From Aperture to CO Pro 8
Like many Aperture users I am now actively looking for a replacement, Affinity is a possible, but still very much in Beta. I like the look of CO and have watched a few tutorials, it would seem to do the job ok........
For those of you that have made the switch, Aperture to CO, were you glad you did?
For those of you that have made the switch, Aperture to CO, were you glad you did?
0
-
If you are lacking in time, then the process you are about to do - evaluating a whole bunch of RAW apps - is about the time-suckiest thing you could consider.
Some things in C1 are hard to get your head around (the Color Editor for me for example), but what are you getting stuck on? What feature/problem is stopping you from shooting right now?0 -
I would just like to add that we are photographers first. Anything that detracts from that is a negative. However, we are all different individuals and work and think in different ways. That is not to say that you are wrong and that I am right, it is just that we are different.
The art and tech of digital photo development is in its infancy. Twenty years from now, will we even have a Phase One, Adobe or whatever in existence?
I always come back to my position that the tech is an enabler not a detractor. Imagine having to go through contortions to ensure that when you flick on a light switch in your place that the light comes on, depending on your light bulb, or time of day...sorry for getting a bit abstract but what if you had to start your vehicle with different tires, fuel etc. and it did not work for you...
Anyways, just an observation.
Cheers all!0 -
[quote="NNN635125228139971356" wrote:
I would just like to add that we are photographers first. Anything that detracts from that is a negative. However, we are all different individuals and work and think in different ways. That is not to say that you are wrong and that I am right, it is just that we are different.
The art and tech of digital photo development is in its infancy. Twenty years from now, will we even have a Phase One, Adobe or whatever in existence?
I always come back to my position that the tech is an enabler not a detractor. Imagine having to go through contortions to ensure that when you flick on a light switch in your place that the light comes on, depending on your light bulb, or time of day...sorry for getting a bit abstract but what if you had to start your vehicle with different tires, fuel etc. and it did not work for you...
Anyways, just an observation.
Cheers all!
Don't worry, I get what you're saying... I've invested a ton of time in learning C1 lately and I'm afraid I'm going to have to invest an equal amount of time into Lightroom 6 since the performance and viewer issues in C1 are costing me too much time. Fortunately, this migration to a new RAW converter is happening at a time of year for me when there's not a lot going on otherwise in photography, or I'd still be getting by with Aperture.
Life is short. If the tools you have aren't working the way you want to work, find ones that are.0 -
I concur. Cheers and I hope that you (and I) get what pleases us.
It would be nice to be able to do a job like a carpenter that uses a circular saw wether it be a Ryobi, Makita, Milwaukee or Delta and get a straight cut without spending time to read a manual and viewing videos.
Anyways, this can be debated and argued ad infinitum.
Most important is to be doing what you love by shooting with your camera, not the admin.0 -
[quote="NNN635125228139971356" wrote:
It would be nice to be able to do a job like a carpenter that uses a circular saw wether it be a Ryobi, Makita, Milwaukee or Delta and get a straight cut without spending time to read a manual and viewing videos.
As a group they will still have their own opinions about which makes are the best, who has the best batteries, who the best/most cost effective blades and cutters .... and how pointless/useless/unnecessary some of the new devices have become before finding a video that shows them how to cut more in less time.
They may or may not participate in forums to tell everyone else.
Pretty much like any other group.
Still, if all they want is a straight edge .... are you sure that is all they are interested in ?
Those that are photographers will, presumably, be happy with an OOC jpg as long as it's sharp and straight.
Grant0 -
I always come back to my position that the tech is an enabler not a detractor. Imagine having to go through contortions to ensure that when you flick on a light switch in your place that the light comes on, depending on your light bulb, or time of day
I rather consider with I'd have to go through to do something manually, or what the alternatives are for doing the thing I'm doing, at the level of quality I'm doing it. For me, there are currently three viable alternatives. C1, Lightroom, and Aftershot. Aftershot I find buggy and the quality not there in some adjustments. Lightroom's UI drives me bonkers. So C1 it is.
I understand it's different to Aperture, I've used Aperture for 3-4 years.
But that doesn't make C1 broken.0 -
When thinking about the usefulness of the tech, look at what we are able to achieve today, and what it would take to achieve in the darkroom in the physical world.
That said, it you want to be a photographer, and spend time just shooting, then do that.
Your time, your life, do what you love. 😊0 -
I used Aperture for a few years and loved it but moved to Lightroom when I could clearly see its tool set was moving on past Aperture's.
I have also been trying to use CO since version 7 was first released and it finally had a catalog. I keep going back to Lightroom because I find CO unstable, I don't mean it crashes all the time but features tend to stop working when a new release comes out. It also lacks some very simple dam functionality. (e.g. importing into folders by capture date, renaming folders, sorting is also very limited, you can't see the images in sub folders when the parent is selected, etc etc) Some features are very slow or use huge amount of cpu which bog down my machines. Just starting CO takes a while. The UI is still quite clunky even though it can be customised. In a nutshell I don't trust CO yet to look after my photos.
I have done many comparisons with raw files from many cameras and I really can't see where CO is better than Lightroom. The only exception to this is with Fuji X-Trans because Adobe do have a problem demosaicing them. In fact one area where LR is better is colour, it is much more natural than CO which seems to add a brown/red hue to everything.
I do like the fact that CO sets the sharpening and noise reduction levels dependant on ISO, that is good time saver. (LR can do this too but you have to spend a lot of time setting it up) I also like the Levels tool which makes the CO Auto adjust feature quite useable for time lapse stuff. LR's auto feature is pretty crap to be honest.
LR6 is just around the corner so it will be interesting to see what they have done. My guess is they will add tools like HDR and Pano stitching rather than adding any really useful stuff like levels 😉0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
38 comments