Who's moved from Lightroom to Capture One?

[Bob Rockefeller]

I'm contemplating a move from Lightroom to Capture One after the dead of Aperture and a somewhat "forced" move to Lightroom.

The Capture One image processing tools seem to suit me better than Lightroom's and do many of the same things, but in different ways. And I like not switch modes to go from browsing to adjusting.

But Lightroom's DAM features, IMHO, are as far ahead of Capture One's as Aperture's are/were ahead of Lightroom's.

Who had made, or is making, the move to Capture One from Lightroom and finding ways to "make do?" 

[mgrayson]

I moved, sort of, from Aperture to C1. Aperture still works, and I haven't moved the 350GB library anywhere, but all my work for the past year or two has been in C1. Catalogs in v8 are stable enough that I'm thinking of moving more stuff over. I have <10,000 pics in a Catalog, and every shoot goes into a Session first, where many of them stay. Catalogs are MUCH better for searching many images, but bad experience with v7 Catalogs has left me shy. I've never had a problem with them in v8.. just being cautious.

The only things that could pry me off C1 are if they 1) go subscription only or 2) I settle on a MF system they don't support (Pentax or Leica), and even then, I might just use C1 with homemade profiles (dcamprof FTW!).

Best,

Matt (who uses LR when there is no alternative, or when printing)

[Bob Rockefeller]

Matt (who uses LR when there is no alternative, or when printing)

So C1 won't do the printing you need? Is it the quality of output or the convenience of creating recipes that's the problem?

It still makes me crazy trying to delete an image from the disk. If I'm in a collection, it's easy to remove the image from the collection or catalog, but not the disk. How do you handle that?

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

So C1 won't do the printing you need? Is it the quality of output or the convenience of creating recipes that's the problem?

It still makes me crazy trying to delete an image from the disk. If I'm in a collection, it's easy to remove the image from the collection or catalog, but not the disk. How do you handle that?

Hi Bob.

Removing a file is a two-step process. First step moves it to the (session) trash folder, where it can still be salvaged if you get second thoughts. Then, in the Capture One Library, you go to the (session) trash folder, and delete (selected) files and the settings for those files there.

Cheers,
Bart

[mgrayson]

LR's printing module is one of the few things I like about ... all of Adobe, I guess. Aperture's is easy enough, but I feel more in control with LR, and get, I think, slightly better results. Granted, I've never used QImage.

C1? A few years ago, I got very strange colors printing from it and technical support told me that I couldn't print from a RAW - I had to output a TIFF first. That seemed quite odd. In version 8, I tried again. If I follow the online instructions EXACTLY, especially the order in which I bring up page setup dialogs, and settings, then I often get good results. Certain things, like margins, seem haunted - change one number, and others change in ways I still can't anticipate. Someday, I will learn how to keep an image centered while adjusting margins. But every third or fourth print comes out rotated or the wrong size. Until a new version of C1 touts their new printing module with detailed workflow videos, I'm exporting and printing elsewhere.

LR, by comparison, has clear layout tools. I'm never surprised by image size, placement, or orientation.

--Matt

[Doug Peterson]

The only things that could pry me off C1 are if they 1) go subscription only

The C1 team has stated quite clearly that they will never eliminate the option for a perpetual license. They do offer a subscription model, but it's mostly targeted at larger institutions that prefer the subscription model because it spreads their costs out and provides them 100% clarity on their per-month costs (vs unknown intervals of upgrades). A fraction of the users are using subscription; most are buying the normal (perpetual) license once and then choosing to upgrade if/when they want. This provides, in my opinion, a great case study on how many end users PREFER perpetual licenses when offered both options.

[BobShaw]

I am looking at threads like this with interest. I use Aperture still. With apologies to Mark Twain, reports of its death are exaggerated.
I don't like Lightroom. The interface is cumbersome at best.
Capture One and Aperture catalogues can be on a server so they are the only options considered.

If anyone is having printing problems from anything then I recommend getting Mirage and all of your printing problems go away. Why print from an editing programme? You have keep repeating the same process over and over. Export a 16bit TIFF once and print from that, any size. I use it with a 3880.

[kirmo]

Started using Lightroom from 1.0 and been slowly switching to C1. Still some work done in LR.

Had mysterious printing problems with LR some years ago and switched to Mirage and 100% satisfied.

I also agree C1 lacks some of the DAM features that LR has and been long time hoping that something like
keywording would be better done in C1.

Anyhow more work goes through C1 and will never upgrade too monthly paying software.

Kirmo

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Staying with LR for a couple of reasons:

• Significant lock in because I have 70k+ images in Lightroom
• I feel that Lightroom has been consistent since beta 3 back in 2006 when I started using it
• Lightroom has DNG support
• Not least because of DNG, Lightroom is much better documented
• I find Capture One marketing a bit over the edge

So, my heart is with Lightroom. But, I also feel that Lightroom has real issues with handling non OLP filtered sensors. Issues they need to fix and I have seen little movement in that direction.

But, hell will freeze to ice before I switch to Capture One, it is sort of personal so I can't explain it. I would much more likely use RawTherapee or Iridient's raw developer as alternative tools. I have a license for the present version of C1 and I use try it time to time. But we make no friends, simple as that.

Best regards
Erik

I'm contemplating a move from Lightroom to Capture One after the dead of Aperture and a somewhat "forced" move to Lightroom.

The Capture One image processing tools seem to suit me better than Lightroom's and do many of the same things, but in different ways. And I like not switch modes to go from browsing to adjusting.

But Lightroom's DAM features, IMHO, are as far ahead of Capture One's as Aperture's are/were ahead of Lightroom's.

Who had made, or is making, the move to Capture One from Lightroom and finding ways to "make do?"

[Hoggy]

Staying with LR for a couple of reasons:

• Significant lock in because I have 70k+ images in Lightroom
• I feel that Lightroom has been consistent since beta 3 back in 2006 when I started using it
• Lightroom has DNG support
• Not least because of DNG, Lightroom is much better documented
• I find Capture One marketing a bit over the edge

So, my heart is with Lightroom. But, I also feel that Lightroom has real issues with handling non OLP filtered sensors. Issues they need to fix and I have seen little movement in that direction.

But, hell will freeze to ice before I switch to Capture One, it is sort of personal so I can't explain it. I would much more likely use RawTherapee or Iridient's raw developer as alternative tools. I have a license for the present version of C1 and I use try it time to time. But we make no friends, simple as that.

I tend to agree with this, especially the part about DNG support (in which Phase One seems to be starting support for, abeit it kicking and screaming  ).  Although I only have about 6,000 images in total, I've done way too much work on them to switch completely.  LR's cataloging facilities are also lightyears ahead.

That being said, C1 is looking like something I will want to use from time to time.  The fact that it doesn't (yet) write anything back into the DNG's XMP is both a blessing and a curse for C1, IMO.  I'm finding it nice to have a secondary catalog that, coupled with not having any history, is wholly and completely separate from my main files to be an interesting creative outlet to experiment with alternative renderings of another processor's interpretation of the raw data (also without cluttering up my main [LR] catalog).  The downside to me of it not writing back into the DNG's is that I'm missing the reassurance of having a belt-and-suspenders type of backup, complete with snapshots/variants that would otherwise be stored into XMP - should any catalog issues ever occur.  Needles to say, I'm doing incredibly frequent backups - and on that note, it's nice that C1 doesn't force you sit and wait while it zips them up.

I'm also looking at DXO right now.  And DXO is much more suited to a LR workflow - and in fact it seems to be centered around it.  It can even save out 16 bit linear DNG's!  I think that allows for other additional LR corrections like WB-control, and even highlight and shadows recovery options..  And especially spot healing!  I'm finding LR's spot healing to be much better than both DXO & C1.
As far as noise goes, I've seen an article that showed C1's v7 noise reduction to be better than both DXO & C1.  However, in the couple tests I've done so far - LR seems much better than C1, but DXO seems better than LR.  Especially considering Luminance noise, here - chroma seems to be good in all of them.

So all in all, I think it's good to have a couple/few raw processors to keep your options open.  Each one seems to have pros and cons.

[Tony Jay]

Capture One is a very good raw converter.
However, to change from Lightroom to C1 would entail some major revisions to workflow.
Lightroom is so much more than a raw converter and that is really the issue.
The Digital-asset-managment capability of Lightroom is massive (the recent upset with the import module notwithstanding) and one way or another C1 is just lost in action here.

This is not really a criticism of C1 since the design of C1 is just to another workflow philosophy.
Apart from the fact that they are raw converters they are not really comparable as software packages as far as I am concerned.

Tony Jay

[Jimmy D Uptain]

I use both and will continue to do so.
C1 is much faster and way more customizable. Their process recipe options are to be envied by LR. Lets not forget sessions.
C1 biggest fault (in my situation) is the skewed colors on D800 files. They refuse to acknowledge its a problem. Thats their "look".
However LR is just better for some files, has a much better search feature, and better soft-proofing.

Also using the CC model, I'm able to utilize PS's cloning and healing tools which are far superior to either LR or C1.

I honestly don't understand why folks feel like they have to choose one or the other. They work fine side by side.

[Paul2660]

I use both, and find each has unique features that I need.  Edit, amazingly I forgot to mention LR's history of adjustments. 

Capture One:

0.  LACK OF HISTORY OF ADJUSTMENTS PROCESS, MAKES WORKING BETWEEN IMAGES QUITE DIFFICULT
1.  By far the best color editor I have ever used.
2.  The fact you can now use the color editor/WB tool in local adjustments is also a very powerful tool
3.  Local adjustments, period, C1 does it better as they are treated as independent layers, unlike the adjustment brush/multiple brushes in LR
4.  The ABILITY to use sessions.  I have no desire to keep all my images in a catalog, just does not work for me.
5.  By far the best tool for Phase One back raws,
6.  LCC process is easy to use and works, unlike the LR process which I have never been able to get to work
7.  I have never tried to print from C1, and probably never will, as LR works great here.
8.  C1 can have bugs, (I run in windows) but they are few and far between
9.  C1 is fast and does seem to UNDERSTAND how to best use a graphics card, unlike LR
10. Zooming to 100% takes no extra time and is seamless

Lightroom

0.  HISTORY FEATURE, To me a huge advantage over ACR/CC and C1, invaluable for my workflow.***
1.  The new HDR and Pano tools are excellent additions.  The ability to create a multi-image pano, as a dng and still use the LR tools is very powerful.
2.  The new auto mask is amazing also and has huge potential
3.  Catalog only, I would prefer a session work flow
4.  Local adjustments are all on or all off, no way to only turn of one (which to me is an Adobe feature cut to keep CC use going), i.e. LR adjustments are
     seen as independent layers.
5.  Color editor in adjustment brush is OK, but nothing like the power in C1
6.  Toolset is good and getting better with each release
7.  LR is slow at times and seems to get memory leaks if open for a long period of time, requiring  reboot.
8.  I see excessive times (30 seconds to 45 seconds) to re-open some images and zooming to 100% can be worse if images have many adjustment
     brushes
9.  I still feel LR doesn't like working with a 30 inch monitor when zooming to 100% (something that has been around for years)
10.LR DOES NOT seem to handle a graphics processor well, in fact if enabled on my PC"s LR tends to slow down, GX470 Nvidia 1GB of ram
11.LR seems to work better for me on both Nikon and Fuji files but LR still needs to improve on their Fuji processing algorithm.
12.Print module works great and handles my printing needs for images up to 36" x 96"

Both tools can work to produce excellent results, and as many others have already commented, I can't ever see just moving to one of them. 

Paul C

*** Just today, I went back to some shots taken in April of 2015, and I can still see exactly what I did to get to where I currently have the image, C1 in session mode just can't offer this.  If you work a lot on your files in the raw converter as I do, such a history of adjustments is invaluable.  LR's is even better that CC (when working in CC not ACR) as once you close a file, the history is gone.  So for me this one single feature is a HUGE plus.  I have never understood why C1/Phase One can't make their software do this or why Phase One doesn't see this as  huge advantage.  It might have something to do with how C1 implements the local adjustments in layers?  I have asked many times on this forum and Phase's forum, but never have been given any answer other then use the back key, which is WORTHLESS if you are working on two or more images at a time as you will get lost where you are.  So C1 seems bogged down in a "work only on one image at time" mentality.  Sad.

[Rory]

2.  The new auto mask is amazing also and has huge potential

What is this?

[Paul2660]

The auto mask feature came out a few releases ago.  It IMO is the best selection tool I have ever seen or used, and really wish that Abode would move to CC, as selection over fine details are still very hard to do at least to me.  The auto mask can select a sky against a tree loaded horizon with amazing accuracy.  Here is link to a video that shows some of the features, by Wayne Fox.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LypUUCT7XFQ

Paul C

[Rory]

The auto mask feature came out a few releases ago.

Oh, okay.  You confused me with "new".    Wayne's use is pretty ingenuous and I use it quite often.

[Paul2660]

Yes, I guess it's been around enough it's no longer "new". 

Paul

[christwo]

Using the trial version at the mo, not keen on the method of key wording or not being able to change the colour tag titles. However, I am processing images a lot quicker that I ever did in LR and I have been using that since VER 1.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Hi,

I've 'moved' to Capture One Pro a long time ago (although I keep using LR sometimes, for comparisons), because it's a better Raw converter (with more to come), and I do not need the kind of cataloging that LR offers. For postprocessing I use the best tools I can find/afford, so there are several of those (non-of them LR) as a Photoshop plugin or stand-alone application (FocusMagic, several of the Topaz-Labs plugins, PixInsight, HeliconFocus, PTGUI, etc.). For printed output, Qimage Ultimate is hard to beat

LR is a bit too much of Swiss-Army knife, lot's of tools in a compact envelope, but no real superior tools when compared to dedicated solutions. I'd need to trade too much quality for some convenience (and subscription aggravation).

So Capture One offers a much better start of the life of my images, for me.

Cheers,
Bart

[orc73]

ok after all the highly professional(and highly appreciated) posts let me come with the stupid answer

Depending on the camera model the c1 converted images look just much better. maybe if you spend hours on LR you will get similar results.

If you need a big database to find and organise files for the future, LR is much better.
I ended up doing a c1 catalog now for every job and store them together with the photos. This makes me loosing control over my whole work, I can not search over all my files. On the other hand if you have a big database in LR, you better make sure you have 1(one) big storage device and a good migration process...if you start to split locations on different devices, it tends to get a mess and you are quite sure to run into data loss in the next migration. And you loose a lot of power each time you have to open the catalog with your files from the past 5 years work.
Not an option for me, they need to be splited in some way anyway.

So for now I go with the rather unprofessional solution to do projects 1by1.