November 28, 2014, 11:07:21 AM

Author Topic: Lightroom vs. Capture One  (Read 5729 times)

Keith_Reeder

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 206
    • View Profile
Re: Lightroom vs. Capture One
« Reply #15 on: August 16, 2014, 05:33:12 PM »
He wrote that the colours appear more natural and representative of the original scene.

He's unequivocally wrong about that.

Christian Greuner - one of Phase One's staff and a regular contributor to the Phase One/Capture One forum - is on record on numerous occasions to confirm that Capture One's profiles are explicitly intended to be pleasing rather than accurate.

I use Lr and Capture One, and agree entirely with this - and I tend to prefer Capture One's colours myself, but it's not because they're more accurate.

Capture One renders microdetail better than Lr, but Lr's highlight recovery is better than Capture One's: they're both better than Optics Pro in this latter regard (by a country mile - this is true of their respective "shadows" tools too), but Optics Pro has its own qualities to recommend it, such as its lens correction tool and its NR (PRIME is peerless, although Capture One is the equal of Optics Pro's "standard" NR, which is high praise for Capture One).

One thing I like about Optics Pro is the ability explicitly to select Bicubic Sharper as the output resizing algorithm: this is usually enough on its own to produce a splendidly sharp image without any USM or lens correction sharpening applied - it seems to work better than resizing with Bicubic Sharper in Photoshop.

Back to Capture One, a little trick which has real value is to apply a small amount of the "Structure" slider in the Clarity Panel (with the method set to "Punch") - it adds a very worthwhile but subtle amount of extra sharpening that can't really be obtained with the standard USM.

Until recently I would have put Lr's NR above Capture One's, but with recent releases of both, I'd definitely give the nod to Capture One.

All told it's currently my go-to converter, but I tend to flip-flop between it and Photo Ninja, with Lr and Optics Pro played in as mood and necessity dictate; but if/when Picturecode ever gets its version 1.2.3b out of pre-release, with the bug fixes and highlight recovery improvements they've told me are in the offing, it'll probably go back to the top of the pile, because I really like the "just a converter" design model, and Photo Ninja does that one job phenomenally well - and cleverly, too boot, with much of its intelligence hidden from user view...   
« Last Edit: August 16, 2014, 06:00:35 PM by Keith_Reeder »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Lightroom vs. Capture One
« Reply #15 on: August 16, 2014, 05:33:12 PM »

MonkeyB

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Lightroom vs. Capture One
« Reply #16 on: August 17, 2014, 04:31:31 PM »
shooting with a 6D, i do not like LR5's emulation of my camera sensor's RAW data. DPP4 does it much better. have not tried C1 yet, but maybe will check it out.
Canon 6D  /  24-70 f2.8 L II

pwp

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1617
    • View Profile
Re: Lightroom vs. Capture One
« Reply #17 on: August 18, 2014, 12:07:00 AM »
It's probably a case of horses for courses. Some time ago I went through a breathtakingly time wasting process of deep testing every known RAW converter on the planet, including the dreaded Silkypix which I just got a new license for with my Panasonic GH4 (now my go-to camera for video...bye-bye Canon).

What an ultimately flawed process! Yes, they all have certain stand-out qualities, wildly varying workflow efficiencies and equally varying impact on the Visa card. At the end of it all I went with the King of Workflow, Adobe Lightroom and now use nothing else, except occasionally Adobe Camera Raw which uses exactly the same engine anyway. In later versions of Photoshop there is the very cool option of opening any image up in Camera Raw with a keyboard shortcut. Useful!

It probably doesn't matter which RAW converter you use provided you're comfortable with it and it suits your workflow and budget.

Bottom line is that It's All About the Image! A fabulous shot will look fabulous if it's shot on an iPhone and a boring shot will still look boring even if it's shot on a 5D3 or a Hasselblad. Don't forget what Einstein, Aristotle and Leonaro Da Vinci all said: Content is King.

-pw

Keith_Reeder

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 206
    • View Profile
Re: Lightroom vs. Capture One
« Reply #18 on: August 18, 2014, 07:47:38 AM »
Don't forget what Einstein, Aristotle and Leonaro Da Vinci all said: Content is King.

Far be it for me to argue with such luminaries, but it's only half the story: given that the content will be the same regardless of converter, why would anyone not want to get the best possible rendition of that content?

In other words, great content and great image quality trumps great content that looks like crap, and "it's all about the image" comfortably accommodates "image quality" as a relevant parameter.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2014, 07:51:32 AM by Keith_Reeder »

LDS

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 143
    • View Profile
Re: Lightroom vs. Capture One
« Reply #19 on: August 18, 2014, 01:51:03 PM »
why would anyone not want to get the best possible rendition of that content?

Can you measure it - the "best possible rendition" - using a scientific method, or it is just a matter of personal tastes in selecting parameters with a tool or another?

IMHO Schewe is right when it calls a RAW file a "digital negative". From it you can produce different images depending on what you want from it. Is there a tool that produces the "best result always"? I don't think so.

MichaelHodges

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 402
    • View Profile
Re: Lightroom vs. Capture One
« Reply #20 on: August 18, 2014, 03:47:04 PM »
shooting with a 6D, i do not like LR5's emulation of my camera sensor's RAW data. DPP4 does it much better. have not tried C1 yet, but maybe will check it out.

Try Camera Standard as the default profile. 

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Lightroom vs. Capture One
« Reply #20 on: August 18, 2014, 03:47:04 PM »