Lightroom Alternative - Luminar, Capture 1 or...

[rob_w]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

20 hours ago, dadu007 said:

I know what Phase One profiles the actual cameras in-house, they say so in their tutorials (Leica CL was profile was automatically loaded)...I always wonder if Adobe does that, too?

Interesting.  Do you know if they profile the lenses as well?  One of my bugbears with ON1 is that it does not apply the lens corrections included in the DNG.

I tried searching the C1 site for camera compatiibility, but the page showing Leica compatibility refuses to load.  May just be a temp problem of course.

[zeitz]

It is kind of irrelevant on how Adobe produces its profiles because, if you don't like Adobe's, you can set the default to one of the camera manufacturer's profiles or to your custom-made profile.  On the other hand I have not found how to automatically apply lens corrections.  I still apply all lens corrections manually.  It would be interesting to know where Adobe gets the lens corrections because they are very good, even for the Voigtlander superwide lenses used on Leica M digital cameras.

[Jeff S]

21 minutes ago, zeitz said:

On the other hand I have not found how to automatically apply lens corrections.  

https://lightroomkillertips.com/how-to-set-up-lightroom-to-automatically-apply-a-lens-correction-to-your-imported-images/
 

Jeff

[dadu007]

@rob_w

I've attached a screenshot of the Leica cameras supported by CO20.

The page did load for me...  https://www.captureone.com/en/resources/tech-specs

 

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!

[dadu007]

@rob_w

Here are some screenshots regarding the Leica lens profiles in CO20. The software automatically detects the lens used based on metadata from the .dng file (I assume.)  The "Chromatic Aberration" and "Hide Distorted Areas" options were also automatically applied by default.

 

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 August 12, 2020 by dadu007

[zeitz]

I had seen that Default selection, but assumed it applied that one lens to all files regardless of what lens was used.  Thanks, Jeff, for finding the answer.

[Rokkor]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 22 Stunden schrieb dadu007:

Hi @Rokkor (nod to your Minolta heritage?)

I, too, don't have much, if any, experience with presets. Sorry, can't help you there!

I started using Qimage 10+ years ago because I never fully trusted (understood?) Adobe's Color Management workflow. It starts to get a little complicated (for me) with calibrated monitors, ICC printing profiles, and assigned color spaces. Qimage is very transparent in how it handles all that. So I usually export unsharpened .tiff files (from whatever photo editing software I'm using), with the sRGB colorspace assigned (yes, I know Adobe 1998, etc. are wider gamuts, but it's fine for my eyes...), and then it's very clear in Qimage which monitor and paper profiles are being used. I also REALLY like how Qimage handles sharpening and the adjustments you can make for that.

So, I have nothing against printing from Adobe/Phase One print software, but I know Qimage and trust its color accuracy. It's also mom-and-pop indy software, and I like supporting that. 🙂

BTW, I'll put in an additional plug here for IMatch photo database software. It is simply AWESOME (10+ years user there, too.) It's homegrown and supported by (German and Germany-based) Mario Westphal. HIGHLY recommended. https://www.photools.com/

Hi Dadu007, 

you got it with the Minolta heritage - haha.

I will look into Qimage. Unfortunately my Spyder pro is no longer supported by for the current MacOS, so I am in uncalibrated MacBook Pro internal screen mode. I wonder still what the right settings would look like in terms of brightness. Recently I got a picture printed as a fine art print and it turned out to be very dark. I have not activated the soft proof though. So maybe that was the mistake. Will take a look at Image. 

 

Thanks.