[johnhilvert]

I moved away from Lightroom almost immediately after buying version 6, which was a joke and the sign that Adobe had no intention of actually keeping LR out of the subscription mode.

For my use, it wasn't a huge deal, as I had been cataloguing with a dedicated DAM software even before I started using LR, and LR never had the features in their catalog for me to replace my software.

Yes, the issue of how to manage Digital Asset Management (DAM) is something I am still researching. However using the Cloud for anything but back-up strikes me as risky and very expensive.

On1 seemed like it was aiming to be a LR replacement, and I naively bought it. But, I found it to be much more of a resource hog than even LR. It was constantly trying to cache images, and the user interface was a bit basic for my liking. I've installed 2018 as a demo, but it crashes on open almost no matter what I do. I've not been able to use it. I'm struggling to get any support, and I want a refund on it.

That's OK, I'm no ON1 fanboy, just a mild-mannered reporter for a great forum. These proposed guides are exploring the options available. The system crashes with ON1 et al reflect an over-eagerness to grow their market, I suspect. I write and test them, so you don't have to.

ON1 support is important - especially at this stage of its transformation from a mere LR plug-in to LR replacement. I like it can still operate as an LR plug-in. It makes migration easier though more intriguing. FWIW ON1 has yet to respond to my questions re Pentax file support (Pixel-Shift and HD-RAW) for example. On the other hand it is showering me with ON1 texture and image blend freebies this month.

I'll stick with DxO for now, although I have to say that their recent update is a bit half-baked in its use of control points and additional features. Too many developers are trying to paste on features rather than truly integrate them.

On the other hand, have you noticed how the whole market is becoming commoditised and their look and feel is becoming harder to tell apart? Luminar is another example. It seems the overall stability of their code and business model will ultimately rule.

---------- Post added 11-17-17 at 06:24 PM ----------

I am not into the subscription model of Adobe. Also, Capture 1 allows me to do LR style photo 'developing' as well as basic manipulation that would require me to use two different programs in Adobe.

It's clear that LR-Photoshop combo has strengths and weaknesses. Many of new generation RAW editors like to integrate layers and masks functionality rather than rely on a round trip to a separate app such as Photoshop/GIMP/ etc. The downside is that code can be flakey in the first few revs.

[Oakland Rob]

On the other hand, have you noticed how the whole market is becoming commoditised and their look and feel is becoming harder to tell apart? Luminar is another example. It seems the overall stability of their code and business model will ultimately rule.

It's clear that LR-Photoshop combo has strengths and weaknesses. Many of new generation RAW editors like to integrate layers and masks functionality rather than rely on a round trip to a separate app such as Photoshop/GIMP/ etc. The downside is that code can be flakey in the first few revs.

Yeah, it seems a bunch of image adjusting software developers are rushing to deal with the subset of Adobe users who are displeased with Lr (and to a lesser extent Ps). They've gotta rush stuff out the door right now lest they lose those purchasers. Be interesting to see if they can then scale up and meet people's needs; Luminar's example and On1's are illustrative. I think you'd have to be kinda desperate to preorder software without even a demo, but I guess lots are willing to risk it, and deal with the inevitable early adopter bugs and such. It's also a good example of how developers have to push upgrades people pay for in order to finance continued development to keep up with features (promised or otherwise, like a DAM or port to another OS). And how your upgrade fees have to be factored in, since some of the early releases aren't the kind of mature stable software like old Aperture or Lr that one can hold on to for long periods without upgrading.

And I have to say some of these developers are losing me. I was willing to pay for some of this stuff when it was an extension to Lr or Ps, but not now that they're trying to compete (and they'll never really get there). I have no desire to pay for the development of stand-alone features; without an organizer DAM like Lr they are of little value to me, esp since Ps can do anying they can. DxO is seeming to stay with the model of being a strong Lr/Ps plugin, but Macphun has been leaving that model, and maybe On1 although I don't use it.

[Tas]

Yeah, it seems a bunch of image adjusting software developers are rushing to deal with the subset of Adobe users who are displeased with Lr (and to a lesser extent Ps). They've gotta rush stuff out the door right now lest they lose those purchasers. Be interesting to see if they can then scale up and meet people's needs; Luminar's example and On1's are illustrative. I think you'd have to be kinda desperate to preorder software without even a demo, but I guess lots are willing to risk it, and deal with the inevitable early adopter bugs and such. It's also a good example of how developers have to push upgrades people pay for in order to finance continued development to keep up with features (promised or otherwise, like a DAM or port to another OS). And how your upgrade fees have to be factored in, since some of the early releases aren't the kind of mature stable software like old Aperture or Lr that one can hold on to for long periods without upgrading.

And I have to say some of these developers are losing me. I was willing to pay for some of this stuff when it was an extension to Lr or Ps, but not now that they're trying to compete (and they'll never really get there). I have no desire to pay for the development of stand-alone features; without an organizer DAM like Lr they are of little value to me, esp since Ps can do anying they can. DxO is seeming to stay with the model of being a strong Lr/Ps plugin, but Macphun has been leaving that model, and maybe On1 although I don't use it.

This has been a particularly insightful thread for a person like me who has used both the On1 and Adobe products for years. I still have PS CS6, LR6 (stand alone) and of course On1 Photo RAW 2018. My history with On1 products goes back to their second iteration (PPS6) and the changes I've seen since then are remarkable. They've had a browser since Perfect Photo Suite 8 (2014), and will be introducing an import button, I think into a 2018 update that will come free. You can already do an import like LR except for the import button. I can't see what file management options On1 now lacks other than that import button and some additional lens profiles in metadata but it will be interesting to see what John sees in his guides in case I'm missing something.

Personally I don't think there's any real alternative to Photoshop. It has been the cutting edge program of it's type for decades and remains so with the resources and support it has. And whilst Lightroom is a capable product that I've used since LR2, I grew frustrated with how slow and bloated it had become. And the amount of space the catalogues and previews consume is not insignificant. I ditched some old catalogues and previews, some of which had stayed on my system since LR4 and gained back over 60GB. But for all its annoyances LR remained my primary program until last year as I would use it to import and tag my images then do the initial PP before finishing in PS and/or On1 Photo 10 (as I wasn't happy with the LR image output).

The full On1 Photo 10 was a really good program, it had it's own browser and had several other modules, including Layers, Effects & Resize. In essence it was a proper stand alone product so I didn't need to be using LR anymore with this version but LR had become the way I did things so I stuck with doing things that way. Having said that though, Photo 10 was not a RAW processor so LR had to remain my primary program to let me work on the RAW image first. But that changed a year ago with the release of On1 Photo RAW 2017. (FYI, you can download a free version of Effects 10.5, it's a decent tool worth giving a go at that price)

Photo RAW looked really good via their marketing releases, it seemed to be an opportunity to get a program that would allow me to work in RAW and unlike my version of LR would have a continued development path without a subscription. Of course it's not all rosy, the first final release version was particularly problematic and I along with many other users would have many problems until the first and second updates after the final release. This was when the program settled a lot for me and since then the 2017 program has enabled me to completely leave Adobe except for some exceptions due to the capabilities in the PS content aware tool and subtlety in the masking and layering that can be achieved. I can only recall using PS twice last year. With the 2018 updates I don't expect needing to use PS at all.

The On1 program is not just an LR replacement as LR cannot do many of the things that Photo RAW can, for example the advanced masking and selection tools, layers and resize modules (this is where PS comes in for the Adobe users). And Photo RAW 2018 is the second version of this program which makes it hard to consider it has been rushed out the door. As business opportunities go, those making alternatives to Adobe have an opportunity to provide a good working RAW program outside of the Adobe subscription model and grow their user base. That's smart and we photographers have one of those rare golden opportunities to try multiple alternatives and see which program works for us. The amount of the alternatives is likely to be a one-off until the market settles on those options that have been successful so I see the various companies throwing their hats into the ring of RAW processing as a good thing. I agree wholeheartedly with the 'try before you buy' approach though admittedly if I adopted that a year ago I would not be using On1 now as it took a couple of months to get it right. And maybe that's the key? Let a new program get an update or two before you try it.

So I'm disappointed that some of the experiences people are having with the 2018 version of On1 are replicating the problems I had a year ago. I'm not sure what's going on with that or the failure for the On1 people to respond. It took me several days to get replies a year ago, but once they were communicating with me they were very good to deal with. I'm more frustrated than anything else as it's a very capable program and I can see it being one of the real alternatives for those not wanting to follow the Adobe CC path. And so far as ongoing costs go I own all the On1 versions that I have. It will be updated for a year before the next version and if I choose to update it you need to compare the CC subscription to the On1 update of $80. You don't need to do the update of course which is what I'm deciding on myself this year. I'm not sure what they could add in 2019 that would make me want to spend the money.

Apologies for the novel, I'm not a fanboy but may have come across as one without the above history to provide context. So if reading a novel is not your thing here's the - TL;DR. On1 has been developed over at least six+ years, and Photo RAW is in its second iteration, so no real rush has been taken to develop their program. Adobe still has the market cornered but we're in what could be a 'golden age' of alternative RAW and photo processors that will settle into a status quo at some stage so it's worth celebrating what's coming out and just how powerful and well specced these programs are. Don't believe me? Try the On1 program, it leaves LR for dead in what it can do. Happy to stay where you are? Fair enough then.

Tas

[awscreo]

It's so hard to resist a "Photography" subscription though, as it gives access to photoshop that I personally see as a stronger tool than lightroom on its own.. I wish I could get photoshop on its own for half the price, and then experiment with other raw developers. I tried the capture one before, and found it's color reproduction better than Adobe one. Unfortunately I don't want to run two subscriptions, and since I need photoshop I have to stick with Adobe

[BigMackCam]

It's so hard to resist a "Photography" subscription though

Which shows, however much I and a (significant?) number of others may resist, Adobe has priced the service quite cleverly

[BigMackCam]

This has been a particularly insightful thread for a person like me who has used both the On1 and Adobe products for years.

Grant, I must say I really appreciate and enjoy your detailed (and balanced) posts about ON1. I remain to be convinced on its suitability for me personally, but you highlight some excellent and useful information, and your own use of (and support for) ON1 seems to be well thought out. You've also responded helpfully to me on my few posts about it, so - thanks

[awscreo]

Which shows, however much I and a (significant?) number of others may resist, Adobe has priced the service quite cleverly

I use photoshop for some freelance graphic design work, so it's a must have for me it's clever of them to have ps and lr be cheaper than ps on its own for sure

[subsea]

I currently use LR6, PS (CS6) and ON1 Photo RAW 2017/2018. Each of them has strengths and weaknesses, as I’m sure you all know. That being said, I find myself spending more and more time with ON1 as it’s capabilities improve. Their cultivation of customers to provide ideas and suggestions for debugging and improving their software reminds me of what Adobe did early in their history. My more recent interactions with Adobe have been less than smooth, requiring significant amounts of time in order to get them to even understand there was even a problem. In any event, I see ON1 working quite hard to add the capabilities most desired by their customers and that bodes well for the future. At this point, I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and will continue to support their efforts. As has been said, this is kind of an exciting time to be looking at software for the kinds of things we’re interested in.

[johnhilvert]

I've learned a great deal from this thread to shape my guides with an eye to the issues for pentaxforums.com users.

16 things that maintain my fascination with ON1 Photo RAW 2018 are as follows:

1. Lots of free tutorials and plug-ins available. This makes it easier for me to write about by referring to the more useful one.
2. It has a coherent workflow: browse -> Develop -> Effects -> Layers | Masks for local adjustments
3. It is faster than LR especially when loading a shoot from my memory card
4. It seems to replicate many of the Develop LR-functions
5. Migration from LR is enhanced as it can be run as an LR plug-in
6. It has a lot of presets & filters to start with
7. It is reasonably flexible and has considerable customisation
8. It supports the Photoshop file format especially when doing masks and local adjustments
9. It has a promising Digital Asset Management solution, that is optional rather than mandatory as with LR
10. Great entry price --- though some previous users warn about the cost of marginal upgrades
11. Synching control features makes it easy and fast to apply the same settings to numerous similar images from the same shoot
12. Perspective (Transform) correction is available
13. It has welcome blur, dynamic contrast and dehaze tools builtin
14. It integrates many Photoshop-Topaz-like features built-in
15. Filters can be stacked, turned off and on like layers all ruled by a single opacity control
16. No subscription required

Nine downers for me so far:

1. No support for dual monitors, so my workspace gets a lot more cramped than LR
2. No history file to go back to recover certain operations at certain points
3. No support for pixel Shift or Pentax HD-RAW
4. Less support for Pentax hardware and lens
5. I can easily get lost without a clear workflow: Many controls are replicated with varying features across its Develop/Effects/Layers modes
6. Although I've not had one, reports of crashes by other users suggest the underlying code needs more work
7. Highlight recovery is good but not quite as effective as LR6
8. I would like more keyboard short-cuts.
9. So far On1 developers are yet to respond to my technical questions

[johnhilvert]

I've learned a great deal from this thread to shape my guides with an eye to the issues for pentaxforums.com users.

16 things that maintain my fascination with ON1 Photo RAW 2018 are as follows:

1. Lots of free tutorials and plug-ins available. This makes it easier for me to write about by referring to the more useful ones.
2. It has a coherent workflow: browse -> Develop -> Effects -> Layers | Masks for local adjustments
3. It is faster than LR especially when loading a shoot from my memory card
4. It seems to replicate many of the Develop LR-functions
5. Migration from LR is enhanced as it can be run as an LR plug-in
6. It has a lot of presets & filters to start with
7. It is reasonably flexible and has considerable customisation
8. It supports the Photoshop file format especially when doing masks and local adjustments
9. It has a promising Digital Asset Management solution, that is optional rather than mandatory as with LR
10. Great entry price --- though some previous users warn about the cost of marginal upgrades
11. Synching control features makes it easy and fast to apply the same settings to numerous similar images from the same shoot
12. Perspective (Transform) correction is available
13. It has welcome blur, dynamic contrast and dehaze tools builtin
14. It integrates many Photoshop-Topaz-like features built-in
15. Filters can be stacked, turned off and on like layers all ruled by a single opacity control
16. No subscription required

Nine downers for me so far:

1. No support for dual monitors, so my workspace gets a lot more cramped than LR
2. No history file to go back to recover certain operations at certain points
3. No support for pixel Shift or Pentax HD-RAW
4. Less support for Pentax hardware and lens
5. I can easily get lost without a clear workflow: Many controls are replicated with varying features across its Develop/Effects/Layers modes
6. Although I've not had one, reports of crashes by other users suggest the underlying code needs more work
7. Highlight recovery is good but not quite as effective as LR6
8. I would like more keyboard short-cuts.
9. So far On1 developers are yet to respond to my technical questions

[Paul the Sunman]

ON1 can be used as a stand-alone utility, in which case it develops RAW files itself. However, as far as I can see, if used as a plug-in from LR, that option is not allowed. It begins with the LR-developed file. Is that right? Are there advantages or disadvantages to that?

[derelict]

I am currently weighing DxO, On1 and Capture 1 as my LR6 standalone replacement. All have tutorials available (with the advantage going to C1) and both will do what I want them to do. DxO is having a great bundle sale right now though. How does On1 handle cloning/ healing out things in a shot (like powerlines, for example)? Capture 1 is fantastic but I think it is overkill for what I do.

[subsea]

I've learned a great deal from this thread to shape my guides with an eye to the issues for pentaxforums.com users.


Nine downers for me so far:

1. No support for dual monitors, so my workspace gets a lot more cramped than LR
2. No history file to go back to recover certain operations at certain points
3. No support for pixel Shift or Pentax HD-RAW
4. Less support for Pentax hardware and lens
5. I can easily get lost without a clear workflow: Many controls are replicated with varying features across its Develop/Effects/Layers modes
6. Although I've not had one, reports of crashes by other users suggest the underlying code needs more work
7. Highlight recovery is good but not quite as effective as LR6
8. I would like more keyboard short-cuts.
9. So far On1 developers are yet to respond to my technical questions

Just a note regarding the crashing issue: as I commented earlier in the thread, my crashing issue seems to be related to the amount of RAM on my Mac. I think it's wise to take ON1's RAM recommendations seriously. LR6 seems to handle low-RAM situations more gracefully, but slowly. That being said, since I upgraded the RAM in my Mac, I haven't had a single crash so, on that score (at least), I'm a happy camper. My biggest complaint right now echoes one of yours: the lack of a history file. However, if you're using layers, you can recover some of the history by converting them to "smart layers" before saving. It's just not as convenient as in LR6.

[emalvick]

Just a note regarding the crashing issue: as I commented earlier in the thread, my crashing issue seems to be related to the amount of RAM on my Mac. I think it's wise to take ON1's RAM recommendations seriously. LR6 seems to handle low-RAM situations more gracefully, but slowly. That being said, since I upgraded the RAM in my Mac, I haven't had a single crash so, on that score (at least), I'm a happy camper. My biggest complaint right now echoes one of yours: the lack of a history file. However, if you're using layers, you can recover some of the history by converting them to "smart layers" before saving. It's just not as convenient as in LR6.

My crashing issue has been narrowed down to the point where I think it may be a specific source file. With On1 2017, I had dropped in my complete library (root folder) of photos. In 2018, On1 tried to update the cache and apparently has hung up on an image. After removing the catalog and attempting to catalog specific folders (sorted by year), I've gotten to catalog all but one folder, and that folder crashes On1, even when it is by itself (not a memory issue).

I've only gotten one response from On1, which is a bit disappointing. The response I did get helped just a bit in that I found where the log file is. I'm only disappointed that in sending them a log file I've not gotten anything back; it's been a week.

In the meantime, I've stepped back and removed folders from the catalog. Consequently, I am using the software as a "plug-in" for my DAM, and it is working ok. That's really how I should do it anyway.

---------- Post added 11-21-2017 at 09:26 AM ----------

As for On1 and other software, I personally think it is great that alternatives are coming up. LR is a bit over-rated. It has a great workflow, and the interface was better than most other RAW software at the time it came up. The DAM introduced people to having a DAM. LR and Photoshop have ultimately influenced the current crop of competitors (On1, Luminar, Affinity, Capture 1). I'm fine with it since competition will should breed improvements for all including LR. We'll see if that really happens. LR has been mostly stagnant. I had always hoped it's DAM would improve, but I don't think it really has had any improvement since LR3 (maybe LR2). The RAW processor and ACR have had limited improvements and features added since LR3. Adobe has also leaned heavily on Photoshop as a business choice, which is fine. It's hard to beat Photoshop. But On1 et al. don't have that so they can work to extend themselves by building in features that Photoshop has into their software directly.

I've never been thrilled by the need to use a plugin to get certain features that LR doesn't provide directly. It's not that Photoshop can't do it, but Photoshop doesn't always make things easy. This is what allowed On1 to build a user base as a plugin, and others like Topaz, Nik, etc. The creative control you can get out of Photoshop is great, but it does have a cost, and most photographers want to get to an endpoint quickly. Time is valuable, especially for professionals (which I am not one). But I do like taking photos and getting them on paper or online for friends and family. Plugins extend a software, but they also take time to use (exporting the image, having to catalog a new variant, etc). Of course they make things more convenient than Photoshop, so I can't complain much, but then I started playing with other RAW software.

Earlier I had mentioned that I transition to DxO primarily a couple of years ago (at DxO9). It's not terribly user friendly (presents too many features up front), but that was cleared up as I learned the program and customized my workspace. The real advantages it had for me was that on opening of a file for development, the initial edits by default are often 98% to the endpoint. I need vary few edits or external editing. Some will complain its NR is slow, but for the quality, I can handle queuing up files and letting it chug through its PRIME engine. They recently obtained Nik, so I am hoping it improves. The fact it doesn't need a catalog, simplifies things as my own DAM picks up everything and there are no conflicts between XMP info (LR always gives me that). The only complaint is that it doesn't support plugins (or plugins don't support it). It's not a huge deal, as my DAM can have its own plugins.

As far as I can see, On1 will theoretically give me the same type of workflow. I'm not sure it will get me 98% to an endpoint, and it isn't as resource efficient as DxO. But, it could eliminate a need for plugins. Luminar will probably be similar. With On1, I am finding that without a catalog, it is more efficient. I wish it had a built in function to mark folders as favorites without necessarily cataloging them, but I can live with it as is.

I am all for people making guides for all these new software. It would help gain more users and cover a part of the market that is neglected by those that typically use LR. Heck, if someone would come up with a good guide system for Capture 1, I'd probably be more inclined to give it a try, but I've never been able to really get started with that (and the cost has put me off). Oh well. I hope the market grows and that we keep having good options available to us.

---------- Post added 11-21-2017 at 09:38 AM ----------

ON1 can be used as a stand-alone utility, in which case it develops RAW files itself. However, as far as I can see, if used as a plug-in from LR, that option is not allowed. It begins with the LR-developed file. Is that right? Are there advantages or disadvantages to that?

I suppose this would depend on your workflow. If you are processing the RAW file in LR, then I'm not sure how you could do better. You can only get the LR edits into On1 by exporting a new file, which would have to be a TIFF or maybe a new DNG (not sure that LR will export a DNG with its edits in there). If you plan on essentially processing from start to finish (no use of develop module), then you might be able to send a DNG or RAW file over by configuring the plug-in settings or through the Export settings. However, I'm not sure LR ever lets you export a RAW file. Using a TIFF file should be adequate in most cases.

[Bengan]

My crashing issue has been narrowed down to the point where I think it may be a specific source file. With On1 2017, I had dropped in my complete library (root folder) of photos. In 2018, On1 tried to update the cache and apparently has hung up on an image. After removing the catalog and attempting to catalog specific folders (sorted by year), I've gotten to catalog all but one folder, and that folder crashes On1, even when it is by itself (not a memory issue). I've only gotten one response from On1, which is a bit disappointing. The response I did get helped just a bit in that I found where the log file is. I'm only disappointed that in sending them a log file I've not gotten anything back; it's been a week. In the meantime, I've stepped back and removed folders from the catalog. Consequently, I am using the software as a "plug-in" for my DAM, and it is working ok. That's really how I should do it anyway

This sounds like the problem I'm experiencing. I tried to catalogue the entire folder structure but On1 2018 crashed with 98% done. After that it crashed a couple of seconds after start again and again. Reply from support was to delete the cache, which I did. It was then possible to start the program. Retried the cataloguing but the same thing happened when 98% was done.
How did you find the photo or folder that was causing the problem? I'm reluctant to use a trial and error approach.