Jump to content

Phase1 or Lightroom


techpan

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I wanted to find out what people think about the final image outputs of phase1 and lightroom and their comparison. I have extensively used lightroom and like the simple interphase as well how feature rich lightroom is. However, everytime I go back and use Phase One with its' M8 UV-IR color profile, the final outputs look a lot smoother and more realistic. I find that the dng converter of phase1 is better than that of lightroom and wish that I could have the phase1 dng converter with the simplicity and many features of lightroom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted to find out what people think about the final image outputs of phase1 and lightroom and their comparison. I have extensively used lightroom and like the simple interphase as well how feature rich lightroom is. However, everytime I go back and use Phase One with the M8 UV-IR profile it has, the final outputs look a lot smoother and more realistic. I find that the dng converter of phase1 is better than that of lightroom and wish that I could have the phase1 dng converter with the simplicity and many features of lightroom.

 

Wait for Capture One v 4 which should be out in a few weeks, radical improvement in functionality and interface by all reports.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the LFI comparison?

 

Good to hear that C1 has a version 4 coming out. If it helps with the problems I am having with the M8 output significantly, I will be very happy, if not, the M8 goes up for sale..:(

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is about my sentiment, too, but at the moment my conclusion (nothing is definitive in Software world...) is to use Lightroom: the developing area is very rich in functions but clear to manage: I also had the impression (but not so strong) that the first-shot DNG conversion in C1 has something "better" , but, at the end, I concluded that for the final result that's not significant: I remember (it would be too complex to attach the pics) a pair of situations in which C1 produced, initially, some richer details in shadows, but calibrating the DNG in Lightroom developing process showed that, at the end, the information wasn't anyway "absent".

I read with interest that a new C1 version is arriving... as I said, nothing is definitely stated in Software...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the LFI comparison?

I think there were earlier comparisons as well, but the latest is in LFI 6/2007 August, pp 34-41.

Stated primary topic of the article is Aperture's newfound ability to handle DNG and Lightroom's update to ver 1.1.

 

--HC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The choice has a great deal to do with what kind of photographer you are -- pro or hobbyist, and how elaborate are your organizational needs. Additionally, there's the question of how high is your threshold for software annoyance. I switched from Phase One conversion to Lightroom in February and have not looked back. Lightroom is an elegant piece of software, ideal for non-professionals, very intuitive, and as it is so easy to get from it to Photoshop, has unlimited tools.

 

Phase One may be marginally more exact at delivering the precise colors as they existed at the time the shutter closed, but it is so painfully kludgy to use, and it leaves you such a prisoner of Photoshop -- in my opinion -- that for me, I'll stick to the Lightroom I have on both Macs. Lightroom has vastly simplified and improved my workflow. One last thing: the upgraded version available this summer has so improved sharpening, Lightroom now has sufficiency of features that rarely do I feel the need to leave it and head to the Photoshop mothership.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty new to both digital photography & the M8 but I have really enjoyed using Lightroom to process my RAW photos. As someone new, I do not know of the technical benefits for C1, but the interface for Lightroom was a no-brainer.

 

Add to the fact that processing is pretty straightforward & the ability to auto-publish to a website was an extra benefit. I've been using a lot of the canned templates for imagine processing & found them to be really easy to use & they've made me look way better than I am using a few simple steps.

 

I'll continue to use Lightroom & test out this new version of C1 once it has came out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted to find out what people think about the final image outputs of phase1 and lightroom and their comparison. I have extensively used lightroom and like the simple interphase as well how feature rich lightroom is. However, everytime I go back and use Phase One with its' M8 UV-IR color profile, the final outputs look a lot smoother and more realistic. I find that the dng converter of phase1 is better than that of lightroom and wish that I could have the phase1 dng converter with the simplicity and many features of lightroom.

 

Don t forget Lightzone from Lightcrafts! I find its conversion to be excellent better than lightroom in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From a purely UI point of view, you can't beat Lightroom. It really is a Swiss Army Knife application. So for a lot of users, it's all you need. The problem is, the converter in it is not up to the level of C1, Raw Developer and Silkypix. I suspect that Lightzone and DxO will also outperform it, but I haven't had the opportunity to try them. So if you're looking to get the absolute best quality out of your M8 files, LR won't do it for you. But if all you're doing is developing for the web or email (or shooting jpeg), or if you don't need to squeeze the last bit of quality out of your files, then you'll probably be more than happy with LR. Obviously this is IMHO, and YMMV.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait for Capture One v 4 which should be out in a few weeks, radical improvement in functionality and interface by all reports.

 

Eoin

 

I wonder where you got the info that V4 will soon be out.

 

I heard the same thing directly from Kevin Raber exactly one year ago and we still don't have the new version.

 

I am looking forward to trialling the new version so I hope you are correct.

 

Woody Spedden

Link to post
Share on other sites

The choice has a great deal to do with what kind of photographer you are -- pro or hobbyist, and how elaborate are your organizational needs. Additionally, there's the question of how high is your threshold for software annoyance. I switched from Phase One conversion to Lightroom in February and have not looked back. Lightroom is an elegant piece of software, ideal for non-professionals, very intuitive, and as it is so easy to get from it to Photoshop, has unlimited tools.

 

Phase One may be marginally more exact at delivering the precise colors as they existed at the time the shutter closed, but it is so painfully kludgy to use, and it leaves you such a prisoner of Photoshop -- in my opinion -- that for me, I'll stick to the Lightroom I have on both Macs. Lightroom has vastly simplified and improved my workflow. One last thing: the upgraded version available this summer has so improved sharpening, Lightroom now has sufficiency of features that rarely do I feel the need to leave it and head to the Photoshop mothership.

 

John

 

 

I could not agree more if you are talking about global corrections only. I find it rare that at some point I don't have to go to photoshop to do selective editing on most images I intend to print. (If the image is only for a slideshow I rarely take this extra step).

 

I agree that the "capture sharpening" provided in 1.1 is a miracle compared to V1.0. But it is not sufficient for print sharpening so again, for printing, one needs Photoshop.

 

However the ability to export to Photoshop when you are done with the raw conversion and capture sharpening, doing what needs to be done in Photoshop to make the image ready for a final print and then re-importing back into Lightroom for the purposes of archiving is a simple and very effective workflow IMHO.

 

Woody Spedden

Link to post
Share on other sites

John

 

 

I could not agree more if you are talking about global corrections only. I find it rare that at some point I don't have to go to photoshop to do selective editing on most images I intend to print. (If the image is only for a slideshow I rarely take this extra step).

 

I agree that the "capture sharpening" provided in 1.1 is a miracle compared to V1.0. But it is not sufficient for print sharpening so again, for printing, one needs Photoshop.

 

However the ability to export to Photoshop when you are done with the raw conversion and capture sharpening, doing what needs to be done in Photoshop to make the image ready for a final print and then re-importing back into Lightroom for the purposes of archiving is a simple and very effective workflow IMHO.

 

Woody Spedden

 

Woody - I agree - going into Photoshop is often needed for the best shots, the keepers, the ones you're going to put on your wall. But as you say, it's an easy workflow. And as an organizational tool, it's a miracle. As for the distinction between C1 and Lightroom, for my needs, Lightroom does the trick. It takes what in the C1 workflow is... counting... four steps, and does it in two. Pretty good. Cheers, JB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait for Capture One v 4 which should be out in a few weeks, radical improvement in functionality and interface by all reports.

 

Are any of these reports available anywhere Eoin? I for one am most keen to try it to decide whether to persist with the LE ver. or upgrade to Pro at great expense. I really don't want to decide just before a new version.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I haven't seen mentioned is the very significant difference between C1 LE for Mac and Windows. The Mac version is very poor in comparison. Both the user interface is considerably worse but the results too are significantly worse. I have taken the same image and processed in both versions with the same settings. The first is the windows version and the second is the Mac version. By the way the moire is not fixed in either version. Note the difference in detail between the two. Sharpening was set to standard on both.

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

John, the difference here looks mainly to be the sharpening, so I think that the two platforms may have different defaults. What if you set both to the left end of the slider, or try to match results? The Windows shot has a shocking amount of mazeing in the tie, and the "detail" in the lapel looks to me mostly noise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the interface i saw at PMA with some Leica folks at a seminar

 

Phase One

 

Mmmhhh... really seems the interface of V4 has improved...and they say "2007" for availability... for what is known, does a people like me, who got C1 bundled with M8, in 2007, have the right to obtain V4 when it'll be available ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmmhhh... really seems the interface of V4 has improved...and they say "2007" for availability... for what is known, does a people like me, who got C1 bundled with M8, in 2007, have the right to obtain V4 when it'll be available ?

 

So far it seems so, the minor updates had no impact on your right to "upgrade" to the next version. Unless they do a major upgrade still in the series 3.x, there will be free upgrades for all the LE users.

 

I was tired of waiting for a user friendly version of C1, so I switched to LR which suits my needs as an amateur better (mainly the organisational part).

 

But hey, C1 was free for us and it doesn't hurt to check the keepers on how they'd look if processed through C1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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