A replacement for Lightroom?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't know - I always re-edit from raw, and disregard earlier edits.

[wda]

When I revisit earlier LR processing, I always check development history. These are instructions carefully filed away. Later processing can either build on the finished state, or start anywhere earlier in the historical record. I have found with some of my oldest digital processing that my improved knowledge allows better skilled reprocessing which can start from any historical point of processing. Quite a rewarding exercise.

[Advertisement]

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

[elgenper]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I don't know - I always re-edit from raw, and disregard earlier edits.

An excellent strategy when printing, publishing, or otherwise really "using" an older image.  But when browsing the archives, searching for an image, or just finding out just what happened on a particular day (yes, my image archive IS my diary...), some modicum of edit will give me a better experience than just OOC raw´s. If i do find something worth resurrecting, it certainly gets a new editing session.

[zeitz]

Robert poses an interesting issue.  I have to ask myself which photo-related companies I trust.  I know I don't trust Apple; buggy OS updates are rushed to release; AirPower was an imaginary product; a new MacPro also has yet to reach reality and the current one is 5 years out of date; Apple decisions are purely based on profit margin product by product.  I don't trust Microsoft because of numerous Windows problems before I switched to Mac.  (But for some reason I trust Dell.)  I don't really trust Leica either; I am expecting my M8 and M9 to fail and be unrepairable.  But that really has more to do with spares for electronic parts; you can't 3D print a new sensor or a new display.  I don't trust Nikon, especially because I couldn't get a new autofocus motor for a lens that is no longer manufactured but not that old.  I don't trust that Adobe will make decisions that favor the way I use their products; at they start of CC they guaranteed original software owners would never pay more than $10 per month; I know I don't trust that statement anymore than I trusted the M8 upgrade program announcement.  But I do trust that Adobe will continue in business for a very long time.  And I trust that .dng raw files will be readable by some software as long as I care about them.

[farnz]

Perhaps most importantly do you trust the man in the mirror?😄

Pete.

[zeitz]

Implicitely

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, farnz said:

Perhaps most importantly do you trust the man in the mirror?😄

Pete.

Never. I know his failings too well.

[jaapv]

Do these guys read our forum?

This was mailed to me just now...

 

https://www.on1.com/blog/looking-for-a-lightroom-alternative-5-things-to-know/?utm_campaign=Engage_LR_alternative_04-19&utm_source=RAW18_SteLegacy_Own&utm_medium=email&utm_content=LR_Alt_B_short

[rob_w]

I promised to post an update on my Luminar assessment.  After 3 weeks of fairly intensive use, here is where I am at:

I liked Luminar enough to purchase a licence but switched back to LR yesterday.  Luminar is full-featured, with all the manipulation capabilities I need.  For the most part, the Luminar Looks (many of them “AI” powered, whatever that means) are better than most, being less garish.  When a look is applied, the amount of effect can be controlled with a slider.  Luminar also has a layers capability which I did not test.  

 

There are several reasons why I am not yet ready to change from LR to Luminar.  One is that Luminar has some awkward operating procedures.  For example, I would like to apply a Look and then tweak it with further settings, but when I switch to the settings menu the photo is reset back to the start.  Another is that there is no way to edit on one machine and transfer the edits to another.  Quite typically I edit on a laptop while travelling then transfer to the main catalogue when I get home.  Luminar cannot do that, other than by a workaround keeping the catalogue on a portable disk.  I queried Luminar's support service with these and other questions.  They were very helpful and responsive but there are some things the product just cannot do yet.

 

Probably the most critical restriction is that Luminar processing is very slow.  Clearing my machine of any other apps helps a lot.  But it is still a slow process.  Slow to show the results of changes, slow to load the next photo, etc.  That accumulates over an editing session until it becomes too tedious to be enjoyable.

 

So, back to LR 6.14 perpetual license for the time being.  It's quite likely further releases of Luminar will refine performance and speed as happened with the evolution of LR in its early days.  I will keep watching.

Edited April 20, 2019 by rob_w

[Stephen_C]

This is an interesting thread which I've just discovered (I'm usually on the Leica Q/Q2 forum). I, too, ditched Ligthroom the moment it became subscription only. While I strongly dislike subscription apps what really persuaded me to do so was the fact that only a year or so previously there were assurances from Adobe that the app would not become subscription only—so, like others here, I lost trust in Adobe. I switched to Capture One and now my Q2 workflow is as follows:

• use Adobe DNG converter to transfer the files from the SD card, in the process losslessly reducing the file size by approixmately one-third;
• use Photo Mechanic to browse, label and keyword the photos—by far the quickest and most efficient way I've discovered of doing so;
• import the photos into Capture One applying an auto adjust preset and renaming them in the process.

I can then use Capture One for any processing tweaks that are required. (I'm aware that the renaming process could take place in any of those three stages. It's simply convenient for me to use a Capture One renaming template.)

The only thing missing at the moment is a proper digital asset management program. Capture One falls short in that regard so I'm awaiting with interest the beta of Photo Mechanic Plus (which includes cataloguing) which is due to be released tomorrow for registered users of Photo Mechanic 6.

Stephen

[jrp]

I haven’t tried Luminar or on1. I do try capture one periodically. It’s pretty good, but Lightroom seems to have a simpler interface and some useful tools, such as transforms and panos and hdr are built in. Capture one seems to have a more complex interface (although it is more customisable). It’s also easier on the battery as it seems to use the GPU mainly for producing final results.  In the end, I usually come back to Lightroom. 

[terrycym]

What about darktable?

it can import LR catalogues.

it’s free too.

 

[marchyman]

On 4/13/2019 at 5:08 AM, jaapv said:

What has trust to with it? The moment you might dislike what they are doing, you can opt out.

Opt out to what?  That is the question in my mind.  The recent flap about Adobe maybe raising their subscription prices has made me look for alternatives, again.   Just in case.

On 1 doesn't support color profiles.  When I last tried it (maybe 6 months ago) its claim to import the Lightoom catalog was technically correct.  However, maybe 1 out of 10 photo edits were acceptable.  Most would have to be reset and re-edited.   Worst, it couldn't display some of my images -- jpeg scans from an epson scanner.

Luminar doesn't support keyword management.  That is a deal breaker for me.  I didn't check to see if it supports color profiles.

Time to look at some of the others.

[jaapv]

This just proves that they are worth the price they are charging

It makes it worthwhile to separate your DAM from your editing program. Use an old permanent version of LR and export to the postprocessing software of your choice, for instance.

I use Bridge and Photoshop. Bridge can be replaced, should I feel that way, and so can Photoshop, but the two are not intertwined.

[marchyman]

Capture One may replace Lightroom for me.  Its catalog, while not as full featured as the Lightroom catalog, may be good enough for my needs.  I do like the Capture One editing tools.  When looking back at older images I'd re-edit from raw.   That's what I did when switching from Aperture to Lightroom.

I've got until the beginning of June to make up my mind -- that's when my Adobe CC subscription expires/renews.  If I decide not to renew I've still got a license to Lightroom 6 I can use to access my Lightroom catalog.

Decisions, decisions.

[rob_w]

On 5/6/2019 at 8:02 PM, jaapv said:

This just proves that they are worth the price they are charging

I don't agree with this Jaap although I usually share the same sentiment -- i.e. you get what you pay for.  I think Adobe is plundering the market because of its dominant position and, in fact, failing to develop its product further in ways which would justify the cost of ownership.

If this is a "snow white and the seven dwarves" scenario, I do agree it is a concern that none of the seven dwarves charges enough to really break from the pack and finish their product properly.

Edited May 9, 2019 by rob_w

[jaapv]

For me, the subscription model works out cheaper than updating Photoshop, so I don't feel plundered. As for the price, we are on a Leica forum, all of us have placed (perceived) value over price, so who are we to complain about Adobe, Apple, Pelikan, Swiss watches, and others...?

[rob_w]

On 5/6/2019 at 8:02 PM, jaapv said:

It makes it worthwhile to separate your DAM from your editing program

This is very appealing Jaap.  I am interested  that Stephen appears to have gone the route of separate programmes, with the use of Photo Mechanic alongside C1:

On 4/21/2019 at 12:14 PM, Stephen_C said:

• import the photos into Capture One applying an auto adjust preset and renaming them in the process.

My question to Stephen and yourself, and others, is this.  In what form do you keep the photo in your picture library afterwards?  Presumably if it is edited in, say, C1 and you then want to view it using Photo Mechanic afterwards, it must be exported from C1 as a TIFF.  If I understand correctly, then that looks a clumsy process compared to using an integrated approach.  You are maintaining two bulky collections of RAWs and TIFFs in parallel; if you need to re-edit a photo the whole cycle must be repeated again, starting with the RAW file, etc. 

Am I missing something?

Edited May 9, 2019 by rob_w

[Stephen_C]

5 hours ago, rob_w said:

In what form do you keep the photo in your picture library afterwards? 

I do not, as standard practice, create a separate image from the original RAW (DNG) file. I may find a picture using Photo Mechanic Plus (the new version that contains the catalogue features) but would then view it in Capture One. I use Photo Mechanic Plus merely to label and keyword my photos—and to find them later if I need to (because Photo Mechanic Plus is much more efficient at doing that than is Capture One). Occasionally I'll create a jpeg using Capture One—for posting on here or for sending to a friend, for example. However, I emphasise that I do not routinely create a TIFF file of each processed DNG.

Stephen

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[stephan54]

I had stored a large number of NEF and more recently DNG files (with backups), with the JPEG files stored in Smugmug and on another disc.

Hardly ever do I revisit the RAW files, so I made room by deleting them.