I wrote a long time ago Here is a blog post about the different RAW converters, which is still viewed very often. This is probably why I regularly receive emails with questions about these RAW converters. So that I don't have to write everything down again and again, I thought I'd do an update. Finally, there are now Adobe Lightroom 6 (also called CC) and Capture One version 8.3, but Apple has removed Aperture from the program. Since I almost only work with the first two converters mentioned, I want to limit myself to that. And to get straight to the point: there is a clear favorite for me personally, but it also has its quirks. If I could wish for something, it would be a combination of these two RAW converters.
Capture One is my favorite converter and these are the reasons why:
The options for influencing colors with Capture One are incredibly diverse. I'll happily admit that this confused me at first. But once you get through the sliders and controls, you'll love the variety of options. Capture One has a clear advantage, especially in difficult lighting situations. I can't tell you how many times the white balance on the skin has sped up my workflow dramatically when fancy effect lighting was set at a fancy event.
Similar to Lightroom, I can use the eyedropper to select individual shades and manipulate their color, saturation and brightness. The difference is that I can select color ranges much more easily and can control exactly which colors I'm working on. The tools in Capture One are simply more finely adjustable.
I edited an example image here with both RAW converters. This is a scanned color negative that was completely wrong in color. It really makes no sense to try to photograph greenish floodlights at night with daylight film...
I like to compare the two RAW converters with tools: while Capture One uses a chasing hammer, I use a sledgehammer in Lightroom.
Did you know that Capture One has a significantly larger range of white balance settings? While this goes up to 2000 Kelvin in Lightroom, 800 K works with Capture One. This is a real added value, especially for photos in romantic candlelight.
I also like the operating concept better. I can save frequently used settings for the image editing options. Of course, this can also be done in Lightroom via the presets, but with Capture One, personal preferences are attached directly to the tools and I don't always have to move the mouse to the other side of the screen to find the right preset.
In addition, many automatisms are solved really well in C1. For example, the noise reduction is preset so that manual adjustment is unnecessary in many cases. Capture One reads the ISO value used from the image file and applies noise reduction, which works well in many cases. Moiré suppression also works better automatically than with the corresponding tool in Lightroom. Nevertheless, I can rework with the brush in Capture One. In general, almost all settings are also possible as local adjustments using the brush. This works in both programs, but simply better in Capture One. Except for the soft focus (which I consider questionable anyway), I can do all the steps of portrait retouching in Capture One, including Dodge & Burn. As I said, this also works in Lightroom, but not quite as seamlessly. Adobe probably wants to know some reason for Photoshop.
The absolute highlight is the Clarity slider, which creates halos much more quickly in Lightroom than in Capture One. If you often photograph fur structures, there is also a "Structure" slider in Capture One that highlights these in a wonderful way.
By the way, importing and exporting is faster with Capture One, and creating preview images is also faster here. The changes to the controls, however, can be seen a little more quickly in Lightroom.
In short: the editing in Capture One impresses me with the crazy fine-tuning options. The result is usually better than in Lightroom. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to make these advantages visible on images on the web. When scaled down and compressed, the results between Lightroom and Capture One are naturally similar.
But there are also things that Lightroom can do better:
While Capture One only includes cataloging and image editing, Lightroom can of course do much more: book printing, web gallery, etc. However, I don't have to go into these additional functions because Lightroom can also score points when it comes to the basic functions. This makes the Healing Brush in Lightroom much faster and easier to use. Unfortunately, the ability to adjust the sharpness very precisely in Lightroom is also missing in Capture One. The same applies to noise reduction. Whenever the automatic algorithm in Capture One doesn't work 100%, Lightroom comes out on top. The gradation curve can also be adjusted manually more beautifully and more evenly thanks to the division into regions than with Capture One.
The lens corrections are also a nice thing in Lightroom, something like that doesn't exist in Capture One. In fact, I don't need this function for my Leica lenses and therefore I don't notice the lack of these corrections in C1. Lightroom is also great for correcting objects that have been photographed crookedly. Manual intervention is necessary here in Capture One.
Working with catalogs works very similarly in both programs. Everyone will have their own preferences. I work with both RAW converters in such a way that I don't import the images in catalogs, but rather copy them into subfolders. I don't pre-select the images in either program, as they are both much too slow for that. I pre-select them with PhotoMechanic and then only import the "keepers". By copying the images, I have identical folder structures on different drives: one with the originals and one with the originals and the edits. Call me paranoid, but I've never lost an image file.
tl;dr: You can see that I could definitely live with Lightroom as a RAW converter, but I simply prefer Capture One and impresses me with its image quality.
Due to the different strengths of the programs, I like to edit my analog scanned black and white images with Lightroom, everything else with Capture One. By the way, the image above was edited with Lightroom and the new VSCO7.
Finally, a note on one Variety of good (English-language) tutorials for Capture One, which make it easier to get started with the program.
Fotofood: Capture One or Lightroom CC? http://t.co/7ATkVNyPOT -
A long time ago I wrote a blog post here about the different...
RT @rim_light: New to the blog: Capture One or #Lightroom CC? – http://t.co/O03BPAeckV #Capture_One #RAW converter http://t.co/XwhPkvDGRr
Well, you can adjust the sharpness very precisely in C1, even quite precisely. Capture also has a more realistic color interpretation. The guys dragged a few cameras into the lab and used them to profile people. Lens corrections are also available here just like in LR. The biggest and worst disadvantage of C1 is that it cannot pass images to PS as smart objects. That's really annoying because you have to turn something at the base afterwards.
I'm totally with you about color. For Leica, however, there is only one lens correction in C1, in LR at least 27 plus Voigtländer and Zeiss. That really is a difference. And feel free to show me the trick with the sharpness when you get the chance 🙂
Sharpening works just like unsharp masking in Photoshop. Adjust the sharpening, adjust the radius and, if necessary, increase the threshold value to tune the area slightly.
You seem to be right about the profiles, but at least there is the option to correct them manually :)
Yes, but it's not as clear and convenient to control the settings as by pressing the Alt key in Lightroom in C1.
Well, if you can guess with halo-like contours whether the image is sharp enough or not, that's true :)
Thanks! =)
A few weeks ago I bought the inexpensive Pro version for Sony cameras and noticed that the results were different in terms of color. The approach is also fundamentally different.
However, after editing in C1, I was able to reproduce virtually every look in Lightroom as well.
What I want to express is that in fact you can create almost identical images with both programs. The only question is which workflow will get the best out of you. For me it's still Lightroom. It's easier for me.
But thanks for the comparison - I only found C1 through your tweets.
I admit that I really don't like reading articles in magazines or blogs that make pure feature comparisons. In order to assess the quality of a software or the suitability of it for your own workflow, a little more is necessary. And ultimately you have to like yourself a little. I honestly admit, I can't stand Adobe. I explained why in a podcast episode (https://goo.gl/OanKhp like from minute 20) also explained.
Nevertheless, speaking as a professional user, I always create a kind of "specification" before an "investment" in order to screen possible candidates. If I were to set up an agency today (again*), I would measure various programs against company processes, security aspects, TCO, investment protection, etc., etc.
And here I have to say very clearly and completely objectively: LR doesn't have the slightest chance. The most important criteria for me are:
– (KO) Network support (We are in 2015!)
– (KO) Tethered Shooting with LiveView
– (KO) Alternative to the catalog/sessions
– (casually) a reasonable customizable UI
– (KO) selective editing in layers
– (casual) hand-held keystone (straight picture corners)
– Advanced color management and color manipulation (LR also provides, but not even half as elegant and time-saving)
I think the functions you mentioned, such as book, slideshow and web functions, are out of place. In my opinion, this is real bloat stuff that feels like 10^6 other 3rd party programs can do better. Or to be even clearer, something like this belongs in the hobby area.
Well, of course the RAW converter is not the core of the photographic process and in principle it can always be done using simpler means or those supplied by the camera manufacturers. But the more commercial this process becomes, the more crucial it is to choose the right tools. Imagine you have to photograph an entire 20″ container full of gadgets for Alibaba (just we have done) and wanted to do this with LR? This would be pure masochism. Ditto a sequence of all university teachers at a university in the studio with different poses, backgrounds etc. - how is that supposed to work without live view and distributed work?
My conclusion about LR is that this program may have originally been intended for commercial needs, but for a few years now it has been aimed exclusively at the mass market - and that is the amateur sector. Corresponding Important functions will not be found there in the future or will become fewer and fewer. The subscription model is aimed precisely at this clientele.
And that brings me to another point: Our images and the work that has been invested in them so far represent the essential asset. An asset that banks, for example, can also quantify precisely (we currently have 5 photographers under contract). If I were to use LRCC and wanted to leave it at some point, this asset would be in the trash. It is completely incomprehensible to me how professional users can get involved in this madness? If I were a bank, I would knock something like that off.
Regarding tutorials and such, unfortunately there is a lot of English stuff. This is a real deficiency. (Still, I hope Scott Kelby never discovers COP). In order to counteract this deficiency, I founded a German User Group on G+ (https://goo.gl/Xj7kXp) and if time allows I'll also post one or two German screencasts for COP (https://goo.gl/kWswWS). I do this on a voluntary basis and have nothing else to do with P1, so I would of course be happy if more people would join in and contribute their own stuff, because my time is also somewhat limited. 😉
So far… and greetings from Hong Kong
Sven
* Our agency has existed since 2005 and back then the choice was rather manageable. LR wasn't up for debate yet. If I remember correctly, apart from COP, only Bibble was shortlisted.
Thank you for your dedicated words. I can't add anything to that, but I can underline everything you say. Your perspective is much more professional than mine and probably most of my readers. It's even more enlightening to read your comment. Thank you for taking the time.
Do you also use Capture One when sending live football games?
I don't do any image editing. 🙂
I use Lr, but I keep glancing over to C1 because it looks better. What surprises me - I retouch 98% of the portraits in LR and never found the right access when testing in C1. You write that you feel the opposite. – How do you work? I have a bunch of presets in LR for the correction brush that I always use (smooth skin, whiten teeth, eyes, hair, wrinkles, shine, redness and much more.) As far as I know, C1 doesn't have any brush presets that can be saved, right?
I don't need any special brushes for the corrections mentioned, because I only change my pictures with light. If I need real image manipulation I use PS.
May I ask which preset exactly from VSCO7 you used for the above image? Thank you in advance. Kind regards
Sorry, I don't know anymore. The only important thing is that I slightly overexposed :)
I own both programs and I actually like C1 better. What I am absolutely missing there is a reasonable correction of CAs. Lightroom is miles ahead here. While with Capture One I can only click on a more or less successful automatic correction, with LR I can go much more finely and also remove difficult CA.