"Industry Standard" - the only industry standards are TIFF and JPG. Lightroom forced my workflow to work in the way that a bunch of engineers in Santa Clara decided it should go and would add a lot of unnecessary time to accomplish nothing of substance. The library structure was created by low level engineers with no knowledge of database structures and is no more sophisticated than Outlook from Microsoft. Capture One was created by a single photographer who had skills in programming code but it is his view of how and editor should work.
With the shift from Lightroom and Photoshop to alternatives each photographer can work with whichever applications best suits their workflow and end product requirements. Even with Photoshop, which I worked with before the application was renamed by Adobe, the Raw conversion was good enough for small prints or images going into an album or online but not good enough for large prints where I wanted to have access to 100% of the data in the Raw file.
For highest quality Raw to TIFF I use Nikon's Capture for my Nikon NEF files. No surprise to me that software engineers at Nikon can provide a better file conversion than all the outside companies whose people have to reverse engineer their code from NEF files on a trial and error basis. The delay in getting ACR updates after new cameras are released is for this reason. The outside engineers have to wait until they can buy the new camera and start producing Raw files and then make adjustments to their code.
Think of a house that has been built and someone wants an exact duplicate and one builder has the original blueprints and the second builder has to go look at the house and make measurements and has no access to what if below the floors or in the walls and must make a best guess. Which "duplicate" house would you expect to be a better match?
