Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

  1. #1
    Thawley
    Guest

    Exclamation Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

    John Nack is looking for feedback to improve ACR in Lightroom and Photoshop – I know there are a lot of Capture One users here, so now's your chance to be heard.

    "The Lightroom 3 beta includes an improved demosaicing algorithm, so it's the best basis for comparison." – says Principal Product Manager, Adobe Photoshop (and Adobe Camera RAW).

    As a lightroom user in the education realm (who is bound to Adobe products because of budgetary & political reasons) I hope all of you with strong opinions will take this opportunity to tell Adobe what you think and help them improve.

    Thanks for listening.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

    Today I played around with LR3beta and some files.
    Didn't try LR for quite a while. First impression: yes, apparently demosaicing is improved.
    But it depends on the camera and on the quality of the file.
    First thing I always try is the default look regarding color and gradation/levels. Furthermore sharpening set to zero, luminance NR set to zero and color NR at a low value.
    With these settings Nikon D3x and Canon 5D are almost the same in LR and C1 regarding details. But the captures I had on hand are not perfectly sharp (maybe not the best lenses).
    Leica M8 and digital back files (captures without shake and good lenses) clearly show more details processed through C1 5.0.
    The differences are even more obvious after soft sharpening (in Photoshop with Focal Blade).
    Tonality in C1 is still more film-like; also cleaner blacks and better differentiation of highlights in C1 (of course this applies to the defaults of the softwares).

    As to the look I won't comment as it depends on the user's experience with the software.

    Things I missed (unless I overlooked something):

    - no customization of the keyboard
    - limited customization of the interface / limited zooming options
    - RGB values - in the histogram there is an indication for RGB… but only in %. Useless.
    - Histogram apparently refers to ProPhoto, not to the color space you are exporting to (not even to sRGB or AdobeRGB as in ACR).
    So actually you are working blind in LR…
    - too many mouse operations required

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

    Quote Originally Posted by thomas View Post
    Tonality in C1 is still more film-like
    You don't need to say any more...
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

    Quote Originally Posted by Ben Rubinstein View Post
    You don't need to say any more...
    what's the probelm?

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

    I'm agreeing with you wholeheartedly!
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

    Quote Originally Posted by Ben Rubinstein View Post
    I'm agreeing with you wholeheartedly!
    hm, don't know if you are sarcastic or not.
    Just to clarify: I didn't meant to say "C1 looks like film". Just more film-like compared to LR - both with the default settings.
    C1's gradation/tonality rather reminds me of a photograph whilst LR (ACR) is a bit flat, midtones are accentuated too much (for my taste).
    My first impulse in LR is to tweak the curve...
    Last edited by thomas; 9th November 2009 at 05:50.

  7. #7
    ddk
    Guest

    Re: Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

    Quote Originally Posted by thomas View Post
    hm, don't know if you are sarcastic or not.
    Just to clarify: I didn't meant to say "C1 looks like film". Just more film-like compared to LR - both with the default settings.
    C1's gradation/tonality rather reminds me of a photograph whilst LR (ACR) is a bit flat, midtones are accentuated too much (for my taste).
    My first impulse in LR is to tweak the curve...
    You can't generalize this Thomas, results in both C1 and Adobe products are very camera dependent and pretty subjective at the end of the day.

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

    I'm agreeing with you Thomas. C1 has a far more film like curve and colour for skin tones.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  9. #9
    Thawley
    Guest

    Re: Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

    Jack says thanks.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    netherlands
    Posts
    196
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

    Absolutely essential for me is that Adobe LR and ACR handle all proprietary DNG files as such and use xmp files - don't alter anything in the DNG files from M8 M9 and similar.
    I have a separate external hard drive for LR3. My original Leica DNG's go into separate archives and only get developed in C1 5.
    The development in LR3 using a custom made profile is much improved and compares in all aspects very favorably with the C1 - my profile made in the DNG profile editor starting from the adobe m8 camera profile renders skin tones, reds etc. extremely close to the Capture One result. Only it doesn't leave the DNG as it came out of the camera.
    maurice

  11. #11
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Feedback, please: Adobe raw processing vs. others

    I haven't tried C1 V5, but I've used V4 for the last year, and I think LR3 has narrowed the gap quite a bit.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •