[Murfy]

I am so ready to jump ship with Lightroom (and other Adobe products), I want to go to capture one 8, but it looks very intimidating and expensive. Are there other options? I checked out Lightzone but it seemed a little buggy to me.
If it makes a difference, right now I just enter local juried shows and stuff like that, so I don't need anything too complex for a business.

[jatrax]

What is your issue with Lightroom? And what functions are important to you? Lightroom is a workflow management system that also does RAW development, some editing and has a decent keywording system. If you are going to use something else you should define what parts of that are most important.

If all you need is RAW development or simple editing there are many alternatives. I have used GIMP and Faststone in the past. But there are many.

If you need workflow management the options are far fewer. I have heard Lightzone and Darktable mentioned but never tried either. Lightroom has it's quirks but I do not see any real competition for workflow management. But a good list of what you need to achieve will help in the search.

[Murfy]

I like the keywording but I thought I could use other options for that, but I guess not. for juired shows that have, I do make collections to find images easily by keywords. my issue is that the raw converter could be better. after trial of capture one, I see a huge difference in quality. I also dont like the fact they will no longer do feature updates to stand alone lightroom, for example, new haze tool will only be for lightroom cc (not that I would use that but what else will they hold out on?). I really like capture one, but it is expensive. I mainly do black and white images. I like the focus highlighting in capture one and the zone system features of lightzone.

sorry for typos and such, my kindle is being finicky today.

Ok back on my computer...I have about 4000 raw files, and I probably import 20 photos a week and then edit maybe at the most 4, a week, so I don't need high volume workflow, but I like that I can keyword and edit without having to export, I can edit and go back to it if I change my mind, and I like the virtual copy feature. But I think raw processor could be better and I don't like how they are not phasing out stand alone but still telling customers that stand alone is available but not updating the same features as CC

[stevebrot]

If you are mainly looking for a RAW converter, there are many options available at various price points and degrees of competence. The free convertors are particularly attractive, though it should be noted that almost all are built on the dcraw convertor. The prominent exception is RawTherapy which uses an extension to dcraw. As a result, the main difference between the free convertors is the sophistication of the user interface and file/image management.

In regards to competence, there is a wide variation in the quality of results available from the available convertors. It may seem strange, but to be honest, some simply suck. What is more, comparable images may not be possible between convertors. I suggest trying before buying and evaluating with a RAW file having known characteristics.

FWIW, I have tried the competition and have stayed with Lightroom for both RAW conversion and image management.


Steve

[stevebrot]

I also dont like the fact they will no longer do feature updates to stand alone lightroom, for example, new haze tool will only be for lightroom cc

Do you have a reference for that? It does not surprise me that features are not been added between versions of the standalone (they never have) or that they may be rolled out in advance for CC. Are you sure that the dehaze feature will NEVER be added to the standalone?


Steve

[jatrax]

FWIW, I have tried the competition and have stayed with Lightroom for both RAW conversion and image management.

That has been my experience as well. While it is certainly possible for a different converter to do a better job on a particular image I've found the Lightroom one to be good enough for me over all images. if something is not to my liking I also have the NIK plugins which can do a lot beyond what Lightroom can. But that is rare.

You could also consider keeping Lightroom for workflow and looking at the other converters and adding the resulting image to Lightroom to finish. There are several posters here who use different converters depending on the individual file but do their image management in Lightroom. Personally that is too complicated for me and I would rather spend my time learning Lightroom in depth rather than learning several different programs but that's just me.

[jonby]

Murfy, do you feel that the C1 converter is doing things that can't be achieved through Lightroom, or is it just that the default settings applied give preferable results? If it's the latter, I would suggest sticking with Lightroom and finding ways to get the results you want. If you have access to the C1 trial, you could spend some time comparing default results and developing a lightroom preset, or set of them, which gets you close to the C1 results.

My sense is that Lightroom offers so many benefits aside from the raw conversion that it's almost certainly going to be worth sticking with it.

[Madaboutpix]

A new haze tool? Well, DxO Optics Pro 10 Elite has a similar feature called ClearView, which works fairly well. Since I installed the Demo, I've grown quite impressed with what it does to my K-3 DNGs to the point where I'm beginning to lose my high-ISO fear. I guess it would be no gross exaggeration to call their Prime denoising feature class-leading, easily on par with Topaz Denoise.

DxO can be used both standalone and as a Lightroom plugin that lets you keep your image management and other features you may like about Lightroom.

[Murfy]

Do you have a reference for that? It does not surprise me that features are not been added between versions of the standalone (they never have) or that they may be rolled out in advance for CC. Are you sure that the dehaze feature will NEVER be added to the standalone?


Steve

It was mentioned in the Lightroom Group on facebook. This person is apparently a community support manager for adobe.

---------- Post added 05-29-15 at 03:29 PM ----------

Murfy, do you feel that the C1 converter is doing things that can't be achieved through Lightroom, or is it just that the default settings applied give preferable results? If it's the latter, I would suggest sticking with Lightroom and finding ways to get the results you want. If you have access to the C1 trial, you could spend some time comparing default results and developing a lightroom preset, or set of them, which gets you close to the C1 results.

My sense is that Lightroom offers so many benefits aside from the raw conversion that it's almost certainly going to be worth sticking with it.

I get better results right off the bat, but it also appears smoother, for lack of a better word. I don't know if it is sharpening feature is much more robust. I also like some features it has that lightroom doesn't, like the focus mask.

---------- Post added 05-29-15 at 03:31 PM ----------

sorry it combined responses into one reply, I don't know how to not do that. From what I am reading it won't be a feature in 7, I don't know IF that part is true, I am just included what this person said, so I assume if it is added, there will be a long wait for it until standalone upgrade.

[jatrax]

From what I am reading it won't be a feature in 7

I read it the other way, it will be in LR 7, but LR 6 is baked and will only get updates, not new features. That is what Adobe has said all along. But who knows, maybe they changed the policy. Either way LR CC @ $10/month is a huge bargain for me. Maybe not so much for anyone not using PS though.

[DSims]

Capture One 8 is very good; download a trial, find one of the good tutorials, and give it a chance. It's what I use.

---------- Post added 05-29-15 at 08:12 PM ----------

My sense is that Lightroom offers so many benefits aside from the raw conversion that it's almost certainly going to be worth sticking with it.

I haven't really used LR for a couple of versions now, but in my mind the only "benefits" are popularity and 3rd party compatibility.


Those can be very good reasons for some people, but I think Capture One is actually a better product overall. After all, Phase One backs and camera systems certainly produce higher quality images than even the Pentax 645D/Z. It's just a question of what you can afford, and which features and functionality you need.

Likewise, if Capture One can meet your needs, I think it will give you better results. Fortunately cost isn't a big issue in the case of the software.

[6BQ5]

I also use Capture One and I am a huge advocate. The sliders have an enormous amount of adjustment range before the image data looks wonky. Colors and contrast are well rendered to deliver crisp images assuming your shots are in good focus with proper light etc etc. The workflow is very simple, I think, and is similar to Aperture if you have ever used it. You can add any processing block inside any tab - even if it doesn't make sense - so its very customizable. A few drawbacks are the poor DAM capabilities, huge CPU processing power required, and some noticeable lag when performing adjustments. As an amateur enthusiast seeking shutter therapy with my camera, I am beyond thrilled with Capture One as a whole.

Phase One posted many tutorials and archived webinars on Youtube. They are well worth the time to watch. Start with the webinars and go in sequential order. You can probably skip the in-depth sessions with specific photographers at first but those are also worth the time after viewing the ones on basic mechanics.

[jonby]

I haven't really used LR for a couple of versions now, but in my mind the only "benefits" are popularity and 3rd party compatibility.

My comment was based on Capture One not being an option, as the OP had discounted it due to cost and complexity. I think Lightroom does have many benefits over the other alternatives that I am aware of, as it is an entire workflow solution incorporating import, selection, organization, keywording, cataloguing, editing, versioning and outputting to various formats all in one. It is relatively bug free, has pretty good performance and in my opinion has one of the best thought-out interfaces of any software I've used (and I have used a lot). It's also more likely to be supported in the future than the other solutions, so you're less likely to have to re-work or re-catalogue thousands of photos when software becomes obsolete.

[Murfy]

Thanks everyone for weighing in. The cost factor for Capture One is only because I don't know how to use it, and how to invest in something that is not as easy to pick up as Lightroom. Lightroom was pretty easy for me to grasp. I have tried Capture one through the trial but it was a while ago and I can't download another one again to test. I do think the converter does a great job. I would be willing to pay for a month or two to try but that is not an option. I do like certain options like the layers, focusing highlighter, I wish those options were in Lightroom

[alamo5000]

I just kind of googled around and see that adobe is now offering some kind of creative cloud thing for a subscription. Not to change the subject here but 1. I am not subscribing to anything. 2. Is just a plain old downloaded and/or boxed set still available?

If they try to force everyone to join a subscription I will not use lightroom.

FWIW I am still using lightroom 4 point something and I am barely learning that, but that said what I have learned has been great. I am still not good at PP at all but I have been pleased with lightroom so far.