Capture One or Lightroom?
Discussion
I want to get a new RAW processor and have looked at Lightroom (30 day Trial) and am just downloading Capture One (30 day trial)
C1 is not talked about much on here - anybody use it and can offer an opinion as to which one to go for?
Is C1 worth the extra for example and if so why is LR considered the professionals choice?
C1 is not talked about much on here - anybody use it and can offer an opinion as to which one to go for?
Is C1 worth the extra for example and if so why is LR considered the professionals choice?
kman said:
I would say C1 is considered the professional's choice. Its RAW processor is considered the best. But LR is popular and easy to use fitting in well with the Adobe Creative Suite.
Really?! Although both have their advocates Lightroom and Photoshop (Creative cloud) is unbeatable combination. Of all the Pros and serious Pro-am's I know only one that uses C1 (for MF Mamiya Phase 1 Digi back) and he has tried to convert others unsuccessfully for about 3 years!
Simpo Two said:
C1 Pro here; love the workflow and highlight recovery. I hate LR with a vengeance.
I'd be interested to know why. In my opinion it's the best piece of software I've ever used. That opinion is based purely on the fact that if someone said "Here are a load of RAW files, create a desktop application to use them" it's what I'd have come up with.Don't get me wrong, LR is a pro tool and its what I use mostly and find intuitive.
However, if you're after a RAW processor that can really bring the best in terms of rendering an image from a RAW file then C1 does a better job compared to the Adobe Camera Raw engine within LR/PS. This is why almost all medium format users (slight exception for Hasselblad) run their raw conversions through C1.
However, if you're after a RAW processor that can really bring the best in terms of rendering an image from a RAW file then C1 does a better job compared to the Adobe Camera Raw engine within LR/PS. This is why almost all medium format users (slight exception for Hasselblad) run their raw conversions through C1.
Simpo Two said:
C1 Pro here; love the workflow and highlight recovery. I hate LR with a vengeance.
Thanks, Would you be able to add a little detail as to why you prefer C1 please?In other words what do you get from using C1 that you don't get from using LR?
Does C1 have more features, can it do more etc? It's a lot more money to buy a life time licence than LR, in what way is the extra cost worth it?
Hope you don't mind me asking I started this exercise comparing Aftershot Pro 2 to LR5 - LR5 was an obvious winner. Then I read about C1 and before I make my decision I am looking for experiences of people who use one or both of them.
Thanks.
budfox said:
I'd be interested to know why. In my opinion it's the best piece of software I've ever used. That opinion is based purely on the fact that if someone said "Here are a load of RAW files, create a desktop application to use them" it's what I'd have come up with.
Desktop application - is that a program?Well, I can drag and drop a whole wedding into the preview panel, click the first one and aha there it is nice and big - click the WB dropper to get 'white' (and copy/paste that to all if I wish), then adjust levels and curves to get the exposure nice. I then click 'add to queue' and it starts cooking while I get on with the next image.
I work in batches of about 40 RAWs at a time and by the time I've wrangled #40, #39 has cooked and bingo, there they all are in the destination folder.
Highlight recovery - shazam, amazing. Blend a light one with a dark one and you get a histogram that goes off both ends.
Don't need libraries, traffic lights, favourites, web publishing or any other strap-on b
ks, just tip the RAWs in and get them to JPG as well and as efficiently as possible. All I need is one folder called 'NEFs' and one folder called 'Processed'.Edited by Simpo Two on Tuesday 30th December 23:10
steveatesh said:
Thanks, Would you be able to add a little detail as to why you prefer C1 please?
In other words what do you get from using C1 that you don't get from using LR?
I can't work LR. It's complete bIn other words what do you get from using C1 that you don't get from using LR?
ks to me; it doesn't work in any way shape or form that I want. I can and do work C1 Pro and it has provided my living for 10 years. Thanks to Bacardi for recommending it 
steveatesh said:
Thanks, Would you be able to add a little detail as to why you prefer C1 please?
In other words what do you get from using C1 that you don't get from using LR?
Does C1 have more features, can it do more etc? It's a lot more money to buy a life time licence than LR, in what way is the extra cost worth it?
Hope you don't mind me asking I started this exercise comparing Aftershot Pro 2 to LR5 - LR5 was an obvious winner. Then I read about C1 and before I make my decision I am looking for experiences of people who use one or both of them.
Thanks.
its not so much to do with features or what it can do - the point is it can take a RAW file and interpret it better in terms of colour/detail/sharpness than Adobe Camera Raw (which is what LR/PS use). In other words what do you get from using C1 that you don't get from using LR?
Does C1 have more features, can it do more etc? It's a lot more money to buy a life time licence than LR, in what way is the extra cost worth it?
Hope you don't mind me asking I started this exercise comparing Aftershot Pro 2 to LR5 - LR5 was an obvious winner. Then I read about C1 and before I make my decision I am looking for experiences of people who use one or both of them.
Thanks.
this video demonstrates the point https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3yJa2P0Aus
I'm a C1 user and have been since v5, now 8.1. I also beta test C1 for Phase One.
For me it just works how I want it to, whether it be for my usual landscape photos, on both dslr and medium format (I'm one of the weird ones!) or for work jobs, event work, weddings etc.
Particularly with the v8 upgrades it is superb IMO, the local adjustments are more powerful than ever and the shadow and highlight recovery works very well.
Whilst I have no doubt LR is capable of doing a good job I didn't get on with it, just like I don't get on with Nikons no matter how good I know they are. It is down to personal preference.
For me it just works how I want it to, whether it be for my usual landscape photos, on both dslr and medium format (I'm one of the weird ones!) or for work jobs, event work, weddings etc.
Particularly with the v8 upgrades it is superb IMO, the local adjustments are more powerful than ever and the shadow and highlight recovery works very well.
Whilst I have no doubt LR is capable of doing a good job I didn't get on with it, just like I don't get on with Nikons no matter how good I know they are. It is down to personal preference.
Edited by markmullen on Tuesday 30th December 23:13
I use C1. Have done for a few years since about V5.
I bought LR when it first came out but then discovered LightZone which I preferred in many ways, not least was not having to use a catalogue.
LightZone went belly up but is still around as Open Source these days and still has things to commend it BUT C1 allows me to work in the much the same way except more so, faster and with a better result on loading and image without needing to apply much, if any, work. I don't have to use a catalogue and it is incredibly customizable to suit the way one wants to work.
For really tricky stuff LightZone offers more edit controls - even now after pretty much 6 years of no development it's still one of the most powerful manipulative editors for RAW conversion. However 999 times out of 1000 C1 will do it anyway with less effort.
I had another look at LR at version 2 and 3 but still didn't feel comfortable with it. That said I can understand why people like it - it's all a matter of personal taste and preferences.
C1 may suit you immediately or it may look like something from another planet but a little digging will always uncover a raft of useful features no matter which point you start from.
I bought LR when it first came out but then discovered LightZone which I preferred in many ways, not least was not having to use a catalogue.
LightZone went belly up but is still around as Open Source these days and still has things to commend it BUT C1 allows me to work in the much the same way except more so, faster and with a better result on loading and image without needing to apply much, if any, work. I don't have to use a catalogue and it is incredibly customizable to suit the way one wants to work.
For really tricky stuff LightZone offers more edit controls - even now after pretty much 6 years of no development it's still one of the most powerful manipulative editors for RAW conversion. However 999 times out of 1000 C1 will do it anyway with less effort.
I had another look at LR at version 2 and 3 but still didn't feel comfortable with it. That said I can understand why people like it - it's all a matter of personal taste and preferences.
C1 may suit you immediately or it may look like something from another planet but a little digging will always uncover a raft of useful features no matter which point you start from.
Simpo Two said:
I can't work LR. It's complete bks to me; it doesn't work in any way shape or form that I want. I can and do work C1 Pro and it has provided my living for 10 years. Thanks to Bacardi for recommending it
I still dont like it but I am using it for my timelapse workflow and its ok. Have to translate some of the sliders into what they do in ACR and I am only using a fraction of it I guess too.ks to me; it doesn't work in any way shape or form that I want. I can and do work C1 Pro and it has provided my living for 10 years. Thanks to Bacardi for recommending it Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff