Zum Hauptinhalt gehen

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived. The information contained here may no longer be accurate or up-to-date. ⚠️

Lightroom

Normand2
I done 26 weddings on average 1200 to 1800 images per/wedding so far, seem I always started in lightroom but after a couple hundred images I always end up back in capture one, so much faster and colors seem to be better......
0

Kommentare

7 Kommentare

Datum Stimmen
  • Paul Steunebrink
    ... seems to be consistent with numerous user experiences here... 😉
    0
  • Jim MSP
    [quote="Normand2" wrote:
    ....I always end up back in capture one, so much faster and colors seem to be better......


    I use both CO & LR, but CO is my preferred engine about 80-90% of the time.
    I think the LR noise reduction is superior, so I tend to use LR for my shoots in low light, high ISO (such as evening sports).
    If I need to print any of these, they go back into CO, then on to Topaz Denoise.

    However, LR has just introduced another version, 3.5, both adding cameras and correcting bugs. It also seems a bit faster.

    So to those CO software engineers - let's go, you still need to issue an update to keep our crashes down - both CO and MP. I'd like to get back to 100% use of CO.
    0
  • jd-photography
    I can fully agree with your experience. With C1 I am able to get the desired results much faster, the colors are really excellent. Seems that C1 is nearly perfect, but... LR is due to my personal experience much more stable than C1! Also LR never stopped working since I am using it (3 years!), while C1 crashes nearly once a week.

    The main advantage of LR however is the lens correction, which is with C1 only available for MF cameras. It would be amazing to have this very important feature (combined with keystone correction) available in C1, too.

    Regards,
    Joerg
    0
  • Paul Steunebrink
    [quote="jd-photography" wrote:
    ...
    The main advantage of LR however is the lens correction, which is with C1 only available for MF cameras.

    Lens correction in CO6 is limited compared to LR but not limited to MF cameras. It involves more input, is less automatic but you can do a lot of lens correction.
    0
  • jd-photography
    Hi Paul,

    well, you are right. I meant the automatic correction especially of distortion on raw basis. Combined with the keystone correction an automatic enhancement of these problems would make C1 even better. However, I have given up hope regarding this topic.
    0
  • Jim MSP
    A "mid term" solution to this would involve some work by the photographer coupled with some software development for CO.
    Phase One could sell a couple of calibrated "targets" for us to use.
    They would issue a set of instructions on photographing them. This would be followed by the CO software analyzing the results, and calculating and storing a set of lens calibrations for each of the lenses that we own.

    PO would not have to test every lens - just let the photographer calibrate what he/she has.
    I don't think they are too far from that.
    0
  • jd-photography
    [quote="Jim MSP" wrote:

    PO would not have to test every lens - just let the photographer calibrate what he/she has.
    I don't think they are too far from that.


    Hi Jim,

    I fully agree with you, a solution as you described would be a great opportunity to improve C1. At the moment I have to convert my raw file and correct distortion with PTlens. After this I return with the .tif to C1 and use the keystone correction. This works of course, but is only a workaround.

    Joerg
    0

Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.