image from the craddle to the grave. Also LR is parametric. That essentially means that you don't have a lot of "tiffs" laying around. The basic idea with LR that you makes "recipes" for cooking "raw" files. So when you do something with a image, the recipe is applied to the "raw" file. Full size TIFFS are something like 6 times larger than raw files, so the saving is essential.

I have used C1 only a few times. I understand that it has also workflow features but I know little about it.

If you are seriously interested in LR I would say that you should buy the tutorial by Michael Reichmann & Jeff Schewe, it explains LR really well, and is great fun to watch!

Best regards
Erik


Hello all

New here and perhaps this topic has been gone over ad nauseum but I cannot find a thread with the Search tool

I work with .DNG files mainly, though I'm getting a Sony A77 for some fun shots.

What do you feel may be the advantages to using C1 (6.0) over LR (3.6)

Thanks for any help

allegretto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 660
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2011, 06:14:40 PM »

Thank you Erik

I currently use LR but know little more than the simple stuff. I used C1 briefly when I first bought an M8 but could not get the hang of the workflow. LR seems more intuitive, though hardly "easy"

I take one can find this tutorial on LL site so will look

Thanks again
Logged

mediumcool

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 724
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #3 on: October 06, 2011, 04:19:18 AM »

You have to try C1 for a while to get the hang of it. I started with reading only a bit of the help pages, mainly for definitions.

You can organise C1 tools in many different ways, putting different tools in different panels, hiding and showing all tools with a dual keystroke (Command/Cntrl T) and the same with the thumbnails (Command/Cntrl B). Command for OSX; Cntrl for Windows. Tools can be selected by a single keystroke, but make sure you have escaped a dialogue box, or you will get unexpected results! That one took me a few weeks to work out.

I particularly like the way C1 deals with noise in darker OOF areas—it blurs and desaturates, thus helping minimise colour noise; all adjustable through the noise sliders.

[added missing word]
« Last Edit: November 06, 2011, 11:43:58 PM by mediumcool »
Logged
FaceBook facebook.com/ian.goss.39   www.mlkshk.com/user/mediumcool

deejjjaaaa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1170
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2011, 10:32:32 AM »

Also LR is parametric.
all raw converters are "parametric"... and LR/ACR to some (  8)  ) extent are actually not, for example they can replace the original JPG preview (for example generated by your camera's firmware) in your DNG raw file (assume native in camera DNG)... not very parametric behavior (albeit you can argue that you still have the original raw data intact, but not the original file anymore... unless you were a good boy and have a backup, but still)... most (if not all) of others do not touch anything inside of raw files, never.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2011, 10:40:21 AM by deejjjaaaa »
Logged

deejjjaaaa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1170
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #5 on: October 06, 2011, 10:34:14 AM »

I work with .DNG files mainly

which .DNG files ? native in camera or converted ? C1 does not have full support for converted DNG files and for example in case of Pentax it even does not have a proper support for native in camera DNG files (unlike PEF).
Logged

deejjjaaaa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1170
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #6 on: October 06, 2011, 11:44:20 AM »

DNG is a format invented by Adobe to standardize raw formats. It's essentially a variant of TIFF with stuff added to support raw files. The idea is to have a single format instead of hundreds of different formats to maintain.

The idea was that DNG would be adopted by camera manufacturers, but this seems not being the case.

Myself, I use DNG.

Best regards
Erik


I am sorry - what was the point of this dazibao ?

PS: I was talking about a specific raw converter (C1, v6.3.x incarnation) and certain details of how it supports/not supports certain DNG files...
« Last Edit: October 06, 2011, 11:48:04 AM by deejjjaaaa »
Logged

Kukulcan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #7 on: November 05, 2011, 07:27:56 AM »

As the user mediumcool has already written in this thread, C1 has a superior rendering of noise in low light areas, espacially with regard to skin tones, it looks more natural than LR(basically Camera Raw). But sometimes C1 creates artifacts where there's a lot of details in low light landscape shots.(that's my experience). So both have their own advantages in terms of picture quality.
But the workflow of C1 is terrible! If there exists something counter-intuitive, that's C1! Lr is very very intuitive and user-friendly.
Also I prefer the way LR recoveries highlights

Regards
Giuseppe
Logged

Dan Bellyk

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 49
    • http://danbellyk.ca
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #8 on: November 06, 2011, 10:54:36 PM »

Capture 1 does not support certain cameras so read the fine print. I was lucky enough to pick up a copy of LR3 for $220 from a reputable online store and it was delivered on Fri. My suggestion is to download both trial versions and find what suits you best, both have there pros and cons.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2011, 11:00:07 PM by Dan Bellyk »
Logged

crusty

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #9 on: November 07, 2011, 11:36:51 AM »

C1 won't screw you when tethering in front of client.

I love Lightroom, in many ways it is so much better at editing RAW files very easily with little fuss. That love soon faded after giving up outdoor photography in favour of a life in the studio, predominately beauty editorial work.  Now i know why you never see Lightroom on a BTS from Americas next top Model or Fashion TV.

Tethering + Lightroom = Unreliable mess, embarrassment and lost photos.

Anything else + Lightroom = One of the most pleasant experiences one can have from software.

I have a love hate relationship with LR and in the studio i miss it dearly. However, Capture One is so unnecessarily difficult for beginners in a workflow scenario, you really have to dot the i's and cross the T's.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2011, 11:40:53 AM by crusty »
Logged

Keith Reeder

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 256
    • Capture The Moment
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2011, 09:42:38 AM »

As the user mediumcool has already written in this thread, C1 has a superior rendering of noise in low light areas
Debatable.
Quote
But the workflow of C1 is terrible!
Very debatable.
Quote
If there exists something counter-intuitive, that's C1!
Extremely debatable.
Quote
Lr is very very intuitive and user-friendly.
Completely subjective - and debatable.
Quote
Also I prefer the way LR recoveries highlights
That at least, is demonstrably true.
Logged
Keith Reeder
Blyth, NE England

Kukulcan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2011, 10:34:55 AM »

Wow Keith Reeder! Thank you very much, and please, continue to provide to this thread your interesting and thorough contribution.
Logged

Camdavidson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 184
    • http://www.camerondavidson.com
Re: Lightroom vs. C1
« Reply #12 on: November 27, 2011, 03:04:20 PM »

C1 is an excellent program: its primary strengths are rock solid tethering with Nikon, Canon, Phase and Leaf Backs plus top notch LCC corrections and a color editor that is superb.

It is not an all-in-one program like Aperture or Lightroom.

I prefer the files from Capture One over all others.  I have used it for very long time but also have experience with Aperture, LR, RAW Converter, Phocus, Nikon's software and Camera Raw.  To me: the colors in files that I have converted in C1 are cleaner, truer and more to my taste than what I am able to achieve in other programs..

Some prefer LR and I've heard from friends that the tethering capability of LR is significantly better than earlier versions.

If you want to catalog your images you can use LR as your catalog program or Media Pro (also previously known as iView/Media Pro).  Media Pro is a much stronger program than the previous versions but the catalog is not integrated into program like Aperture or Lightroom.

I think the key to all of this, is to find a program you like and stick with it.  Learn it in depth and don't worry about the others.  LR and C1 are both excellent programs.

« Last Edit: November 27, 2011, 05:54:04 PM by Camdavidson »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up