white.elephant
Established
Dave, thanks so much.
awilder
Alan Wilder
I have LR 4 and find it's built-in digital distortion correction algorithm for Touit X mount lenses reduces image sharpness by about 15-20%. This might be because there is no lens profile to date with their RAW converter for the Touit in X mount, only E mount. Unfortunately, it can't be disabled. Capture One does allow you to set the distortion control to "0" thus avoiding this problem. With Fujinon X mount lenses there are no issues that I've come across.
AdamJ
Newbie
I prefer the CaptureOne 7 output over Aperture or LR, however even though CO7 has a catalog feature, whenever I've had more than a few thousand images in the catalog it slows down to such a crawl that I can't use it as a replacement for LR.
Thus LR5 is my primary library management tool, and I use CO7 on occasion. If I hadn't already purchased CO7, I'd use Apple iPhoto to get the Apple RAW conversions as they are almost as good as CO7 to me.
Thus LR5 is my primary library management tool, and I use CO7 on occasion. If I hadn't already purchased CO7, I'd use Apple iPhoto to get the Apple RAW conversions as they are almost as good as CO7 to me.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I had no luck with RAW files from my X10 with Aperture 3. I tried to download an update, but apparently it won't work with the Snow Leopard 10.6.8 I have. I added LR4 for the purpose. It's not too hard to use, though I'm still feeling my way and feeling awkward with it.
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
Rob-F, you have to upgrade your OS to get the latest raw support for Aperture. Apple is learning lots from Adobe. S
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I know, but the last time we had this discussion, someone warned that my scanners might not work after that upgrade.
back alley
IMAGES
that sucks...means i would need to buy a new computer as apple wont allow me to upgrade os...
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Increasingly I think that Photo Mechanic > C1E > Photoshop looks like the winning combo.
Starting to get very tired of database-based catalog programs.
Starting to get very tired of database-based catalog programs.
jarski
Veteran
am using LR as intuitive and fast raw developer, but delete the catalogs once not needing them anymore.
SausalitoDog
Well-known
No, but Aperture is in the app store for less than half of what it cost a few years ago.
SausalitoDog
Well-known
Ben-
You mentioned that you had CS6 - ACR is just fine - some say Capture One does a little bit better but I find ACR to be fine - you can make a tweak or two in your own profile and you will love it (and you already have it).
tom
Ronald M
Veteran
I hate programs that require you to set up a library, ie import photos, when there is already a system I perfected.
lcpr
Well-known
Lightroom just collates the EXIF data into a catalog though, your filetree remains untouched. When you import from a card through Lightroom you can configure it so that it respects the way you previously sorted things, plus you can add metadata so that searching through images is easier.
awilder
Alan Wilder
I love the workflow of LR 4. Does anyone know if LR 5 allows you to disable or adjust the distortion correction for the X mount version of the Touit lenses?
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
Still using LR 2, doesn't work with X-raw files. However I made an Automator that converts the raw-files into DNG-files using Adobe DNG converter that work fine with old LR progs.
SausalitoDog
Well-known
I couldn't agree more. That is why I never use LR.
At least aperture lets you sort of ignore the catalog, but it still makes me crazy. Both would probably be really nice with no catalog. Same for catalog one.
These apps are not really aimed at serious photos. None of them work well with really large catalogs.
Besides, I still don't see any advantage in any of them over photoshop except price.
bwcolor
Veteran
I'm still using PS3 and won't be updating to a cloud service any time soon. Is the new Photoshop a non-destructive editor?
SausalitoDog
Well-known
No, PS CC is not...
I'm still in major funk over subscription scam myself....guess I don't have to decide until tomorrow when it actually comes out.
Adobe has clearly become the company we love to hate...can't life with it and so far, at least, can't live without it. I'm praying that someone innovates in this space and kicks their butt!!! Maybe it will be Google with all the NIK technology they bought. Adobe deserves to get a bean ball thrown at them after abusing their loyal user base !!!
I'm still in major funk over subscription scam myself....guess I don't have to decide until tomorrow when it actually comes out.
Adobe has clearly become the company we love to hate...can't life with it and so far, at least, can't live without it. I'm praying that someone innovates in this space and kicks their butt!!! Maybe it will be Google with all the NIK technology they bought. Adobe deserves to get a bean ball thrown at them after abusing their loyal user base !!!
awilder
Alan Wilder
I just finished doing an IQ comparison between LR and AccuRaw using the Fujinon 55-200 as my test lens. What I originally thought was an IQ difference beween LR and AccuRaw limited to the Touit lenses appears to extend to Fujinon lenses as well. Therefore LR's default image manipulation of Fuji X-Trans files appears to have softening effect and a slight boost in color saturation. To demonstate sharpness difference, here are central crops at f/8 with the Fujinon zoom at 116 mm. The image on the left is from AccRaw and on the right it's LR. Both resolution and contrast are improved by about 15-20% in AccuRaw over LR.
Attachments
SausalitoDog
Well-known
Very true, and I do sometimes save the layers but too often the file size gets so huge with newer cameras that I just flatten and save. I can always go back to the raw file if I need to...