Digital Soup

[Bill Pierce]

In the days when the wet darkroom dominated photo processing, there was one developer that dominated the b&w darkroom - D76 (or its twin, Ilford ID-11). But there were a slew of other developers, Rodinal, Microdol-X, Promicrol, Acufine, Diafine, Ethol T, UFG, D-23, that were popular. Usually they had a relatively unique quality that suited a specific photographers work and became their main “soup” or an often used alternative.

The digital darkroom is dominated by Lightroom with perhaps Capture One running second with both sometimes being bounced into Photoshop for a final fix. But, again, there are a slew of other “developers” that photographers can use because they have certain features or produce a certain “look.”

Me, I’m basically a Lightroom dude with a little Iridient tossed in for Fuji files. But my “often used alternative” is PhotoNinja. It’s set up quite differently from many image processing programs and allows you to immediately choose from 13 presets (normal, 3 color “portrait” setting, 3 color “scenic” settings 6 black-and-white settings). This immediately gives you 13 previews of possible interpretations of the image all of which can then be fine tuned or changed drastically with relatively conventional controls. (And for some reason that is a complete mystery to me, it is outstanding in its ability to hold highlight detail.) I like it because it can show me interpretations I wouldn’t normally consider or really even think of. And it does this while producing a high quality final file.

I would love to hear from any of you who also have experience with an “alternative” digital soup and find it offers certain advantages over the “big boys.”

 

[mpaniagua]

Been using Lightzone or RawTherapee alongside with Gimp recently. Not pro stuff but enough for the little post processing I do.

Lightzone got a good deal of filters for sharpness and contrast and RawTherapee got a slightly better UI thatn Lightzone IMHO.

Gimp deals pretty well with most of the corrections I do (dust and scratches).

Lightzone sometimes shows some bugs but nothing critical.

For an amateur as me, pretty good set of tools for my hybrid process.

Regards

Marcelo

 

[shimokita]

I am enjoying RAW File Converter EX 2.0 powered by SilkyPix, an early version which lacks functionality but works on my underpowered travel laptop... at CP+ in Yokohama earlier this year I stopped by the booth and got a demonstration of the latest PRO version... there is a "learning curve" and it seems to be geared to manual adjustments although if you shoot RAW there is a series of standard film presets.

The system creates a file with the edits... which you can delete to reset the image.

The controls might be a little counter intuitive, but there is a lot of [manual] functionality in the PRO package.... I think it's worth a look see.

 

[dmr]

Gimp deals pretty well with most of the corrections I do (dust and scratches).

I quit updating my Photoshop some time ago, and now that they went with a subscription model I have less of a desire to do so.

I've been using gimp and I really have not found anything that I need that it won't do. Once I got over the rather clumsy .jpg/.png saving I haven't had any issues.

 

[Chris101]

I quit updating my Photoshop some time ago, and now that they went with a subscription model I have less of a desire to do so.
...

When PS went subscription, I downgraded from CS6 to to CS5 (12.1x64), the last version that runs stand alone. I like it because it's familiar, and quite powerful. At work we have the latest and greatest version, but I don't use any of the 'new stuff' in there.

I can boot my computer into Linux, and I have Gimp installed in there, but I find it cumbersome. I prefer the style of Photoshop. Maybe one day I'll install Lightroom, but to tell the truth, I've been wet-printing a lot more. Except for showing on the web, I may give up digital editing altogether (well, except for my digital cameras, but for the last few months, I could count the digital images I've made on my fingers and toes.)

 

[tbhv55]

Another vote for Rawtherapee here. Great program.

The latest version (v5.2) is still exhibiting a couple of small bugs, but they'll deal with those soon. Can't grumble, since it's free... and very powerful, with excellent results.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I've owned three digital cameras over the last 15 years; A Nikon D70, then a Kodak DCS-14n, and now a Canon 5DmkII. I have used Lightroom for all of them.

I have tried just about every RAW converter out there, and I feel that every one of them, except Capture One, gives decidedly inferior color and tonality compared to Lightroom. Capture One did not support my old Kodak, but it works for the D-70 and 5DmkII. I like the color it gives, but the noise reduction in C1 is terrible for high ISO work, and I shoot a lot with my Canon at 1600 and 3200.

I use Lightroom CC as my RAW converter and I don't see that changing anytime soon. I use Photoshop for final editing those images needing a lot of retouching or dodging and burning.

 

[peterm1]

I've owned three digital cameras over the last 15 years; A Nikon D70, then a Kodak DCS-14n, and now a Canon 5DmkII. I have used Lightroom for all of them.

I have tried just about every RAW converter out there, and I feel that every one of them, except Capture One, gives decidedly inferior color and tonality compared to Lightroom. Capture One did not support my old Kodak, but it works for the D-70 and 5DmkII. I like the color it gives, but the noise reduction in C1 is terrible for high ISO work, and I shoot a lot with my Canon at 1600 and 3200.

I use Lightroom CC as my RAW converter and I don't see that changing anytime soon. I use Photoshop for final editing those images needing a lot of retouching or dodging and burning.

I have tried Capture One which I got somewhere or other and loaded onto my machine. Despite numerous attempts I still have no idea how to use it. It is about the least intuitive software I have ever had the misfortune to try to use. I suppose I should be more patient and download some online guides but whenever I need it I am in the midst of processing and just go back to my old standby.

That 'standby" is Corel Paintshop Pro (PSP). I use version PSP 14 as this is the last version to have full support for Nik plugins which I love dearly. PSP 14 will convert RAW files from my cameras (which are a few years old) but the problem is that it will not convert them for some later cameras unless I buy a later version of PSP. And I would not wish to buy the latest PSP because of the lack of support for Nik mentioned above. (However for anyone who finds themselves in this predicament, this problem can be overcome by first converting to DNG format using Adobe''s RAW converter which is free for download. Granted this is a bit of a rigamarole.) Never the less other than this potential limit on using PSP I find that PSP converts RAW files well and the ability to immediately work on them using PSP's own filters or Nik plugins is wonderful.

Another route I often use especially if I have a large number of files to work on, is to run PSP under Lightroom (and Nik running as a plugin under PSP). Sounds weird but it works. That way I can use Lightroom for quick bulk conversions from RAW then use PSP / Nik for any further detailed processing that is then needed on specific files. But other than speed of processing a large number of files, the only respect in which I find Lightroom better is that it is really very good at pulling back blown highlights and I find I can get as much out of those highlights as I possibly can using Lightroom.

 

[willie_901]

I use often NIK Viveza 2 in conjuction with Lightroom CC. Its dodge and brurn tools are etremely efective and eficient. For color work Viveza 2 is a powerful solution to mitigate color balance issues when a scene is lit by multiple light sources with significantly different color temperatures.

Silver Efex Pro is my go-to tool for monochroe rendering. Recently LR CC has become much better at monochrome productuon. Silver Efex Pro also has suerb dodge and burn tools so for me, it still retains an advantage.

It is true the exact same results could be obtained using PS CC. For me, using learning and using PS falls under cruel and unusual punishment.

 

[Dogman]

For several years, I used the camera maker's software for Raw conversion--DPP for Canon, Olympus Viewer 2, Silkypix for Panasonic, Fuji, etc. I would then use Picasa to adjust for printing. Early last year, I bought a new iMac and decided to go ahead and get Lightroom at that time. Since then, I've used Lightroom exclusively. I have no complaints.

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

Capture One and sometimes AccuRaw

Capture One and sometimes AccuRaw

I've used Capture One since I got an Olympus E-1 back around 2004. It is intuitive to me, while LightRoom is not. I beta-test for them on occasion, and have seen the difference that good camera-specific profiles can make. When COne is slow to recognize a new camera, I go to AccuRaw, which can render just about anything. Both do well at demosaicing a Fuji digital file.

scott

 

[charjohncarter]

RAWTherapee>PSE>ColorPerfect or MakeTIFF>PSE>Colorperfect.

 

[ptpdprinter]

I currently use LR/PS CC. I resisted upgrading from LR5/CS6 for several years, but they did not support my new Fuji XT2's RAW files, and converting the images with Adobe's DNG converter got to be a time-consuming hassle. The $10.99/month charge has been less painful than I expected. One of the advantages to the Adobe products is the plethora of YouTube videos describing features and processes. I use QuadToneRIP and Print Tools for printing digital negatives for alternative processes.

 

[35photo]

Lightroom + VSCO

 

[gavinlg]

Capture one is by far the best software - once you get to know how it works it makes lightroom look like a toy. I say this as someone who has used LR since it was first created. HOWEVER, vsco and mastin presets makeup a very large baseline portion of my editing process, and capture one does not have either. So I still use lightroom.

 

[dmr]

One seasoning I sometimes add to the soup is Neat Image, which works fairly well for both excessive grain and digital noise.

 

[Tompas]

I used to use Aperture, and when Apple discontinued that I tried their then new Photos app -- and found that I do not really miss any features.

But I don't do very much in my "digital darkroom": adjust exposure, contrast and color, maybe crop a little bit.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I started on PS and I use CS6. Never warmed up to LR. To me photoshops work flow is more intuitive for an old darkroom rat. I start with adobe raw and do basic adjustments color correct (batch) all photos taken in the same light, correct perspective and other basic things save as tiff or jpg and then finish in photoshop. I guess it's what I learned on. Never warmed up to LR.

 

[Axel]

I use the mighty GIMP since years on Mac and Linux.
It gives the good feeling that you can go deeper and deeper with your skills and nobody comes
around to grab your money or gets your nerves with "new features".
GIMP has all and the developers always are the right step in front.
Much thanks to them at this point 🙂

 

[Bob Michaels]

....................... I would love to hear from any of you who also have experience with an “alternative” digital soup and find it offers certain advantages over the “big boys.”

Bill: I am curious how you would differentiate this exercise from that of years gone by when photographers would spend much effort in finding that alternative developer that would set their work apart from the masses.