Jump to content

Luminar 3 vs CaptureOne 12

otto.f

By otto.f
in Digital Post Processing Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

otto.f

otto.f

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

CaptureOne 12 claims that it’s faster than previous versions but it does not at all and the 12 version comes very close in time after the 11 upgrade, so I‘m starting to get feelings about them.  Luminar 3 comes now with a better workflow, not only because of the libraries but it seems to work handier and faster too. I always preferred C1 over LR because of the results, but I did not yet have any irritations about Luminar results yet. I didn’t use it very often either. Any C1 fans here who tried Luminar more extensively?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

hteasley
hteasley

Installed Luminar 3, pointed it at my photos folder (128k images), and it took hours to set up the library. When it finished, I opened the library, scrolled down, and no thumbnails... at all. Mouseove

elgenper
elgenper

I lost edits for almost all my oldies.  Feels like a minor disaster until you think it through: How much better have you become at editing since you "finished" most of these oldies?  And, how muc

ianman
ianman

The C1 library is based on iView Multimedia which, in it's day, was by far the best DAM and remained so long after it was taken over by Microsoft and then Phase One. Although it's probably still very

Posted Images

hteasley

hteasley

Posted
Posted

Installed Luminar 3, pointed it at my photos folder (128k images), and it took hours to set up the library. When it finished, I opened the library, scrolled down, and no thumbnails... at all. Mouseover revealed UI widgets for photos, so I double-clicked the black space where a rhumbnail should be, and it opened maybe ten seconds later.

Dunno, maybe after it has had a good think for a while, I'll try again. C1 still seeming like the right choice.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ianman

ianman

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The C1 library is based on iView Multimedia which, in it's day, was by far the best DAM and remained so long after it was taken over by Microsoft and then Phase One. Although it's probably still very good, it may not be the best due to zero development by either of the last two owners.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Simone_DF

Simone_DF

Posted
Posted
On 12/19/2018 at 9:39 AM, hteasley said:

Installed Luminar 3, pointed it at my photos folder (128k images), and it took hours to set up the library. When it finished, I opened the library, scrolled down, and no thumbnails... at all. Mouseover revealed UI widgets for photos, so I double-clicked the black space where a rhumbnail should be, and it opened maybe ten seconds later.

Dunno, maybe after it has had a good think for a while, I'll try again. C1 still seeming like the right choice.

It's the first time they release this feature, I expect quite a lot of bugs like the ones you're encountering, but I'm sure they'll also iron out all issues in due time.

The first version of Luminar was a piece of junk and I uninstalled it after a couple of days, but I tried again Luminar 3 last week and I think it's much better.

Give them some months and a couple of updates and it should be much more usable. ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
otto.f

otto.f

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

I downloaded the upgrade, which is in fact a true upgrade indeed, with no extra costs. My library was sync-ed within 5 minutes. You could say I miss a bit the A(automatic) button  of C1 in all sorts of adjustments, for instance WB, but somehow Luminar works more straightforward and can I find faster how the image should look. Here I found in less than no time a sort of Portra look out of my M9 file.

Managing the size of files is also very fast via the Export menu, which is rather primitive and time-consuming in C1 so I still did that in PS before Luminar 3 came out.

Don't know if it has to do with Windows or Mac, but I'm on a Mac and it's flawless. I was at last able to skip my Adobe licence today. Luminar 3 works even faster and  more manageable than Bridges to search what you're looking for.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by otto.f
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
DaveNC

DaveNC

Posted
Posted

I'm now a Luminar 3 exclusive user and quite happy.  I purchased the 2018 version a couple of months ago and continued to use Bridge for file management and parsing through initial images.  Seems Adobe doesn't; eliminate use of Bridge after quitting their monthly club membership.  Now, I am getting used to Luminar 3 library capability.  Basic, but works.  I am satisfied with Luminar and their Aurora HDR application.  I don't use Aurora often, but it works easily.  Now I would appreciate them adding a panorama capability.

My jump from Lightroom started out scary.  There isn't any conversion from LR edits to Luminar.  I finally just went back to my RAW files and quickly and easily reworked them from scratch in Luminar.  Well, only the 100 or so that I consider true keepers at this point.

Luminar it is for me...

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
otto.f

otto.f

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

No it’s not possible to transfer edits from one program to another. 100 points an a WB or 5 points Contrast are all relative figures within one program and can’t be transposed to another program, even if the scales have identical ends. This counts for edits in C1 vs. edits in Luminar too

Edited by otto.f
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Simone_DF

Simone_DF

Posted
Posted
On 12/22/2018 at 7:58 PM, DaveNC said:

My jump from Lightroom started out scary.  There isn't any conversion from LR edits to Luminar.  I finally just went back to my RAW files and quickly and easily reworked them from scratch in Luminar.  Well, only the 100 or so that I consider true keepers at this point.

But do you really need to rework your pictures again? Even without subscription, you can still launch Lightroom and export your old pictures in jpg/tiff, if you want. 

The Library panel is still enabled. Only the Develop and the remaining panels are disabled.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
elgenper

elgenper

Posted
Posted (edited)

I lost edits for almost all my oldies.  Feels like a minor disaster until you think it through:

How much better have you become at editing since you "finished" most of these oldies?  And, how much better has soft- and hardware become?

And, how many of those cherished oldies are really worth your time right now, unless you do need them for some special purpose? The originals do remain, for any future needs.

So, aren´t the small pick of really good oldies worth re-editing, giving your present best?

Edited by elgenper
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Luke_Miller

Luke_Miller

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, elgenper said:

How much better have you become at editing since you "finished" most of these oldies?  And, how much better has soft- and hardware become?

That mirrors my experience.  I rarely re-visit a previously edited image without doing a re-edit.  Yesterday I reprocessed an old image I took of Denali (Mt. McKinley) in Alaska.  Not a great shot, but meaningful since it is often difficult to get a clear shot of it.  I was never satisfied with my best effort the first time even though I used all my processing tricks.  Yesterday with little effort I was able to produce a much better image.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ianman

ianman

Posted
Posted
On 12/20/2018 at 12:47 PM, Simone_DF said:

It's the first time they release this feature, I expect quite a lot of bugs like the ones you're encountering, but I'm sure they'll also iron out all issues in due time.

The first version of Luminar was a piece of junk and I uninstalled it after a couple of days, but I tried again Luminar 3 last week and I think it's much better.

Give them some months and a couple of updates and it should be much more usable. 😉

This is an astonishing comment. They shouldn't be releasing unusable or unfinished software.

It sounds like they are using paying customers as testers... or worse, deliberately releasing unfinished software. I would expect very few bugs even in new features, especially one so simple as a library... how difficult can it be!?

Link to post
Share on other sites
ianman

ianman

Posted
Posted

Out of interest I installed the trial version. No issues at all importing, in fact it was very fast. I'll be testing more, but the feature I would most like to see (versions) seems to be scheduled for sometime in 2019. The price is of course very appealing compared to Capture One.

Link to post
Share on other sites
otto.f

otto.f

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 hours ago, ianman said:

Out of interest I installed the trial version. No issues at all importing, in fact it was very fast. I'll be testing more, but the feature I would most like to see (versions) seems to be scheduled for sometime in 2019. The price is of course very appealing compared to Capture One.

Yes but it does more, at least easier than C1 and I even could finally end my Adobe subscription because it does easier what Bridge did and it does what I needed PS still for. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...