Topic: Who's moved from Lightroom to Capture One? (Read 13453 times)

Shiever · « **Reply #20 on:** November 04, 2015, 09:13:27 pm »

Like Bob I am an Aperture user who has been using LR for about 16 months. I am currently trialing C1. I am finding that the image adjustments in C1 result in images that are a lot closer to those I did in Aperture. It is a much more "controlled" experience. There is a learning curve to C1, but much of the process is more similar to Aperture than LR, eg moving the "adjustment bricks" onto the image. Yes the DAM aspect is inferior to LR, but since I am an enthusiast/amateur with just over 10K images, this is not a major issue with me. I have not tried printing, but I may keep LR for those functions. I am just tired of both Apple and Adobe jerking me around. I am hoping Phase One is more focused on the photographer and not diverted to other things.

Doug Peterson · « **Reply #21 on:** November 04, 2015, 11:11:49 pm »

Quote from: orc73 on November 04, 2015, 11:07:17 am

I ended up doing a c1 catalog now for every job and store them together with the photos.

You might want to consider Sessions instead.

This is exactly what they exist to do.

orc73 · « **Reply #22 on:** November 05, 2015, 12:11:51 am »

Thanks Doug, I was not quite sure if the sessions are till recommended for that or if they are just left over from legacy versions.

As for the picture quality have a look at the first Canon image in my experience report here:
http://www.valentino-photography.com/comparison-medium-format-hasselblad-vs-canon-5dsr/

The difference is significant enough for me. Sharpness and color is just much better out of the box.

budjames · « **Reply #23 on:** November 09, 2015, 06:20:43 pm »

I dumped my Canon 5D Mark III DSLRs and L lenses. For the past 2 years, I shoot exclusively with Fuji-XT1 and X100T.

I gave up on LR6 after seeing the incredibly better conversions I get from CaptureOne Pro 8 with the Fuji-X RAW files. I'm using the same year/month/day folder structure and reference this in C1P8. This way it works the same as LR. I can output finished Tifs to the same folder as the original RAW files then sync the folder in LR to bring in the new Tifs for DAM and printing capabilities. LR is still stronger than C1P8 with DAM and printing.

The image quality is worth the change over even though I have 100k+ images in my LR database representing over 2TBs.

Cheers.
Bud

www.budjames.photography

Doug Peterson · « **Reply #24 on:** November 09, 2015, 06:44:06 pm »

Quote from: orc73 on November 05, 2015, 12:11:51 am

Thanks Doug, I was not quite sure if the sessions are till recommended for that or if they are just left over from legacy versions.

As for the picture quality have a look at the first Canon image in my experience report here:
http://www.valentino-photography.com/comparison-medium-format-hasselblad-vs-canon-5dsr/

The difference is significant enough for me. Sharpness and color is just much better out of the box.

Sessions are not legacy. They are a core part of he program and the preferred option for most professional c1 workflows.

Hoggy · « **Reply #25 on:** November 09, 2015, 09:06:40 pm »

I'm trying to get an understanding though of why C1 seems much less advanced in several areas (though a much better starting point than LR -- C1's auto actual works).. Was Phase One just letting it languish by the wayside for a while there? And now they're finally starting to give it some more TLC?

HCS · « **Reply #26 on:** November 10, 2015, 07:18:38 am »

Quote from: Hoggy on November 09, 2015, 09:06:40 pm

I'm trying to get an understanding though of why C1 seems much less advanced in several areas ...

Could you elaborate a bit on that statement? I'm not understanding where it is less advanced, let alone much. And less advanced than what? Lr?

ErikKaffehr · « **Reply #27 on:** November 10, 2015, 01:53:05 pm »

Hi,

Right now, I feel that Capture One has a small (or even significant) advantage over Lightroom on non OLP-filtered camera systems. Lightroom may have advantages is some other areas. I honestly don't care. Lightroom is about parametric workflow. If you process more than a few images in Photoshop, you are not in a parametric workflow. In that case you may use any good raw converter.

Personally, I feel that I want to learn to make best use of single raw converter and the raw converter of my choice is Lightroom. Not because it is best, but because it fits my workflow.

Best regards
Erik

Paul2660 · « **Reply #28 on:** November 10, 2015, 03:23:28 pm »

To my liking neither C1 or LR really does a great job on Fuji X-trans raw. I started with LR, moved to C1, then back to LR, overall in images with a lot of finer details, I feel I get more out of LR, especially in 300dpi conversions. C1 seems to have a bit better color at first but in LR I can get there. I wrote a bit on my findings here:

http://photosofarkansas.com/2015/10/27/fuji-x-trans-raw-conversions-which-is-best-lightroom-or-capture-one/

Make sure to click on the examples to see them at 100%. I realize it's a totally personal pref. Actually to me the best converter on Fuji is Iridient, but they have their own problems for my workflow. Being MAC only is just one of them.
Paul C

Phil Indeblanc · « **Reply #29 on:** November 12, 2015, 12:40:45 pm »

If you are an artist, or a pro photographer that is interested in the best looking files, you are not moving anywhere. You are not moving from one to another as an end all. You will make use of each for each strong points.

If you are a business man and need to make things at the most efficient under a business model as first interest, you will want to stick with one. I would think that would be LR for a number of reasons. But I can also see the very deep yet opposite selection choosing C1 for some.

fdisilvestro · « **Reply #30 on:** November 17, 2015, 05:46:35 am »

I have starting using C1 as an alternative to LR. So far I like the results I get, but still consider myself a novice, discovering features every time I use it.

I find the sessions very useful for working tethered on location, usually on a portable computer. In the end a session is just a catalog (same data model) and a series of folders, where the paths to the images are relative instead of absolute (this is set in a flag in the catalog), which makes them easy to move from one location to another.

I have also set up a workflow to use C1 as a raw converter for LR, (not fully automatic) which allows me to keep LR as a DAM, stacking the C1 conversion to the original image just as another version.

Contrary to what it seems the general preference, I opted for the subscription model giving myself one year to learn the application and make a final decision.

Doug Peterson · « **Reply #31 on:** November 17, 2015, 05:08:44 pm »

Quote from: FranciscoDisilvestro on November 17, 2015, 05:46:35 am

Contrary to what it seems the general preference, I opted for the subscription model giving myself one year to learn the application and make a final decision.

Subscription is used by maybe 10% of our customers. Most prefer to own the software. But it makes sense to use subscription as a sort of trial-run if the built-in 30 day trial is not enough for you.

When you're ready to buy a license you can get a Capture One Discount here.

budjames · « **Reply #32 on:** November 29, 2015, 05:44:59 am »

Quote from: Paul2660 on November 10, 2015, 03:23:28 pm

To my liking neither C1 or LR really does a great job on Fuji X-trans raw. I started with LR, moved to C1, then back to LR, overall in images with a lot of finer details, I feel I get more out of LR, especially in 300dpi conversions. C1 seems to have a bit better color at first but in LR I can get there. I wrote a bit on my findings here:

http://photosofarkansas.com/2015/10/27/fuji-x-trans-raw-conversions-which-is-best-lightroom-or-capture-one/

Make sure to click on the examples to see them at 100%. I realize it's a totally personal pref. Actually to me the best converter on Fuji is Iridient, but they have their own problems for my workflow. Being MAC only is just one of them.
Paul C

I have been a LR user since the pre-public beta. After ditching Canon FF DSLR for Fuji-X (X-T1, X-E2 and X100T currently), I've been a quest for better RAW conversions that I was experiencing with LR (now v6 CC). I've been CaptureOne Pro 8 for the past two months and to me the improvement over LR is significant enough to warrant a change in my workflow.

Based on my personal experiences and lots of testing, I'm surprised by your conclusion. I hope that Adobe improves Fuji-X RAW conversions with future releases of LR, but for now, I'm happy with C1P8.

You can check out my latest Fuji-X portfolios one my website: www.budjames.photography

Cheers.
Bud James

www.budjames.photography

kencameron · « **Reply #33 on:** November 29, 2015, 10:34:16 am »

Quote from: Paul2660 on October 27, 2015, 09:20:25 am

The auto mask feature came out a few releases ago. It IMO is the best selection tool I have ever seen or used,

Agreed. Capture One also has an auto mask feature, but it doesn't work well, to the extent that even one of C1s own instructional videos is discouraging about its use. In other respects, C1 has some positives on local adjustments (layer based approach with the ability to name layers, color editing and the ability to copy and invert selections). We can only hope that the two sets of engineers compete. I do find that LR gives me a more direct relationship with my files, as if I were painting on them rather than applying software to them. But that is a very personal reaction.

Paul2660 · « **Reply #34 on:** November 29, 2015, 10:59:09 am »

Hi Ken,

Yes, I agree on the auto mask feature in C1, in fact I had opened this thread a while back:

http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=102915.0

Hoping to get a response from David G, but never did. He sometimes avoids the possible negative issues others times not.

Auto mask in C1 on a solid line, say a building works very well, as good as LR, but get to a tree line against a blue sky, or white sky etc, can't do it as well. Sometimes it seems to get a good selection, others it can't.
But I also agree with you 100% on C1 and layers/local adjustments. A huge plus for C1, and I have to assume LR is not allowing it as it will complete with use of CC Photoshop, again a bit sad if true. Also LR's inability to allow you to turn off 1 of multiple brush adjustments to see the effect is a big weakness to me, again I guess that would mean layers, so LR won't go there. LR still is all or none on adjustment brushes (I tend to use many on one image).

I would also love to see an invert button for a selection/bush etc.

C1's local color adjustment tool within a local adjustment, also great, but again you can't overlap multiple local adjustments and make a color selection as the 2nd one will act blown out.

To me the single greatest issue with C1, is lack of a history, but C1 has known about this for years, and has never addressed it. Their method of just hitting the back button is OK for one image but what if you have several open at one time? Not why a history is such a hard thing to code, or it's just possible C1/Phase One don't see it as important. If C1 did not offer so much power in image adjustment, then I could see this, but again I may be the only person who finds the lack of a history of steps a bit important. I am sure it's all about developed workflow.

Paul C

Mike Guilbault · « **Reply #35 on:** November 29, 2015, 10:24:52 pm »

I was just lamenting today about missing the history in C1. Mind you, I didn't use it much, but when I needed it it was there in LR. My main reason for switching to C1 is simply the speed. LR bogs down way too much and too frequently on my old MacPro.

I've actually had better success with the auto mask feature in C1 than I did in LR. Funny how that happens.

David Grover / Capture One · « **Reply #36 on:** November 30, 2015, 04:48:54 am »

Quote from: Paul2660 on November 29, 2015, 10:59:09 am

Hi Ken,

Yes, I agree on the auto mask feature in C1, in fact I had opened this thread a while back:

http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=102915.0

Hoping to get a response from David G, but never did. He sometimes avoids the possible negative issues others times not.

Auto mask in C1 on a solid line, say a building works very well, as good as LR, but get to a tree line against a blue sky, or white sky etc, can't do it as well. Sometimes it seems to get a good selection, others it can't.
But I also agree with you 100% on C1 and layers/local adjustments. A huge plus for C1, and I have to assume LR is not allowing it as it will complete with use of CC Photoshop, again a bit sad if true. Also LR's inability to allow you to turn off 1 of multiple brush adjustments to see the effect is a big weakness to me, again I guess that would mean layers, so LR won't go there. LR still is all or none on adjustment brushes (I tend to use many on one image).

I would also love to see an invert button for a selection/bush etc.

C1's local color adjustment tool within a local adjustment, also great, but again you can't overlap multiple local adjustments and make a color selection as the 2nd one will act blown out.

To me the single greatest issue with C1, is lack of a history, but C1 has known about this for years, and has never addressed it. Their method of just hitting the back button is OK for one image but what if you have several open at one time? Not why a history is such a hard thing to code, or it's just possible C1/Phase One don't see it as important. If C1 did not offer so much power in image adjustment, then I could see this, but again I may be the only person who finds the lack of a history of steps a bit important. I am sure it's all about developed workflow.

Paul C

That's a bit unfair Paul! I don't police LL daily, if I catch something I do.. if I don't, its more enough that I have simply missed it.

I would say if anyone is having an issue or usability problem with Capture One then the first port of call should be Phase One Support. Its free, and you are untitled to it!

With regards to history, it is not actually an often requested feature. People often see it as a 'nice to have' but don't really use it a great deal. Main reason is that working on a RAW file is non destructive and any tool can be 'undone' at any point with no ill effect.

But again, if you want it in there - make a feature request via support so its logged.

Paul2660 · « **Reply #37 on:** November 30, 2015, 09:50:43 am »

Sorry David, did not mean to make it sound like I don't appreciate the time you spend here, I do. That comment was a bit harsh. I have used C1 is the 3.7x days longer than most. That goes back to 2003 or so. My post must have come across as a negative, which I guess it was in regards to the auto mask.

I have given up on the need for history. I have opened so many feature requests over the years on this, it's obvious that the design team has a totally different idea for the basic workflow than mine. However I guess most folks just don't use the vast array of toolsets in this software. I challenge you or anyone else to work up 6 files, with involved local adjustments and the like, or even worse IQ LCC files and Phase files, which sometimes need more tweaking. If you are making a lot of smaller changes and doing a lot of work on the raw in C1, then having a history of steps is invaluable. It's easy to get into an involved workflow in C1 on multiple files and end up needed to back out several steps. The "back" button crosses each actual change, so it's going to back out across various files unless you have only worked 1 image at a time. The only way I have current to file, is create a virtual copy, and start over.

Yes, I use the tools in C1, they are extremely powerful, most times the raw conversion, only need slight tweaks in CC later on, mainly Topaz clarity and that is nominal. C1 offers the end user huge benefits with the color editor and the fact that you can pin point an individual color in a local adjustment layer.

I just don't see the need to use CC anymore with the tools available in C1 or LR both.

Paul C

Paul Steunebrink · « **Reply #38 on:** December 01, 2015, 02:50:41 pm »

As a side mark in this discussion I found the auto mask feature in CO Pro 9 much improved. No jaggies along the borders as before. Not a feature mentioned in the marketing materials spread on the web (I even did not mention it in my review at http://imagealchemist.net/capture-one-pro-9-review/) but one of a (long?) list of improvements that came with the new release.

Dan Wells · « **Reply #39 on:** December 01, 2015, 06:13:58 pm »

Interestingly, C1 v9 includes both keywording and masking improvements (as well as a better raw engine). I made the move to v8 a month and a half ago, and just upgraded to v9 today (with some great help from David at Phase One). I'm pretty confident that Phase is moving to better cataloging - they own Media Pro, which is a very powerful cataloging system, and the new keywording in C1 v9 (which I haven't had a chance to experiment with yet) seems suspiciously like they got it from Media Pro. My guess is that the reason we haven't seen a lot of updates to Media Pro lately is that they're busy integrating it into C1! If that IS what they're doing, when they finish, C1 will have the best cataloging system in the business.

I agree with the earlier posters who commented on C1's much better handling of X-Trans (compared to Lightroom) - that was one of the reasons I made the move (along with Adobe's import downgrade, which led me to worry about Adobe becoming more beginner-focused with Lightroom).

One huge advantage to C1 is Phase One - David reads these forums and responds regularly (and I'm sure he passes our feedback on to the development team). Their other product is $20,000+ digital backs - they're interested in the needs of serious photographers, not in converging photography and mobile phones.Whether or not they succeed with the backs long-term (and I have my doubts, both because of Pentax (and possibly Fuji in the near future) introducing MUCH cheaper MF digital, and because of the increasing image quality of smaller formats), they know serious photographers, and they're a tiny company whose whole focus is on serious photographers who actually use CAMERAS...

Much of Adobe's recent innovation is on the mobile side, and it almost has to be, given how big a company Adobe is, and the relative size of the phone and camera markets. Yes, Adobe backed down on the import downgrade, but I suspect we'll see an increasing number of beginner-focused and mobile-focused features, due to the sheer size of that market. Adobe's real long-term interest is in getting people to use Lightroom Mobile to manage and edit their iPhone photos, because so many people have iPhones.

Will Phase One ever match Lightroom's integrated modules (print, slideshow, etc.)? I don't know. I hope so - they could acquire the technology, as they seem to have done with cataloging by buying Media Pro...

Author Topic: Who's moved from Lightroom to Capture One? (Read 13453 times)