Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 72

Thread: Which post processing software ....

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Which post processing software ....

    I know... I know... this is like which vehicle or what camera type questions but I have been a Aperture user for years. Yeah I have copies of LR, CS, DXO, C1 and a host of plugins and specialty softwares and occasionally used them for their strengths when needed but given a choice I opened Aperture first. Mac has abandoned Aperture so it is inevitable that I will have to migrate to another software in the near future. This a7rII has essentially at the moment given me a kick in the tail to move to something else. Sadly even with many PS/CS college courses these software even though they are without a doubt the most powerful photo processing softwares in the world but it's UI and my mind just never have blended very well. I really don't like the layer process and many of the other systems Adobe uses (not to mention the worlds worst customer service department of any company I have ever dealt with). But, if LR is the best PP software for a7rII AWR files then I would just have to tough it out and use it UI issue or not.

    I see Quentin has been using Adobe and I think Guy still uses C1 (could be wrong there) but both individual are posting excellent images. What is the consensus today as to which software is working best with Sony files? I got most of them so cost of changing to another software is not a issue but results and UI are along with a filing system that might be like the Aperture software if there is one.

    I played with a7rII files in both LR and C1 and got my best results converting the AWR file to a TIF and moving them to Aperture (you know that is the 'Old Horse New Tricks issue") working them there

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,930
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Using LR has very little to do with using Photoshop CS. It's a very different kind of image processing app. And, not to be confrontational, but Adobe has actually done very well on customer support for me. Sure, not without some issues ... but then, nobody's perfect. ;-)

    To me, there is no clear winner OR loser. I use LR myself, and it's nearly the only image processing app I use nowadays. Once you have a feel for what it does, why, and how to get what you want, it's hard to move to other stuff. (I even like using it... but that's my problem.)

    But excellent results have been produced with every modern image processing app out there. Pick one, learn it and use it well. Exploit its strengths, workaround its weaknesses. Etc.

    G

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    I am using C1, then hand off the tif file to CS6 and Nik.
    Iridient also is excellent for dealing with the raw file.
    It's very easy to learn and it also works great with CS6 and Nik.
    If there is a consensus I must have missed it.

    PS: ACR of course underlies both LR and PS.
    With best regards, K-H.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Socorro, NM
    Posts
    404
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Just like K-H, I am also using C1 for basic adjustment then export to Photoshop for further editing with Nik.

    The reason why I am choosing C1 over LR is because the other day, we tested highlight recovery of C1 and LR on FredMiranda and LR produced a bit of posterization/stair-step. I like C1 color more as well.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #5
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    C1 nothing else exists.

    Sorry I'm a big fan of it, but Irident is also very good.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    I've been using LR for at least the past 10 years. Since switching, I'd say I use Photoshop in VERY rare situations.

    Any new PP software is bound to be a big confusing at first, and sometimes a bit overwhelming. I'd highly recommend either a current book on using the software, or (even better) an online video course. I used Kelby Training way back when, and since then it's second nature. This goes for ANY PP software.

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by hiepphotog View Post
    Just like K-H, I am also using C1 for basic adjustment then export to Photoshop for further editing with Nik.

    The reason why I am choosing C1 over LR is because the other day, we tested highlight recovery of C1 and LR on FredMiranda and LR produced a bit of posterization/stair-step. I like C1 color more as well.
    Thanks. Interesting that you should remark on C1 color. C1's color performance got me interested initially. It seems to be much more subtle about that whereas ACR in LR or PS behaves more like a sledgehammer. For some images I never could manage to get the pleasing C1 colors out of LR or PS.
    With best regards, K-H.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #8
    Member fmueller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Northern Virginia, USA
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    I use LR as the first stop for everything, even for MFDB files. It's my catalog but also gets use as an editor for many files. But when I get serious, I drag the file into C1 and then later into PS CC for finishing and printing.

    Doing it this way leaves the C1 and photoshop file residing in the same folder as the original import into LR. I have LR scan the folder to import the finished file into the LR catalog. Sometimes I decide the LR edit looks better and use it instead.

    To go from LR to C1, I literally drag the file on top of the C1 icon in the application bar and C1 opens the whole folder of images into a default session which then stores the C1 information for that session within the LR folder.

    Sounds more complicated than it is.
    Last edited by fmueller; 6th August 2015 at 22:15.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Thanks for all the comments as they are all appreciated. I guess I have had a photoshop version since PS7 and have done every step up in versions since then. During these years I have taken 4-5 college courses to bring me back up to speed with the various versions because essentially I might have to use this software less than 3 times a year max. PS/CS and I are like a monkey with a football user interface wise. I take the courses as it forces me to use it and in a few weeks I am at least minimally proficient. Then the class ends and I don't use it for 6montgs to a year and my proficiency is back to opening the books and dragging myself through the interface.

    I got DXO years ago and use it now basically if I need its Prime NR. It's a ok PP but just not with a lot of tools compared to the others.

    Aperture has been my pet software over most of its existence. There were PP softwares with more powerful tools but the editing and filing for me were effortless. Most all my plugins are through my aperture software and I have the full topaz suite in it among others. I use it daily for work and it is like the back of my hand as far as knowing it.

    C1 I got a few versions ago and my first experience with it was very poor as it did not blend well with aperture and ended up corrupting a couple hundred aperture RAW files which became unsalvageable. I was not a happy camper. Since then I never worked between these two softwares but instead used a separate raw file for each. The newer C1 software does look nice and does do a good job but is slow for me because I don't use it enough.

    LR is my newest venture as I started with LR5. Mainly because I figured I would be just as frustrated with it as PS/CS UI. It is better but does have a few of the features I struggle with mentally to use. But I am sure if I used it as much as my aperture I probably could get used to it.

    I find with softwares the term use it or lose it is very true. I am proof of this

    Now I just have to pic one and run with it....
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #10
    Senior Member mathomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,148
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    I have the worlds most expensive copy of LR, having got there by way of C1. Like you I was a very long-time user of Aperture, and found it to be exactly what I needed. When Apple dumped it, I felt dumped myself.

    I tried C1 and LR at the same time and ended up buying C1 a little hastily because my trial period ended during a busy (non-photo) time for me and I had only done a little image editing with it. I liked its non-modal interface (similar to aperture) compared to LR's goofy modal one, so I thought it was a better option for an Aperture person.

    But then I discovered C1's keywording, or lack thereof. It's extremely basic to the point of unusable, for me. That feature is important to me, so it was a death blow to my use of C1. It also seemed to me that many of C1's keyboard shortcuts are asymmetric (you can't toggle modes with the same keystroke), which forces you to remember twice as many keyboard shortcuts for certain common tasks. That and some other things make the UI harder to learn/use than other tools (for me). I'm not a pro, so the other benefits of C1 are a bit lost on me though I'm sure they are there.

    LR seems to get all the catalog management and keywording right, has the UI mostly right (for me) and has plenty good adjustment tools for my purposes, so I ended up with a Creative Cloud "photo" account for $9.99/mo. I dislike the subscription thing on principle, but am OK thus far in practice. I guess I'll learn to put up with the modality of the LR UI (it's still a little frustrating).

    So I never use C1 any more, though reading some of the responses here gives me some ideas on how to integrate it for certain situations (thanks for that).

  11. #11
    Senior Member Joe Colson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,911
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    36

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Let me begin by saying I use LR CC and PS CC exclusively. The remainder of what I have to say is anecdotal, so please feel free to ignore it.

    I've used PS since its early days and LR since it was released as beta. Both ACR and LR use the same RAW processing engine, so I can start in either and achieve the same results. I've tried Aperture, Capture One, Nikon and Canon's apps, and Hasselblad's app, and keep coming back to LR and PS. All of my plugins from Nik-Google, Topaz and onOne work in each of the Adobe apps. My photo catalog is based on the LR Library module, with full keywording and searching. The camera and lens profiles are kept current by Adobe and are manufacturer-agnostic. I print using the LR Print module and have developed templates for the Web module. With each iteration, the ACR/LR RAW processor gets better, and for my needs is excellent.

    Not relevant to most, PS has a rich scripting environment, and I have developed scripts using that feature. While I haven't used LR's SDK, others have with good results that I use regularly (LR2/Mogrify, Jeffrey Friedl's "Lightroom Goodies", John Beardsworth's Search and Replace plugin, etc.).

    Just my two cents. YMMV.

    Joe
    _________________________________
    Joe Colson Photography
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #12
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    The short version is that I use a Adobe CC/DXO and C1P8 workflow depending on what I want to do. I used to use Aperture 3 due to many improvements and tools that it offered above LRv2 at the time. I'd lean towards arguing the fact that LR4 possibly surpassed Aperture and if you weren't convinced then I'd say LR5/LR6 definitely have in IQ... Using them with DXO takes it up another level to where I'd say pure IQ wise LR6+DXO10 surpasses C1P8 in the vast number of cases. This is where I'd say the Adobe route has the extreme advantage - software/plugin compatibility. There's SOME limited support with C1 and you can export to other programs to edit. The seamless native support designed to work with your RAW Converter/DAM is lacking though by comparison to Adobe (and Aperture for that matter) though. If that's something important to you there's that argument.

    The good thing about C1 is that they have a Sony version if you don't want/need the extra support. C1P8 has the advantage of native tether support and the ability to produce great IQ out the box. The tethering options are unmatched and that's when I use C1P8 primarily now since slowly transitioning back to LR6. All that said C1P8 is much better than any of the previous versions that I mostly hated due to all the glitches and bugs. The catalog features actually work and aren't broken. I'd say my earlier issues with C1P stemmed from the disconnect in buttonology that obvious had a strong design influence from an engineering/programmer standpoint.I know some will agree but the fact that expensive C1P training is always peddled not too far from the software says a lot about the learning curve. In short I had to force myself to use it exclusively for a few months before I became marginally comfortable with it on any level. Aperture and Lightroom both just made sense to me within a few hours without extensive instruction.

    Some of the wild cards are Irridient Developer (great IQ result, great price, a bit archaic interface on some level) and Affinity Photo (if you're on Mac OS X machines.)
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #13
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    C1, C1, C1. LR sucks.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #14
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    C1, C1, C1. LR sucks.
    I was at least a little more settle about it. LOL

    Just checked Topaz package. There damn proud of themselves 449 dollars.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  15. #15
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    C1, C1, C1. LR sucks.
    I generally disagree that it "sucks" but it may not be everyone's cup of tea. C1 generally does better with Nikon files I hear but I don't have a Nikon camera soooo. I do have Sony's and a Panasonic... I had Leica's previously too. All did extremely well with LR and the Sony did well with C1P8 as well. LR6/Photoshop CC 2015 + DXO10 does better though IMO but it is a more costly solution for sure.
    Last edited by iiiNelson; 7th August 2015 at 08:44.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #16
    Senior Member Joe Colson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,911
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    36

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    C1, C1, C1. LR sucks.
    That's pretty harsh, considering the number of users, including me, that get excellent results with LR. And since LR uses the same RAW processor as PS/ACR, does PS suck? I think not. I won't insult the myriad of C1 users by saying it sucks. It just wasn't my preference.

    Joe
    _________________________________
    Joe Colson Photography
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  17. #17
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Consider me the Donald Trump of processing software -- there is no room for political correctness

    If you take the time to compare LR to C1 on a pixel level basis, LR simply cannot compete. And I don't care if you're shooting a Nikon, Leica, Sony or a MF digital back... Now, you may prefer LR's workflow and cataloging conventions and that is fine; and if it's good enough technically for your needs, cool. But it simply isn't as good of a technical processor for detail or color as C1, period.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Oh, that is an unfortunate name to be associated with- PC or no PC.

    I gave up on C1 after a few files. Salute to all who can put up with it.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #19
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    And if you don't like my direct, matter of fact and honest replies, just put me on your ignore list
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  20. #20
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Consider me the Donald Trump of processing software -- there is no room for political correctness

    If you take the time to compare LR to C1 on a pixel level basis, LR simply cannot compete. And I don't care if you're shooting a Nikon, Leica, Sony or a MF digital back... Now, you may prefer LR's workflow and cataloging conventions and that is fine; and if it's good enough technically for your needs, cool. But it simply isn't as good of a technical processor for detail or color as C1, period.
    I'd agree if one was strictly using ONLY LR and not PS, DXO, Nik, OnOne, Topaz, Irridient Developer, or many of the other programs that work natively to enhance the base characteristics of LR alone. LR+Plugins honestly can/do produce a better file than C1P8 is capable of bottom line. That's not to say that C1P8 is bad or that it "sucks" (to use the aforementioned vernacular) because it's excellent software. It's just not the end all be all nor does it have the extensive IQ advantage it once had over LR back in the LR4 and prior days. Actually they are pretty close in native pixel level sharpness now to be honest. I'd say DXO Optics 10 specifically take LR beyond what C1P8 can do natively (i.e. without Photoshop refinements) IMO.

    There's no need for me to continue to debate this point though. I'd seen the results with my own eyes with my own computer and I'll leave it at that. I still use both and you won't hear me say that C1P8 doesn't have a significant tethering advantage over Adobe for the cameras that I own as they aren't even natively supported.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  21. #21
    Senior Member Joe Colson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,911
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    36

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    And if you don't like my direct, matter of fact and honest replies, just put me on your ignore list
    Not being an Administrator, I don't have that prerogative. And having worked in a corporation for 30 years, I'm accustomed to dealing with strong opinions, most cast as "matter of fact". Plus, you don't wear the "onion loaf" hairdo that individualizes The Donald.

    Joe
    _________________________________
    Joe Colson Photography
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  22. #22
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    I have to go with Joe, Jack.

    Your hair is real!
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Like Jim, I was a long time Aperture user, from version 1. Stuck by it until the 'photos' announcement.

    In my quest for the perfect replacement for Aperture I tried C1, LR, DXO, iMatch, along with the usual suite of plug-ins and filters.

    For me, the feature list in order of importance, is:

    1. DAM capability
    2. Ease of use
    3. RAW conversion
    4. Local adjustments
    5. Integration with filters and plug-ins.

    I found LR to be the best after Aperture, transition was not easy but I managed, as I had already converted my library to 'reference' instead of 'managed' two years ago.

    I am not a pro, so subtle advantages in color reproduction or highlight recovery were not that important. I do however, shoot over 50,000 images annually with various cameras and I also have the entire family archive from the 1940s that needs proper cataloging and maintenance.

    C1 is not intuitive and not as robust in file maintenance. Complicated tasks are even more complicated and I did not think spending several hundred dollars in extra 'training' would get me anywhere, at least not for my needs.

    At this time, IMHO there is no better 'all in one' program than LR. I use two plug-ins with it although I have all the others too. The one I go with the most is OnOne software suite 9.5 or MacPhun, both are quite interesting. The latter is actually very speedy in processing, but OnOne is more versatile.

    I also run the image through PS if I need to, although LR with OnOne is almost always enough. Sometimes I use PS and not OnOne if there is only a lot of dust spotting or cloning to be done.

    Just my own 2 cents.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #24
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Colson View Post
    Not being an Administrator, I don't have that prerogative. And having worked in a corporation for 30 years, I'm accustomed to dealing with strong opinions, most cast as "matter of fact". Plus, you don't wear the "onion loaf" hairdo that individualizes The Donald.

    Joe
    My daughter is a hair stylist. She can make that happen.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    For me, C1's total lack of lens/camera profiles and its rudimentary cataloguing make it a 100% non-starter.

  26. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    178
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    not PS, DXO, Nik, OnOne, Topaz, Irridient Developer, or many of the other programs that work natively
    working natively with raw converter means using parametric adjustments too, no... but they work with rasterized image provided by LR enginer, so it is not natively, it is simply more convenient at best
    A7RII + FE55/1.8
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Ok a question for the C1 user's.. do you also use their filing software as well?...... And if you ever used Aperture is their filing software anything like Apertures?

    I just processed 17 a7rII images through C1 alone...... it's results ended up looking good though it's file size was 159mp for one image and it took me a very long time to get it done than in Aperture as expected due to lack of familiarization. Some stumbling blocks for me was using it's leveling tool, moving from one image to another as it would seem to stay stuck on a image. It uses the multi tool array that PS/CS uses which forces me to go in and swap tools. No email sharing ability as Aperture has and I had to export a image to work on it with my Topaz plugin.

    These are all very minor issues and will quickly fall away the more I commit to C! if I do.... one advantage to LR is I can go and get the LR Topaz plugin files from Topaz and upload them to LR for use.

    Man I wish Mac has mercy on us old Aperture users and upgrade this new Photo software to at least near the power of Aperture. I'm too old for this

  28. #28
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,930
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Consider me the Donald Trump of processing software -- there is no room for political correctness

    If you take the time to compare LR to C1 on a pixel level basis, LR simply cannot compete. And I don't care if you're shooting a Nikon, Leica, Sony or a MF digital back... Now, you may prefer LR's workflow and cataloging conventions and that is fine; and if it's good enough technically for your needs, cool. But it simply isn't as good of a technical processor for detail or color as C1, period.
    Please Jack. I like you too much to ever associate you in any way with Donald Trump.

    LR may "suck"I don't know. I see a lot of good photographs being made with it, however, so I don't think it matters much how much better or worse it performs as a "technical processor."

    I judge my photos quality by looking at them printed to 11x17. The pixel level differences are mostly irrelevant at that size. Maybe if I printed to 24x36, I'd see things differently, but I only rarely find myself making such gigunda photos. :-)

    G

  29. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    LR6 and PS6 + Nik. I buy them and hate the idea of paying for them as a subsciption.

  30. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Algrive I read on one of the forums that non CC copies of CS6 will not continue to get updates from Adobe anymore. I like you buy my softwares and refuse to do anything in the clouds whether my macs, iPhones, or softwares. I also refuse to lease a software rather than buy it but it appears that Adobe will soon be all lease or nothing at all.

  31. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim DE View Post
    Algrive I read on one of the forums that non CC copies of CS6 will not continue to get updates from Adobe anymore. I like you buy my softwares and refuse to do anything in the clouds whether my macs, iPhones, or softwares. I also refuse to lease a software rather than buy it but it appears that Adobe will soon be all lease or nothing at all.
    This only applies to PS, NOT LR, which still will receive updates for purchased versions.

    This basically boils down to camera/lens support with RAW processing. Since those profiles will still be available via LR, they can be copy and pasted into Photoshop's ACR to keep current.

  32. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    One other thing.....


    I use keyboard shortcuts a lot since that speeds up my workflow considerably. I found C1 to be lacking in many areas especially when I wanted to view the image in various different ways or move around in the interface. I also use a Wacom tablet with LR.

    I really miss Aperture but am beginning to enjoy LR, you really have no choice but to accept and finally love what you have........

  33. #33
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Lightroom for import and cataloging and for 95% of developing, C1 for files that really require the last drop to be wrung from them. Get both. It's the cost of doing business. But personally I think C1 sharpening is less flexible so when I use it I disable all sharpening and NR, develop, export to tiff and import that to LR where it gets finished and stored.

    It is clunkier than it sounds because to an extent, sharpening clarity and NR all interact, which means doing all those things in LR.

    But that's only for 5% of files. Otherwise it's plain sailing.

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    tashley, Sadly I have too many... LR6, CC6, DXO10, C1 8.3.2, SPP, Aperture, OS Photo's, Expose, DXO Viewpoint, Focus-snapheal-Intesity Pro's, the full topaz suite, PhotoFXLab, Portrait Pro, APG, Hugin, ....... way TOOOO many in fact!!!!! Sadly Aperture best suited my needs and wants for years... all these other softwares with me using them resembles a monkey with a football. I can muddle through them and get the job done but it takes much much longer.

    But, I know I need to pick a alternate to Aperture and just stay with it till it too becomes second nature....

  35. #35
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,803
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    I'm a fan of C1 Pro but to be honest that's only because of three little things - colour accuracy, medium format back LCC processing and the quality of the raw conversion which I do find to be special. There's a subtlety about the rendering of C1 that I just don't get in PS/LR ACR but it's also true that it's not always required. I do very little post processing in C1 beyond the basics to get a great starting image and for this it is very intuitive IMHO. If I need much more than basic adjustments I'll take the images to PS.

    If you're looking for a DAM then I'd definitely look elsewhere than C1.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  36. #36
    Senior Member Eoin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Dublin / Ireland
    Posts
    410
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim DE View Post
    ... I know I need to pick a alternate to Aperture and just stay with it till it too becomes second nature....
    Similar to yourself, I've used Aperture since it's release and have many plugins for it. Regardless of any other softwares better performance with files, I've always felt most comfortable, capable and never felt I was lacking any functionality to get an image to where I wanted within Aperture.

    While Apple has discontinued support for it, they still will add new camera profiles to Camera Raw at an OS level, I see no reason to be forced at this stage to abandon my workflow and Aperture software. I'm happy with it today .... I'm sure I'll still be happy with it in another few years.
    A7II, FE 35, 55 C/Y 18, 28, 85, 100, 28-85

  37. #37
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,575
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    If you're looking for a DAM then I'd definitely look elsewhere than C1.
    Graham,

    While I feel sort-of the same way, I wonder if that feeling is justified or if it's just left over from years of C1's DAM incompetence . The current Catalogs do everything I've needed a DAM to do - it seems more a question of familiarity. Are there features missing for you?*

    Best,

    Matt

    *Aside from handling other medium format files...

  38. #38
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    If you take the time to compare LR to C1 on a pixel level basis, LR simply cannot compete. And I don't care if you're shooting a Nikon, Leica, Sony or a MF digital back... Now, you may prefer LR's workflow and cataloging conventions and that is fine; and if it's good enough technically for your needs, cool. But it simply isn't as good of a technical processor for detail or color as C1, period.
    I struggled with exactly this - do I want my preferred workflow/cataloging (LR) or my preferred results (C1). I have settled in with C1 and am loving it.

    Disclosure: I was given a free copy of C1 to review some versions ago, but I did pay for the later versions.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  39. #39
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,803
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by MGrayson View Post
    Graham,

    While I feel sort-of the same way, I wonder if that feeling is justified or if it's just left over from years of C1's DAM incompetence . The current Catalogs do everything I've needed a DAM to do - it seems more a question of familiarity. Are there features missing for you?*

    Best,

    Matt

    *Aside from handling other medium format files...
    Matt,

    You raise a valid point in so far as I've been burned by the early versions of catalogs and so don't use them. Ditto with MediaPro.

    Given the size of my raw files I'm very wary of entrusting them to a hidden file structure/container that could corrupt and lose everything so I've continued with using sessions where I can easily move files around.

    Yes, I fear that we do get set in our ways!

    With respect to raw rendering, I've continued to find that C1 consistently produces the nicest images. If it supported my Foveon raw files I'd be ecstatic.

    Graham
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"

  40. #40
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,575
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Graham,

    Capture One catalogs are similar to Aperture's Libraries in two respects. The originals can be left "in place" so that the file system and other applications can see them. And even if imported into the catalog (at least in the Mac version), the originals are untouched as files. I just checked by importing a DNG (from a Leica S2, oddly, and it renders fine. Hmmm...) and the file was visible inside the catalog.

    Having said that, I still import into a Session every time for ease of relocation.

    I'm still not sure if I'm going to go deep into C1 as a DAM. I did once LONG ago (versions 1-3) and it didn't end well.

    Best,

    Matt
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  41. #41
    New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    I stick with LR because of the great Laura Shoe tutorialS, she has great teaching abilities and the sound quality and clarity on her cd's are excellent.
    The c-1 tutorials not a good teacher, having bad hearing the accent and poor sound quality makes it too much work to learn. I contacted c-1 and the girl was insulting intimating I was a rank amateur and c-1 was the pros choice.
    bASICALLY THE C-1 TUTORIALS DO NOT WORK FOR ME therefore the program does not.

  42. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Socorro, NM
    Posts
    404
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    I was at least a little more settle about it. LOL

    Just checked Topaz package. There damn proud of themselves 449 dollars.
    Guy, their package is outrageously priced, but most of them are not that useful. I found only their Denoise is head and shoulder above others; it has edge-aware algorithm that would only blur/NR the solid part. Similarly, their masking tool is very good. Their sharpening plug-in is full of options (separate mid-tone, highlight, shadow sharpening); however, I found Nik Sharpener is much faster to use with comparable result. The rest is like Instagram/hipster stuff.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  43. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    I acquired my Topaz individual softwares over a long period of time and when I started the Topaz softwares were less expensive than NIK. When NIK had problems and was bought that is when their prices came way down. For me they are about two same like each. I use Denoise, Adjust5, B&W Effects 2, and Detail 3. The others I picked up along the way and just about all of them at their introductory sale prices. Some of them are just bells and whistles off the wall stuff... I guess I use DeNoise and Detail the most.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  44. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    I've had Topaz, Nik, Alien Skin and On1's suite. I only use On1 - it's completeness, ease of use and support are first rate. Using their "dynamic contrast" filter alone justifies the price (which is quite reasonable). I believe they have a full function, limited time evaluation for those who are interested.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  45. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    I had never heard of On1........ I will have to look at that one

  46. #46
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,930
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Wow.

    I almost never use any plugins at all. I try to get focus and exposure right in the camera, only rarely have need for any but minimal sharpening, and only very rarely need much noise filtering. If an exposure needs much of this kind of post processing, I consider it bad and move on to the next candidate.

    Maybe I'm not critical enough, but I see little dissatisfying about the prints I produce with LR...!

    G

  47. #47
    Senior Member CharlesK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    730
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    I have both C1 Pro 8 and Lr6/CS6. For ease of cataloging and usage I prefer Lr6. It achieves 98% of what I need. For more detailed and finer PP I quickly export in PS6 and back into Lr once I am complete. The plugins of Nik suite are excellent and for portrait work I use Imagenomic Portraiture as I find this is still one of the best programs for portraits. My thinking is "keep it simple", as it is quite easy to fine tune Lr to your needs.
    Originally I purchased C1 Pro for the M9 as Lr was inferior for PP then. I stayed with C1 Pro for a long time and use it occasionally now, but Lr6/CS6/+dedicated plugins work great now.
    Charles Kalnins
    Tallai, Queensland Australia.

    http://kalnins.zenfolio.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  48. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Wow.

    I almost never use any plugins at all. I try to get focus and exposure right in the camera, only rarely have need for any but minimal sharpening, and only very rarely need much noise filtering. If an exposure needs much of this kind of post processing, I consider it bad and move on to the next candidate.

    Maybe I'm not critical enough, but I see little dissatisfying about the prints I produce with LR...!

    G
    Godfrey, You must not shoot Sony cameras much above base iso IMO the original a77 was just horrible in iso noise above 400iso. The NEX 7 was little better at 400 and higher. The a99 could go to 1000iso before imo it got hit with objectionable noise and the a77II hit that level at 1600iso. I will admit I hate iso noise as much as I hated grain in film which moved me to medium format very early in my life and later LF. Topaz DeNoise was just about a have to on nearly every image above those iso's until DXO came out with Prime then I had a real noise busting software for that purpose. Did I mention I hate noise

    You can get focus as good as you want at the time of capture but Topaz Detail will make the overall image just have that special look by just even uploading it to the plugin, hit apply and bring it back to aperture alone without using anything else.... though I do at times.

    It's not that the plugins can do things better than one can do in the basic PP conversion softwares; it is just for me, it is much quicker day in and day out. For my needs and wants speed and IQ is money in my pocket.

  49. #49
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    For whatever it's worth to the few of you who still want to hear what I have to say about this:

    Since I switched to C1, I have not needed any plug-ins. And I did have the complete Topaz suite -- and relied on it -- before C1...
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  50. #50
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Which post processing software ....

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    For whatever it's worth to the few of you who still want to hear what I have to say about this:

    Since I switched to C1, I have not needed any plug-ins. And I did have the complete Topaz suite -- and relied on it -- before C1...
    Just to be clear, I had actually sulked about your absence earlier if you recall that, Jack.

    I have never heard of Topaz suite until now. It is the ease of use that led me to comment on LR.

    I may give C1 another try.

Posting Permissions

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