Lightroom vs Captue One LE/Pro?

[krissheldon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I need some clarification with regard to Adobe Lightroom/Capture One LE...Is there any need to use both Lightroom and Capture One LE/Pro? Do they essentially perform the same function? Is Capture One Pro worth the upgrade?

 

Thanks for any advice,

 

Kris

[rosuna]

I am waiting for Capture One 4.

Capture One 3.7 Pro is too expensive, and the LE version is too basic.

[cwf]

The C1 website states that there is at least one free major upgrade with each license of C1 Pro and seems to say that there are two offered now (perhaps reflecting the imminence of v. 4.).

 

http://www.phaseone.com/Content/Software/LicensePolicy.aspx?layoutid=SupportSite%20-%20Main

 

I do not know how likely they are to reduce the prices going forward.

[arthury]

I need some clarification with regard to Adobe Lightroom/Capture One LE...Is there any need to use both Lightroom and Capture One LE/Pro? Do they essentially perform the same function? Is Capture One Pro worth the upgrade?

 

Thanks for any advice,

 

Kris

 

LR user interface is a smooth operator. Have you downloaded the trial version to try it?

[Englander]

C1 LE is a raw converter and basically nothing else; LR has a raw converter and is trying to be everything else--Digital Asset Manager, Slideshow and Website producer, etc. Their renditions of raw images IMHO are significantly different-- so if you are making a decision based on raw conversion, you need to look at what they do to your images (especially look at what happens to reds, to tonal transitions, to micro-details). I suggest that you should compare the other functions of LR to other products on the market such as iView. I bought LR with high expectations and it performed well when the catalogue was small; with time and lots of experience using it, I look at it differently. Personally, I have decided that, while there is extra expense in having specialized software, in this case you get the performance you pay for.

 

Joe

[johM8]

What I know is that Adobe bought two of Phase Ones top coders:mad:. I use capture one because it's very fast and usually does everything you need. There are better programs for web publishing etc....

[dfarkas]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I use capture one because it's very fast and usually does everything you need.

 

I agree. C1 is really very fast and streamlined, especially if you have a lot of files. You can correct several hundered files per hour once you become familiar with the program. It doesn't have many bells and whistles and doesn't try to be anything it's not. I've used both the Mac and PC versions and I have noticed that the workflow is a bit faster and smoother on the PC version. Hopefully with the upcoming melding of features in C1 v4, they will keep some of the unique features from the PC version.

 

I tried LR Beta 4 a while ago and didn't like having to switch modes as I was going through my thousand images. Some of the image controls were really innovative, but the speed just wasn't there (for me). Also, I found that at 100% view there were some strange edge artifacts when using shadow and highlight recovery. I don't know if this was just a beta issue or not. After a few hundred images, I got frustrated with LR and finished the job in C1.

 

YMMV.

 

David

[xrogers]

Lightroom needs lots of memory to work well, especially with a large catalog. Lightroom performance is greatly improved by having it render standard sized preview images on (or after) import. This takes more space, but then eliminates on-the-fly rendering for most cases.

 

When I first tried Lightroom, I figured that a library of a few thousand images was the maximum for good performance. With standard previews rendered, my PowerMac G5 dual 2Ghz with 3.5Gb memory works just fine with a library of almost 27,000 images.

 

Lightroom does not provide the fine control over raw conversion of C1 or Raw Developer. It does not allow use of profiles, which seems necessary for some M8 images. But the workflow is very fast. I've never seen anything like it for taking a mass of raw images and producing high quality properly profiled smaller prints quickly. It supports very good integration with CS3, and only adequate integration with other programs (like C1). It's black and white conversion module is very good. The ability to act on a library of raw images without creating intermediate tiff or psd files is wonderful.

 

LR's sharpening is weak. Large prints need to be brought into CS3 and sharpened there, where there is far more control. It provides no support for even simple burning and dodging, but does allow for removal of dust spots.

 

Anyhow, I've switched from iView to Lightroom for cataloging, proofing, and production of small (up to letter sized) prints. I use LR and CS3 for some raw conversions (sometimes it's better), and Raw Developer for highest-quality raw conversions (more often it is better for larger prints, or where color profiles are required to get colors right).

 

So far I really like Lightroom. Try the free demo, and consider investing $15 in the luminous landscape lightroom tutorial (http://www.luminous-landscape.com)---that gives you three hours of video showing how two photographers use its features, with discussions between them about its strengths and weaknesses.

 

--clyde