Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2017/01/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Silkpix, which also came with my X-T2 and albeit free, is cumbersome to use, to say the least ? Amities Philippe > Le 6 janv. 2017 ? 19:39, Douglas Barry <imra at iol.ie> a ?crit : > > Thanks to everybody for all their suggestions which I've kept for > reference. I better clarify that I DO use LR, but it is ancient - version > 1.3 - and the only reason I haven't upgraded to enable me to shoot and > download RAW is because I dislike the rental idea, but that's just me as I > prefer to own things. Anyway, it's blown up in my face three and a half > years later, as I can't get decent 20x16 prints that are needed for an > exhibition from the fine jpgs I currently get from the camera. > > That said, as Frank pointed out, it appears that I'll get Capture One with > the A7ii, so I can wait the couple of weeks to try that out. SilkyPix > which Peter also mentioned have good offers and I'll download that > afterwards. > > Thanks everybody > > Douglas > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "piers at hemy.org" <piers.hemy at > gmail.com> > To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> > Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 3:49 PM > Subject: Re: [Leica] PC alternatives to Lightroom??? > > >> And I agree with both Gerry and Tina, having used LR since version 1, and >> its predecessor RawShooter. Intuitive and flexible both. But if you >> insist, >> take a look at Corel AfterShotPro. >> >> Piers >> >> On 6 Jan 2017 2:41 p.m., "Tina Manley" <tmanley at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I agree with Gerry. LR is very intuitive, fast, works with all of my >>> plug-ins, and is a great cataloging system that I use to find any photo >>> in >>> my 900,000+ files in seconds. >>> >>> Tina >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Gerry Walden <gerry.walden at icloud.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Just a warning to the wise for Douglas. If you have converted images to >>> > .dng files using Lightroom then Capture One will not recognise them. It >>> > will recognise native .dng images from Leica digital cameras though. I >>> have >>> > to agree with Lluis that I think it is better as a raw converter but it >>> is >>> > no where near as intuitive as Lightroom, and for me the advantages of >>> > > LR >>> > outweigh the disadvantages of C1. I have been on the Photographers plan >>> for >>> > some time now (more or less since it was introduced) and really don?t >>> > understand the reluctance of people to sign up. Adobe support is very >>> good >>> > and C1 support can be slow. >>> > >>> > Gerry >>> > >>> > > On 6 Jan 2017, at 13:57, Lluis Ripoll <lluisripollphotography at >>> > > gmail. >>> com> >>> > wrote: >>> > > >>> > > I use Capture One version 8, in my opinion is much better than LR, I >>> use >>> > > LR only with my B&W scans due to the facility to remove unlimited > >>> > > > dust >>> > > spots. >>> > > Lluis >>> > > >>> > > El 6/1/2017 6:37, "Peter Klein" <boulanger.croissant at gmail.com> >>> > escribi?: >>> > > >>> > >> Douglas: I use Capture One. A "light" version came with my M8. I > >>> > >> >> soon >>> > >> purchased the Pro version and have stuck with it through many >>> upgrades. >>> > >> Like Lightroom, C-One is considered a fully professional tool, and >>> > keeps up >>> > >> with support for virtually every significant camera made. Also, > >>> > >> >> C-One >>> > can >>> > >> be purchased outright--unlike Adobe's rental model, which I oppose >>> > >> > >> on >>> > >> principle. The recent versions have layers and layer masks, so you >>> > >> > >> can >>> > do >>> > >> local exposure/contrast/color adjustments, cloning and (to a limited >>> > >> extent) "healing." The C-One layers are not as advanced as >>> Photoshop's, >>> > >> but C-One does 98% of what I've ever needed. >>> > >> >>> > >> For the remaining 2%, I use Picture Window Pro, *after* I've done my >>> RAW >>> > >> work. PWP has a generic RAW converter, which requires a lot more >>> manual >>> > >> work to get the basic conversion right than Capture One or > >> >>> > >> Lightroom. >>> > The >>> > >> latter two have built-in profiles for most cameras. PWP's RAW >>> processor >>> > is >>> > >> basically a GUI interface to DCRAW, which is built into program. You >>> > have >>> > >> to figure out the settings on your own, or use someone else's > >> >>> > >> recipe. >>> > >> >>> > >> Personally, I would not use PWP for its RAW converter. I use it for >>> what >>> > >> my RAW converter don't do or don't do as well. PWP's RAW can work >>> well, >>> > >> but I find it better suited to people who are more interested in the >>> > >> technical minutae of RAW conversion than in actually taking > >> >>> > >> pictures. >>> > Such >>> > >> people can do as well with it as with Lightroom or C-One, but I'm > >>> > >> >> not >>> > one >>> > >> of them. PWP's RAW converter enabled me to learn a lot about how RAW >>> > >> converters work, and to play with RAW files from new cameras. But >>> > >> inevitably, when Lightroom or C-One come out with a camera profile, >>> > often >>> > >> with help from the camera maker, it always is quite a bit better > >>> > >> >> than >>> > what >>> > >> I can do with PWP. >>> > >> >>> > >> Before C-One had layers and layer masks, I did my initial global > >>> > >> >> work >>> > >> (affecting the whole image) in C-One. Then I saved the file as a >>> 16-bit >>> > >> TIFF. Then I'd work on the TIFF in PWP, doing local adjustments with >>> > masks, >>> > >> cloning, and such. Today, I usually find C-One sufficient. And I've >>> > still >>> > >> got my copy of PWP for the occasional esoteric stuff that C-One >>> doesn't >>> > do. >>> > >> >>> > >> I will not get into a holy war about whether C-One or Lightroom is >>> > better. >>> > >> As with all complex tools, which one is better depends on what you >>> need >>> > to >>> > >> do. For most of us, either will do quite nicely. I'd say that if you >>> are >>> > >> serious about RAW work, you owe it to yourself to have one of the > >>> > >> >> two. >>> > >> C-One is probably less expensive in the long run. If you have an >>> > esoteric >>> > >> need, your best bet is to do a Net search of that feature and look >>> > >> > >> for >>> > >> reviews or user comments that mention the feature and the programs >>> > >> > >> of >>> > >> interest in depth. >>> > >> >>> > >> Also note that Fuji X-Trans files have some special processing >>> > >> requirements. The consensus I've read is that Capture One is > >> >>> > >> somewhat >>> > >> better than Lightroom for Fuji files, especially for landscapes with >>> > lots >>> > >> of green in them. Each handles the colors a little differently. You >>> > might >>> > >> want to research that further. There's also SilkyPix, which is what >>> Fuji >>> > >> recommends. But that means using something that is very different > >>> > >> >> from >>> > >> everything else out there, and might not be the best for any other >>> > camera >>> > >> make. >>> > >> >>> > >> Jonathan Sachs, the author of PWP (and also the co-author of the >>> > original >>> > >> Lotus 123), just discontinued development on PWP. The final version >>> > >> > >> is >>> > now >>> > >> available for free here: >>> > >> <http://dl-c.com/> >>> > >> >>> > >> Since PWP is a mature, full-featured image editor, I see no reason >>> > >> > >> not >>> > to >>> > >> have it if you need a good general purpose image editor. IMHO it's >>> > *much* >>> > >> better than any of the other free or low-cost programs out there. I >>> > chose >>> > >> it over Photoshop and Photoshop Elements years ago. (Of course, if >>> > Elements >>> > >> is fine for you, look no further). PWP's major downsides are: >>> > >> >>> > >> (1) It does not do layers, so you have to save several versions >>> > >> > >> of >>> > >> your image if you want to go back and change something. >>> > >> (2) Its user interface is a little different from most Windows >>> > >> programs, which annoys some people. >>> > >> >>> > >> Hope this helps! >>> > >> >>> > >> --Peter >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >>> I have been using Picture Window Pro 7.0 for some time, and it does >>> > >>> fine, but is being discontinued. I own my software, but there will >>> be >>> > >>> no more updates for new cameras. At present, it does not support >>> > >>> > >>> RAF >>> > >>> files from the X-T2, which I have been considering. It works fine >>> with >>> > >>> RAF files from the X-E1. That is why I was exploring LR. >>> > >>> >>> > >>> Jim Nichols >>> > >>> Tullahoma, TN USA >>> > >>> >>> > >>> On 1/5/2017 4:59 PM, Douglas Barry wrote: >>> > >>>> Having never shot a RAW file since I discovered my Fuji X100S > >>> > >>>> >>>> files >>> > >>>> were not compatible with my old LR nearly four years ago, I'm >>> > >>>> wondering are there any low cost PC alternatives to Lightroom that >>> > >>>> would enble me to import Fuji RAW and convert to Tiff as I need > >>> > >>>> >>>> the >>> > >>>> resolution for printing?? JPGs don't cut it for larger sizes. I'd >>> like >>> > >>>> to hear from anybody who is using alternative PC software to > >>> > >>>> >>>> import >>> > >>>> RAW files and how it's working for them. >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> I'm also buying a Sony A7ii so it would be useful if it could do >>> > >>>> > >>>> the >>> > >>>> same trick with Sony RAW files. I do little manipulation so I'm >>> happy >>> > >>>> to use my existing PSE software which can deal with Tiffs easily. >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> Douglas >>> > >>>> >>> > >> >>> > >> _______________________________________________ >>> > >> Leica Users Group. >>> > >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > Leica Users Group. >>> > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Leica Users Group. >>> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Tina Manley >>> www.tinamanley.com >>> tina-manley.artistwebsites.com >>> http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography/3B49552F-90A0- >>> 4D0A-A11D-2175C937AA91/Tina+Manley.html >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information