Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Post production: starting again, what would you choose?  (Read 2620 times)

FataMorgana

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29
Post production: starting again, what would you choose?
« on: March 10, 2018, 10:45:31 AM »

If you were to know now what you know, which PP software for the likes of Sony, Nikon RAW files, which one would you use / purchase?

I've been a Lr user for some time, CC as I speak.

I keep hearing about Phase One being a better RAW converter, and TBH, I am looking for a different look, a different workflow to most everyone else whom it seems, uses Lr.

What would you suggest, do you have knowledge beyond Lr and experience of both?

Thanks
Logged
Sony 2018 Professional Shortlist. 22 IPA H'Mentions 2017-15 +a 2nd 2016, Px3 cat' winner 2008

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2017
Re: Post production: starting again, what would you choose?
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2018, 07:01:45 PM »

Hi Fata,

C1 which I think is nice has a 30day trail, as many do.
I try to avoid monthly sub software like the plague, so I still use hte desktop version of LR/6x I think it is.

There are others, like On1, or DXO, or RawTherapy, Iridium, and so many. You will know once you try it.

Oddly, I like LR, but prefer C1 results, and even using C1 for over many years, and being a C1 cert user, it is still not a friendly to use sw.
Some things are, and simple things are odd, and it does it in a non OS standard manner. I like LR ease, but its not modular, and its slow, and it just doesn't process as nice as I get out of C1.
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

mburke

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 69
Re: Post production: starting again, what would you choose?
« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2018, 07:17:01 AM »

I have fllound On1 Raw to work really well for me. They are releasing a new version with some enhancements to the brushes and to the Browse module this month. I find it very smooth in going to develop or Effects modules which work on the raw file without touching it and then export to a folder for putting on the internet or printing. I use Qimage to print so I have tons of options. They have come a long way in the last few years and have excellent tutorials.
Logged

Hening Bettermann

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 911
    • landshape.net
Re: Post production: starting again, what would you choose?
« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2018, 04:57:09 PM »

I have started with ACR and Photoshop, but when Adobe went off to the Cloud, it left me behind on earth.
For a raw converter I have used Iridient for years, and it is great. Recently I have migrated to Raw Therapee, mainly because of its automatic CA correction, which has done wonders for me, and its manual defringing. - I have never used C1 nor Lightroom.

After raw conversion, I use PhotoLine for editing. It is only 60 , if you know Photoshop you'll find it familiar, and it has a vast scope of functions for all the stages of PP from ingestion to printing. (I do not print myself though). It's only draw back is the absence of tutorial literature, but there is a very responsive forum.

Alan Smallbone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 770
    • APS Photography
Re: Post production: starting again, what would you choose?
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2018, 11:38:44 AM »

There are lots of options as you are well aware of, and as noted most have at least 30 day trials. I used to use the Adobe train and have gotten off of it, as I prefer some of the other options. Capture One is an amazing piece of software, does wonderful raw conversions and had really great precise color correction. For me, their catalog/session interface is kind of funky but usable. I use it for really precise careful work that I will print large or deliver for customers. Other times and probably mostly use OnOne. I like their software, it has some issues but they are working on them and none of them are real problems but you can probably say that for most software packages. I like the interface, I like the non-destructive process and the ease to go back and process again without losing any history and the ability to use many layers etc. Masking is powerful for OnOne and quite easy to use and looking forward to the improvements later this month in that department. Creatively there are more options for OnOne and it is quite useful for most things. I could use it for all my processing but it is nice to have options.
I have tried Luminar and did not like it that much. Topaz has some unique masking options and works but I find it is not that great a path for me, but it is a tool I do have if needed, since I had invested in their plugins.
For a photoshop replacement I have Affinity Photo, which I really like. You can have 5 installs if needed, it is also available on an ipad. It is not that great for raw conversion, but for things like stacking for noise reduction and other pixel crunching it works well, it also supports most existing photoshop plugins.
I have not tried Alien Skin Exposure, don't see the need and it is costly. I run a Windows PC so none of the mac specific apps are on my list. Darktable is interesting but not quite there yet.

As a sort of conclusion after trying and working on a lot of pieces of software, they all do pretty much the same thing. They all work, they are tools. What it really comes down to is how it fits with your workflow and how you like to work. If you pixel peep a lot, then the raw conversions can make a real difference, I don't, what matters to me is how the whole image looks, it is the content, not the specific pixels. So try many of them, then decide which ones you really want to master and what will accomplish your end result that you desire. There are many options, be open minded and try them, it takes a while to force yourself out of the mold of habits but the change can be refreshing.

Alan
Logged
Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA

davidedric

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 79
Re: Post production: starting again, what would you choose?
« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2018, 04:44:50 AM »

I have been using Lightroom for a number of years.
However, I am convinced by experiment that DxO PhotoLab does a better job in converting my m4/3 files, but I want to retain Lightroom as my DAM, and for further adjustments.  Using DxO as a Lightroom plug-in is just too clunky for more than a few images, so I am looking to a workflow something like:

Initial cull.  Maybe in FastStone or Fast RAW Viewer, or could just use DxO.

Process in DxO with a preset applied to all images, mostly PRIME

Export to disk as .dng (and do something else for a while)

Import to Lightroom, can be done in batches while DxO churns away

Make any further adjustments in Lightroom, publish, print, export or whatever.

Dave
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11832
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Post production: starting again, what would you choose?
« Reply #6 on: August 06, 2018, 05:54:46 AM »

I use a variety of converters, but C1 Pro is my baseline for DSLRs files (currently D850). Sometimes Iridient also.

I use DxO for my RX100 mkV because of its great noise reducation and optical correction.

I use LR and Phocus for my Hasselblad files.

Cheers,
Bernard

jeremyrh

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 881
Re: Post production: starting again, what would you choose?
« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2018, 03:19:33 AM »

On a tangent - suppose you found yourself on a very limited income, so you couldn't commit to subscriptions, or to upgrading your software every release, what would you do? I suppose as a first step you'd use what you have bought until it breaks, but then what? Free/included software like Apple Photos? Or ??
Logged

shootraw

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
Re: Post production: starting again, what would you choose?
« Reply #8 on: August 15, 2018, 09:45:00 PM »


What would you suggest, do you have knowledge beyond Lr and experience of both?

Thanks

I use (and teach) Lightroom, Photoshop and Capture One. For raw conversion, I like both the ACR engine and C1 for slightly different things but overall, for me, Lr is still ahead. However, things are close enough that whichever you take a liking to and learn thoroughly will produce better results for you.

One interesting thing about teaching large groups of students over the years using both Lr and C1 was watching some instantly take a liking to one product over the other, just as some prefer one camera system to the other  it's a preference based on something other than feature set.

But do also look at DxO Photolab as a plugin to Lightroom, which allows you to send raw files to Photolab from Lr and have the resulting file (which can be a DNG, TIFF or JPEG) end up back in Lr. It's not perfect (there are colour-rendering differences with DNGs, for example, and you have to remember to switch off Lightroom's default sharpening for the files that you send back) but, when using DxO's Prime noise reduction (which you can set as a default for all new files), the balance between noise reduction and detail rendering is very impressive, particularly for Micro Four Thirds sensors at higher ISOs.
Logged

Aram Hăvărneanu

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 60
Re: Post production: starting again, what would you choose?
« Reply #9 on: October 05, 2018, 07:19:51 AM »

On a tangent - suppose you found yourself on a very limited income, so you couldn't commit to subscriptions, or to upgrading your software every release, what would you do? I suppose as a first step you'd use what you have bought until it breaks, but then what? Free/included software like Apple Photos? Or ??

Well software like RawTherapee is free (both as in free beer and in freedom), and gives results as good (or better) than anything else really.

There's also Darktable (also free and open source).
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up