My new GFX 100S is supposed to arrive tomorrow. For some reason I was under the impression that I would have to use Capture One Pro to process the files. However someone suggested that they actually use Lightroom, which is what I have used since it first was released. I have no intention of starting a flame war like a Mac or PC kind of thing (I am Mac), but do any of you use Lightroom? It would be great not to have to learn a new program but I have heard that the color from COP is superior. Thanks.
Use what you know (LR) and are most comfortable with unless you just feel like trying something new. Many people use LR with the GFX files and are perfectly happy with it.
The reason I've been such a long time user of Capture One for all the digital cameras I've had and the raw files I've processed as part of doing retouching for others is that C1 gets me much closer to where I want to be in far shorter time than anything else, and Capture One has a very similar look to it across camera models and across brands and that look is something that is something I like a lot. It's not that I can't use Adobe products. I can, but it just takes longer to get what I want, and there's a fundamental difference in the tone curve between the two that where I'm not a huge fan of whatever Adobe is doing in that regard. In addition, I hate being forced to use catalogs the way Lr forces you to do just to process a file. I only use sessions in Capture One and it's an extremely efficient way to work commercially, or any other way for that matter. Of course, you can use C1's catalog if you want but I don't. And then there's the Selective Color tool in C1. That alone should seal the deal for just about anyone but there is a small learning curve to that, but what a powerful tool and there's no equivalent as far as I know in the Adobe world, not even in Ps.
The great thing is, is that it's so easy to try each one out for a month or so and see which one works best for you, and don't forget to test tethered shooting if you need to do that. There's a difference there as well.
There was a time several years ago when Adobe's noise reduction was better on really high ISO images but I think that gap is far less significant now, and, in fact, those were some of the times where I would process in Adobe just for that but then everything else about the image was wonky and I'd have to work to make it look how I wanted.
For me, the best solution is to process raws from the GFX in C1 and then off to Photoshop where the real fun begins, and every so often I'll process a problem child in Iridient Developer, which has some very unique tools and processing algorithms that no one else does - a program I keep around and rarely use but also to help support Brian who put it out as a one man show.
Thanks! I downloaded C1 yesterday and will try giving it a spin for a while. I no longer have a studio and have not shot tethered for a while. At this point, my primary usage for the GFX files would be for landscapes. Thanks.
Quite simply, I'd use whichever you are most comfortable with. In the end, if you look at and talk to a lot of photographers, you won't find a real consensus one way or the other. (Though I do think you'll find a lot more photographers... and clients... are working in the Adobe space.)
Jeff Rogers wrote:
Thanks! I downloaded C1 yesterday and will try giving it a spin for a while. I no longer have a studio and have not shot tethered for a while. At this point, my primary usage for the GFX files would be for landscapes. Thanks.
I prefer LR for the more streamlined workflow, but if you like to use the Fuji Velvia colour preset for landscapes, I find the C1 version has a lot less magenta cast than the LR version does.
At this point I am finding ON1 2023 my favored processor over and above C1 and LR. I'm just getting into it, but I believe it's a viable alternative to either of the others.
I have been accustomed to LR and PS since I have used both applications for years. I recently downloaded C1 and have been using it in tandem with LR and PS. I do like the better and more accurate WB control with C1. I doubt I'll move to C1 once my trial is up, but I'll most likely download C1 express for Fujifilm that is free.
-Renders my custom simulations leagues better then Lightroom.
-Doesn't feel bloated. A big reason why I left LR years ago was because of feature bloat (and ones that I won't particularly use at that).
-LR still doesn't run as fast as Capture One does in both my editing workstation and my laptop, both being no slouch in the specs department.
-Sessions sessions sessions SESSIONS. I work between multiple workstations and I can't stand catalog-based editing programs. Sessions mean I can toss the whole folder on a portable drive and take it to any computer with Capture One and pick up right where I left off.
-As a full-time pro, I honestly feel Capture One targets my demographic of photographer much better in terms of features, functions, and customer service.
I moved from Lightroom to Capture One in 2010.
The skin tones & the general colors are, I find, much better on C1.
On every major LR update I always download it again as I've got it for free with my Photoshop subscription but eh... Meh.
I believe there is a lot of blog posts & videos on Youtube where people already compared the different engines next to each other regarding the colors. You'll be able to see it for yourself! :-).
Edit: most of my feed on IG is shot on Fujifilm GFX50s and X100V and graded with Capture One
Having to iMpOrT CaTaLoGuEs instead of just using a damn file tree fills me with a level of rage which is, yes I am aware, completely irrational. I've watched too many friends do that extra work just to see their entire photo organization system, edits, and everything get lost and corrupted. So for me it is Secret Option 3: Neither. I like Bridge & ACR. It used to be that ACR was more barebones and you had to use Photoshop to get some of the features LR offered within the raw editing environment, but Adobe has added a ton of stuff to ACR in recent years and I now practically only open Photoshop if I'm stitching or need to add text art.
Lee Saxon wrote:
Having to iMpOrT CaTaLoGuEs instead of just using a damn file tree fills me with a level of rage which is, yes I am aware, completely irrational. I've watched too many friends do that extra work just to see their entire photo organization system, edits, and everything get lost and corrupted. So for me it is Secret Option 3: Neither. I like Bridge & ACR. It used to be that ACR was more barebones and you had to use Photoshop to get some of the features LR offered within the raw editing environment, but Adobe has added a ton of stuff to ACR in recent years and I now practically only open Photoshop if I'm stitching or need to add text art....Show more →
+1, I bought C1 Pro _only_ to be able to use "sessions" (and I use one single session for everything), which isn't available in the free version (that otherwise has everything I need).
I strongly dislike the user interface of C1, but it's bearable since I only shoot like ~10 photos per time I'm out with the camera. And the results are great. It would drive me nuts if I had to edit hundreds of photos at a time though. You can't even save whatever defaults you want, for unknown reasons.
Makten wrote:
+1, I bought C1 Pro _only_ to be able to use "sessions" (and I use one single session for everything), which isn't available in the free version (that otherwise has everything I need).
I strongly dislike the user interface of C1, but it's bearable since I only shoot like ~10 photos per time I'm out with the camera. And the results are great. It would drive me nuts if I had to edit hundreds of photos at a time though. You can't even save whatever defaults you want, for unknown reasons.
Come on, Makten. You can save whatever defaults you want and any other presets you want or need as well, plus, you can use their absolutely kick-ass selective color tool to modify the color response and save it as a new ICC input profile. The only other easy way I know to do that is to boot up an old Mac in 10.6.8 and use the Edit Module in ProfileMaker Pro, but this is way easier and so much faster as well. But yes, you can save as many presets as you want.
Lee Saxon wrote:
So for me it is Secret Option 3: Neither. I like Bridge & ACR. It used to be that ACR was more barebones and you had to use Photoshop to get some of the features LR offered within the raw editing environment, but Adobe has added a ton of stuff to ACR in recent years and I now practically only open Photoshop if I'm stitching or need to add text art.
TBH, I'm also a Bridge/ACR/Photoshop person.
My instincts were developed in Photoshop, and it "thinks like I do" for the most part.
Because almost everyone I know was using Lightroom, I eventually decided that I really ought to understand it better, if for no other reason than to be conversant about it when people asked me for advice. I had a big project that I was doing, and committed to doing the whole thing in the Lightroom environment over a period of three years.
It sort of worked. At first. Until I figured out that it was pretty easy to take an image out of LR and edit in Photoshop if necessary. And soon just because it seemed easier. And eventually, there I was again, back in my almost-wholly Photoshop workflow.
I do like LR for sorting and selecting images from extremely large sets of related photographs. (The particular project I was working on actually generated nearly 10,000 photographs. LR's ability to categorize them by individual person and more was pretty useful in the end.)
Another factor that leaves me less inclined to depart my Photoshop approach is, as you mention, the increasing power of ACR. At this point it actually has many of the same raw editing features that are found in LR, and over the past few years I've moved more and more of my editing to ACR, which works especially will if you use smart layer export to Photoshop.
