Capture One vs. Lightroom

[pklein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been using Capture One since I got Ver. 3 bundled with my M8. I'm on v. 5 Pro now, and am comfortable with it. Lately, I've been hearing very good things about the latest Lightroom, particularly with regard to noise reduction at high ISO. I don't know how that compares to the latest C-One or third-party noise reduction programs like Neat Image, Noise Ninja or Noiseware. My attitude towards noise reduction is to use it as sparingly as possible, and much heavier on the color noise than on luminance noise. I prefer a bit of grain to a mushy picture.

 

The cataloging functions of Lightroom are overkill for me. If I were to switch, it would be to get significantly better image quality, noise reduction, or more convenient workflow. For instance, if LR were to make the M8 significantly more usable at ISO 1250 or 2500, that might be a reason to switch. But if I could get much the same gain with C-One or a third party program, then why bother?

 

Can people who have used both programs chime in here? Why did you switch to Lightroom or why did you stay with C-One? Is there a significant difference? Would it make more difference to an M9 user than to an M8 user?

 

--Peter

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Dan States]

The newest version of LR has a better noise reduction system in my experience. In C1 color noise reduction can blot out and distort yellow and red objects, but LR3 is much better in this respect. I also like the clarity and vibrance tools better than the C1 control interface.

 

I've started going back to shots that I didn't use because of excess noise and after running through LR3 they are often quite good. An M8 shot at 1250 iso can look great now with little effort.

 

Finally I've found LR3 to be more stable on my Mac than C1. I get no crashes or spinning wheels on batch processing.

 

Best wishes

Dan

[wda]

......

The cataloging functions of Lightroom are overkill for me. If I were to switch, it would be to get significantly better image quality, noise reduction, or more convenient workflow. .....

 

--Peter

Peter, while I cannot comment on your main question, may I add a point relating to your dismissal of Lightroom's cataloguing feature.

 

Once you build up a sizeable collection of digital image files, at some stage you will want to find specific subjects among many thousands of pictures. By using the search function you can almost instantly filter out the required pictures. I use that function just as much as the Develop Module, possibly more. I know you have dismissed it, but once you master its simple structure you will wonder how you managed without it. Most photographers discover the need for some form of cataloguing, sooner rather than later. Treat it as a potentially valuable bonus in your quest for improved noise reduction.

 

I have used LR since the first version. The latest upgrade made a significant difference to the quality of my M8 and X1 files.

[hoppyman]

Peter I have both but have hardly ever used Capture One. I kept it upgraded should I ever want to experiment with different processing, but I understand the LR interface well and with LR3 I am very content. Because you have a number of modules you have a very convenient central application to do nearly anything you could want and of course it integrates with Photoshop if you are using that. C1 very likely does a lot of those things too of course.

 

The cataloging capability of LR is a huge benefit for me. I am still going through stored images (and adding more) from as far back as 2003 here but every new set gets a couple of minutes of attention to keywording on import (plus an automatic second copy to a back up drive) and I can find anything very quickly from about 10,000+ images on this computer (so far) with a couple of clicks.

With the Metadata for example, I can sort via Date, ISO, File type, Keyword, Location, Focal length (or actual lens), Camera (inc serial number) and Aperture or any combination of those.

 

If you haven't heard the phrase 'drowning in data" before I predict that it will become meaningful for you very soon.

 

In any event, may I suggest that you download the free one month trial of LR for yourself and give it a try to see what it can do for you? Your M8 files do especially well with the newest processing.

[XK50]

In my experience, the debate centres around three issues:

 

1) To database or not to database. Whilst I can see the absolute necessity to use one, in many circumstances, for someone, like me, who operates off a medium spec laptop, shoots relatively few pictures, is blessed with a good memory and – a key factor – misses DIR/DEL/COPY/MOVE from CP/M and DOS, a database – any database – just gets in the way. However, I accept this might just be an educational problem and I’ve to read Scott Kelby’s LR3 book.

 

2) The treatment of high ISO noise. I started using LR2 in March, when I received my M9 (thanks Leica!). Frustrated by LR (see above), I bought the newly announced Capture One 5.1 and was bowled over by its treatment of M9 images. But ten days later (yep, 10 days!), Adobe released LR3 beta and, with its noise filter, it immediately trumped C1 5.1. Overnight, 2500 ISO on the M9 was fully usable and a lot of internet comment was redundant.

 

My copy of LR3 beta expired in June, so I got to know C1 5.1 and, shortly after, Photoshop 5 (which has the same RAW “developer” as LR3). For M9 ISO noise, PS5/LR3 reigned supreme.

 

So, it was deep joy, last Saturday, to download - prompted by a LUF thread - a free copy of LR3.2 (thanks, Leica!). Did some rock band photography with the M9 on Sunday evening and on “developing” with LR3, yep, there was that superb noise reduction.

 

But what’s this? A message to download Capture One 5.2.1? And you’ve guessed it, somewhere along the line, I can now see little difference between the brands in the area of noise reduction.

 

Adobe! Your turn!

 

3) So the thing now turns on “usability” and I have to say that, for me, C1 seems to be more intuitive in many areas (but both have “things you need but can’t find” and “things that don’t seem to work as you hope”).

 

However, only LR3 has the ability to print “packages” and – useful for me - to submit to flickr.

 

So, which is the best? Leica or Contax? (OK, seemingly stupid question to ask on the LUF but it’s a metaphor, see).

 

Best wishes,

 

John

[hoppyman]

John EVERYONE says that before they pass five years and 30,000 images or whatever and you want to find that shot with X lens shot of the lunar eclipse with the whales in the foreground. You KNOW it is in there somewhere, what was it two or three years ago???

Metadata is your best friend

I hear you on the rest;)

.............In my experience, the debate centres around three issues:

 

1) To database or not to database. Whilst I can see the absolute necessity to use one, in many circumstances, for someone, like me, who operates off a medium spec laptop, shoots relatively few pictures, is blessed with a good memory..............

[delander †]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I keep trying with LR 2.6 and now 3.2. I too find the digital asset management too difficult. I know where my photos are and I have thousands of them. Do I ever want to find those photos taken with a certain lens etc, I dont think so.

 

So I'm afraid that LR3.2 still has not taken me away from Capture one (not pro version) which I find simple and easy to use, giving me a full view of my folder structure.

 

By the way the LR3.2 noise reduction process does blur detail, perhaps not so much in the image shown by Adobe.

 

And Capture one still to my mind produces images with the most detail.

 

Jeff

[pklein]

Big thanks to everyone who replied so far, further comments welcome. This is a long-term question for me. I tend to be a bottom-feeder when it comes to my own computer. My current PC is 7 years old, but with a second hard drive and all the extra memory it could hold. When I get a new machine, hopefully later this year, I will probably give LR3 a try. The good news is that either one will probably do a good job for me. I'll have to test it with some high ISO pictures in both programs, and see where things stand on noise-reduction vs. lost details.

[sblitz]

have latest lightroom (m9) and capture one (d-lux4) .... love capture one but it is not stable on the macbook pro laptop i use ..... lr is.