How to Compare Different Photo Processing Software

[nvw]

Hello,

I have been reading through some recent threads regarding DXO and Lightroom, when and how to use both. What I would like to do is see the differences for myself but being new to both products and photography, I am not certain what a fair and accurate comparison would be. When the experience photographers in this forum decide to compare how one product processes an image vs another, how do you start? Using white balance as an example, would you bring the RAW file into both products and see how they read the RAW file and how they adjust white balance? If so, in general what would you look for?

I am not certain I am asking the right questions so any direction is much appreciated.

Thank you.

[KirbyKrieger]

The user has more effect on the final product than does any of the top-ranked digital camera file converters and developers.  Music isn't about the instruments, though good instruments will allow good musicians to make better music.  Make yourself into a good instrument, first, then and use the best instrument at hand.

Between LR, C1Pro, and Aperture, the choice does not come down to _image quality_; it comes down to ease of use (user productivity), additional functionality (as a DAM, C1Pro is poor, LR is good, and Aperture is excellent), intangibles such as the user's comfort with the interface, and tangibles such as "Does this program run on my OS?".

I don't know about DxO Optics.  I assume it's comparable*.  (I've had no reason to look into changing my workflow).

Try them all; buy the one you like to spend time with.  Learn why the tools are programmed to work the way they do, and what they do at the pixel level, in addition to how to use them.

* However, I would steer far away from anyone and any company that uses the word "magic" to promote digital camera file developing software.  The following, currently on DxO's front page, is BS afire:

The thing I really appreciate most about using DxO Optics Pro is this 'lighting engine'… and suddenly the pictures that were throw-away before just blossomed. If you can magically have some way of eliminating all the flaws in your camera and in your lenses, and instantly correct all of that, so that the starting point of your pictures is 15 to 50% better before you do any kind of editing to them at all, why would you not do that?

- Ian Coristine - Photographer | Canada

[Vladimirovich]

being new to both products and photography... when the experience photographers

do you think that you really want a short answer from "experienced" photographers ? because it will boil down to somebody's personal preferences...

[Glenn NK]

do you think that you really want a short answer from "experienced" photographers ? because it will boil down to somebody's personal preferences...

I think there is a lot of truth in this.

When someone asks "what kind/brand of camera should I buy?", I shudder because most of the recommendations will reflect bias, and even if they don't, how does one know they are not biased?

Now I'll give you my bias:  Lightroom - because there is a very large user base of both pro and amateur users from which to obtain assistance.

The next person will say CS6 for the same reason.

It depends on one's personal point of view - which will be biased at least to some degree.

Glenn

[nvw]

I think I got it. Read the advise and opinions of others but remember that there is no right answer for me since in the end, it's personal. Go experiment.

Thanks everyone.

[Glenn NK]

Right.

I think it's OK (and it would be nice) to discuss and compare the strengths and weaknesses of various software packages, but too often it devolves into a P-ing match where insults are hurled back and forth.  DPR is a classical case of this.

Perhaps another problem is that just to be comfortable (let alone proficient) with any particular PP product takes some considerable investment of time.  Because of this very few of us (who actually spend time photographing) can be really familiar with more than one product.   Consequently when I see a "review" that compares several products, I wonder if the reviewer really has taken the time that would be required to do it well.

I suppose one good indicator might be the number of users a product has compared to others, although this doesn't necessarily hold, particularly with a newer product (which applies to DXO).

Glenn

[Jimmy D Uptain]

The user has more effect on the final product than does any of the top-ranked digital camera file converters and developers.  Music isn't about the instruments, though good instruments will allow good musicians to make better music.  Make yourself into a good instrument, first, then and use the best instrument at hand.

Between LR, C1Pro, and Aperture, the choice does not come down to _image quality_; it comes down to ease of use (user productivity), additional functionality (as a DAM, C1Pro is poor, LR is good, and Aperture is excellent), intangibles such as the user's comfort with the interface, and tangibles such as "Does this program run on my OS?".

I don't know about DxO Optics.  I assume it's comparable*.  (I've had no reason to look into changing my workflow).

Try them all; buy the one you like to spend time with.  Learn why the tools are programmed to work the way they do, and what they do at the pixel level, in addition to how to use them.

* However, I would steer far away from anyone and any company that uses the word "magic" to promote digital camera file developing software.  The following, currently on DxO's front page, is BS afire:

Well said sir.
Knowing what results you want is key. Getting those results can take time. Whatever software you choose, learn it. Once you learn one, you should "stray" and play with other convertors.
Personally, I would look for the negative in each software. Scanning through forums, you will find common problems. Ask yourself if these issues will affect you.
C1's catalog needs work. If you don't plan on using a catalog, its no issue. LR isn't very customizable (is that a word?), but if you don't think you will need to move things around, its a non issue.
Will you tether your camera? I don't, at least not yet, so I don't sweat tethering problems. I'm not saying either LR or C1 have tether issues, I honestly don't know, because I don't care.

Another thing you may have not considered is how stable a given software is on your system. The only way to find out is to test it.
While you are testing that, see how easy it is to use it.

[Lundberg02]

The GUI, the drive you nuts factor, does it output Pro Photo, does it input DNG, does it have lens correction for your camera, adjustment incrementing, skin tones, histogram window size, and more.

[ppmax2]

Here is a summary of my opinions for the various apps...I've used them all heavily in the last month because of the Aperture announcement and I've been looking for a new home...

Aperture: good at many things, best library management, can still render beautiful images; no longer being developed

C1: high quality rendering, great tools for editing color, great but limited tools for local adjustments, library management needs work

LR: good at many things, awesome and large user community, can't stand the modules and constantly changing ui and keyboard shortcuts, love the color tools and parametric curves ui

RawTherapee: steep and deep learning curve, best noise and sharpening tools bar none, 32bit floating point image rendering pipeline (the only one?), UI needs a little help and cleanup in some areas...achieving your vision may take some time but when you arrive it will have been worth it

There is lots of good and some great software out there and each will have its strengths and weaknesses. Find the tool that makes sense to you...we probably spend more time in front of these applications than we do taking pictures.

HTH--
Pp