fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  

FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

1       2              4       end
  
Is PS/LR still your default workflow?
I have moved on
I am actively looking for alternatives
The hassle of transitioning to something else is not worth it
Don't use it enough to care
It still is superior to the available alternatives

Is PS/LR still your default workflow?

  
 
Beagle64
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


Really? Pot and kettle old chap - criticising or expressing a preference of anyone’s software or camera choices is seen by apparently you as well as some others (according to you) as some sort of heresy or a judgement of their character. Physician heal thyself springs to mind, the irony of your statement seems lost on you. Hopefully one of those narrow minded Adobe users will have a spare chill pill for you and would be willing to share, or at least let you pay a monthly subscription to access it.

guywithgas wrote:
Adobe users, please take a chill pill. Non-Adobe users don't hate you. We are entitled to have our own view points and are free to express them.

"Freedom of choice" is a thing. It.... is.... as... simple... as ..... that!!




Jul 11, 2026 at 02:12 AM
guywithgas
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #2 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


I would encourage you to post photos or better start buying/selling stuff on this forum. Wait.... what? Trolls don't do that? Gotcha

Beagle64 wrote:
Really? Pot and kettle old chap - criticising or expressing a preference of anyone’s software or camera choices is seen by apparently you as well as some others (according to you) as some sort of heresy or a judgement of their character. Physician heal thyself springs to mind, the irony of your statement seems lost on you. Hopefully one of those narrow minded Adobe users will have a spare chill pill for you and would be willing to share, or at least let you pay a monthly subscription to access it.






Jul 11, 2026 at 07:10 AM
gdanmitchell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


Get a room, guys. ;-)


Jul 11, 2026 at 10:27 AM
Alan321
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


I've used LrC since back when it was "Lr" because it suits my non-project-based multi-camera-brand photography. I don't work briefly on any short term commercial project and then move on to another, and another... so the LrC database works well for me. On the other hand, I didn't like also working with both Canon software and Nikon software in Windows, but that's no reflection on either one.

I use LrC totally in database mode; editing pics parametrically and occasionally reworking them as new or untried LrC features appeal to me. However, I do seem to be allergic to Ps (and AutoCAD for that matter).

I had tried Apple Aperture at one stage long ago but then Apple promptly abandoned it. Eventually I abandoned Apple.

I'll soon be switching from Windows to Linux as much as possible, and so I'll largely move to some yet to be decided on non-Adobe photo software. I expect to use LrC to export some raw pics as dng files and then use the dng files in Linux. Pics that don't need the LrC denoise or other AI features will be handled in Linux. In general, my photo files will live in Linux. I intend that my LrC database will live on in Windows for when I want to temporarily copy some raw files back to Windows for special processing in LrC and produce new/updated dng files for ongoing use in Linux software.

In case you missed the obvious, I'm having a shitty with Microsoft Alas, the untimely death of my previous PC coincided with the death of Windows 10 and some of the software I like to use, so my data recovery was very much compromised despite lots of data backups being available.



Jul 26, 2026 at 08:18 PM
Jack Flesher
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #5 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


gregfountain wrote:
I tried to switch to C1, and I think it handles DNG files better than Adobe, which is saying something considering it's an Adobe raw format, but ultimately I found myself launching images into PS to do stuff C1 can't.

I do a lot of focus stacking and you really can't compare the ease of stacking and blending images that PS offers and to be able to select images in LR and open them as layers in PS is unmatched. Even something as simple as extending the canvas for online presentation is missing in others I've tried, so C1 got
...Show more

TBC, C1 is an excellent raw converter. It has functionality, deep independent control functionality on color, light, sharpening, sizing and all other basic conversion controls (except NR!) that aren’t in LR or ACR. C1 also has cloning, cleaning, masking, dodge and burn and NR capability all on layers, but their implementation is slower and almost archaic compared to ACR/PS. So for me it was convert in C1 and export to PS for masking, D&B, cleaning and cloning and framing. Hence why when it came time to give one up it was C1 that lost. That said, I still believe that C1 generates a marginally better “negative” to work on in PS where ACR or LRc fall notably shorter. But the reality is I could show you and most other followers of this thread examples of what I’m talking about and you would see them, but even I have to admit they’re less significant than they were just a few years ago — and more importantly the typical viewer wouldn’t have a clue what we were talking about.



Jul 26, 2026 at 08:44 PM
gregfountain
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #6 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


Jack Flesher wrote:
TBC, C1 is an excellent raw converter. It has functionality, deep independent control functionality on color, light, sharpening, sizing and all other basic conversion controls (except NR!) that aren’t in LR or ACR. C1 also has cloning, cleaning, masking, dodge and burn and NR capability all on layers, but their implementation is slower and almost archaic compared to ACR/PS. So for me it was convert in C1 and export to PS for masking, D&B, cleaning and cloning and framing. Hence why when it came time to give one up it was C1 that lost. That said, I still believe
...Show more

All good points Jack, and as I said, I prefer how C1 handles DNG files, and it's more than marginal (They open from thumbnails looking closer to what I saw in the viewfinder). I suppose I'll end up resubscribing, and consider it the cost of supporting my obsessive photography habit.



Jul 26, 2026 at 09:29 PM
gdanmitchell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


Jack Flesher wrote:
C1 is an excellent raw converter. It has functionality, deep independent control functionality on color, light, sharpening, sizing and all other basic conversion controls (except NR!) that aren’t in LR or ACR.


Jack, I don’t use and have not used C1. Can you enlighten me? Specifically, What does it do in these areas (“color, light, sharpening, sizing and all other basic conversion controls”) that ACR and LR can’t do?

Thanks.



Jul 26, 2026 at 10:12 PM
PSBaxter
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


LR/PS CC at $120 per year is the best bargain in photography. I have tried most everything else over the years and nothing touches it for me. I use LR and PS on every image I edit . I do use DxO PureRaw for raw files. I started using it for M4/3 files, and find it superior to every other raw converter I have tried. Camera Raw /LR is almost as good and I would happily use either if I had to. To each their own but I like Adobe snd it is cheap!


Jul 26, 2026 at 11:41 PM
melcat
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #9 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


Jack Flesher wrote:
TBC, C1 is an excellent raw converter. It has functionality, deep independent control functionality on color, light, sharpening, sizing and all other basic conversion controls (except NR!) that aren’t in LR or ACR. C1 also has cloning, cleaning, masking, dodge and burn and NR capability all on layers, but their implementation is slower and almost archaic compared to ACR/PS. So for me it was convert in C1 and export to PS for masking, D&B, cleaning and cloning and framing. Hence why when it came time to give one up it was C1 that lost. That said, I still believe
...Show more

There are a few things I disagree with here:

• Capture One does now have advanced noise reduction using AI. There have been a couple of recent threads here about its efficacy and performance. It’s very easy to use: just tick a checkbox in the noise panel and it will do it in the background, without the user having to handle intermediate files.

• I don’t experience any performance problems with Capture One, and the machine I use for photo processing is an Intel iMac, which must by now be one of the slowest machines still supported by macOS and slower than what most people here use. It also runs with no trouble on my base model M5 MacBook Air.

• It’s true that Capture One’s healing tool for dust removal isn’t fully automatic, like Photoshop’s, but IMO it’s better for that. Instead of having to heal multiple times with a smaller brush, second guessing what the tool will filll with, you can instead often drag the source area to somewhere more suitable. I don’t see anything archaic about the other tools in Capture One.

I did notice, as have others, sharper results from Capture One, although I was comparing with an older Adobe Camera Raw “process”. Some have speculated that Capture One’s demosaicing algorithm is more advanced.



Jul 27, 2026 at 04:19 AM
gregfountain
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #10 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


gdanmitchell wrote:
Jack, I don’t use and have not used C1. Can you enlighten me? Specifically, What does it do in these areas (“color, light, sharpening, sizing and all other basic conversion controls”) that ACR and LR can’t do?

Thanks.


I know you asked Jack, but for me, C1 imports a DNG file that looks a lot closer to what I saw when I took the shot. It's not an issue of LR/ACR/PS not being able to do the same, rather, it seems to give me a more accurate color and exposure starting point. I can't explain why. It may be an import setting in LR, but I checked/unchecked all the boxes google and YouTube told me to check to ensure it's the camera's settings that are applied to the imported file. I will say that if I open a file in PS from LR, and immediately go to ACR, and then click "auto" on the exposure panel, it looks right, and then I can set the black point to get accurate color, but finding a pure black point on an image isn't always possible.

Always good to have a choice.

I'll add that maybe I should simply drag and drop the files from the card into a folder, then open them directly into ACR. That seems to be what a lot of people do. Then LR become more of a file magement system vs the initial importer and editor. I'll try it.



Jul 27, 2026 at 08:50 AM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

ruthenium
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #11 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


melcat wrote:
There are a few things I disagree with here:

• Capture One does now have advanced noise reduction using AI. There have been a couple of recent threads here about its efficacy and performance. It’s very easy to use: just tick a checkbox in the noise panel and it will do it in the background, without the user having to handle intermediate files.

• I don’t experience any performance problems with Capture One, and the machine I use for photo processing is an Intel iMac, which must by now be one of the slowest machines still supported by macOS and slower than
...Show more

I started using Capture One 1 year ago. By the way, that decision was influenced by positive comments from Jack. I liked the experience very much and Capture One has since become an integral part of my workflow. During that time, I tried Adobe photography plan for 1 year but decided to stay with Capture One, significantly because I don't want to use the catalogue in Lr. The other program that I have been using for years is DxO Photolab. I still have this and shall upgrade to ver. 10 when it is released.
I agree with the above points. Indeed, the new denoise in Capture One works well. I like that it works "behind the scene"; that is, one can continue with adjustments while the denoise is running. DxO DeepPRIME XD denoise is still better in recovering fine detail, and it is faster by a factor of 0.6x. This can be important for wildlife photographers, I guess.
I can confirm that Capture One works exceedingly well with the DNG files generated by Photolab 9 (I use the new compressed format). In fact my workflow typically involves working side-by-side with the raw files and with the DNGs from Photolab 9, as sometimes I like the former and sometimes I like correcting the later. The reason for this is probably that for my camera and lenses (GFX100SII and GF20-35mm f/4 and GF500mm f/5.6) there are no profiles in Capture One other than the generic. Thus, sometimes I like the result of the lens corrections, sharpening, and denoising in Photolab 9 in the exported DNG file, when correcting these in Capture One.
I cannot comment on the Capture One’s healing tool for dust removal, as none of my cameras (Sony A1, OM-1 II, and GFX100S II) ever collected dust on their sensors - this is totally a non-issue to me.
Other corrections in Capture One work beautifully, allowing that kind of overall control that makes masking rarely needed, in my uses. I can say that learning the ins and outs of Capture One takes time. I am still learning after 12 months of using the program. Thus, some patience is required. Also reading an e-book about Capture One has been helpful to me (Photographer's guide to Capture One by Nils Wille Christofferson).
I am paying CAD 124.51 (about US $88) annually for Capture One, however this is edu discounted.



Jul 27, 2026 at 09:20 AM
shutterbug guy
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #12 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


All these people are buying subscriptions when the software used to be bought and paid for. My, how times have changed.


Jul 27, 2026 at 09:28 AM
gregfountain
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #13 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


shutterbug guy wrote:
All these people are buying subscriptions when the software used to be bought and paid for. My, how times have changed.


"You will own nothing and be happy." Maybe photo software is where it starts



Jul 27, 2026 at 09:40 AM
jstrawman
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #14 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


My requirements are modest. I dropped PS/LR after version 6.14. Luminar Neo works
well for my needs.



Jul 27, 2026 at 09:52 AM
gdanmitchell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #15 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


melcat wrote:
• It’s true that Capture One’s healing tool for dust removal isn’t fully automatic, like Photoshop’s, but IMO it’s better for that. Instead of having to heal multiple times with a smaller brush, second guessing what the tool will filll with, you can instead often drag the source area to somewhere more suitable. I don’t see anything archaic about the other tools in Capture One.


You can move the source area in ACR and LR, too.

- - - - -

gregfountain wrote:
I know you asked Jack, but for me, C1 imports a DNG file that looks a lot closer to what I saw when I took the shot. It's not an issue of LR/ACR/PS not being able to do the same, rather, it seems to give me a more accurate color and exposure starting point. I can't explain why. It may be an import setting in LR, but I checked/unchecked all the boxes google and YouTube told me to check to ensure it's the camera's settings that are applied to the imported file. I will say that if I open a
...Show more

I think what you are saying is that you are comfortable with the default settings you have in C1, and you re not comfortable with the default settings you choose in LR or ACR. I’ll agree that this might make C1 “better for you,” but once you find out which of the multitude of settings options and personal adjustments you prefer as your starting point in the Adobe software you just… save them and start that way every time.

Always good to have a choice.

I generally agree with that, and even though I’m not personally tempted by these alternatives to my Adobe workflow, I think that their existence is a useful reminder to Adobe that they aren’t the only game in town… and that if they slack off on features, quality of the apps, or pricing there will be others there ready to move in.

The initial release of LR, from what I understand, was a somewhat panicked Adobe reaction to just such a threat. Apple had developed their Aperture program to the point that it was becoming a very attractive alternative to the Photoshop system. It was a LR-like program (I understand that the development teams may have overlapped) that we extremely competent and sold at a much lower price point. Adobe saw this threat the very quickly rushed out early versions of LR that may or may not have been fully ready in order ot try to kill Aperture… and they succeeded, unfortunately.

I'll add that maybe I should simply drag and drop the files from the card into a folder, then open them directly into ACR. That seems to be what a lot of people do. Then LR become more of a file magement system vs the initial importer and editor. I'll try it.ot

I wondered a bit about your workflow. I usually don’t say much about LR based workflows, since I’m not really a LR guy. My workflow is Bridge/ACR/Photoshop. Here’s how it works for me.

1. I open Bridge and select “Import from Camera.” Bridge opens a little import app, and copies the raw files to folders on my computer. (I also allows me to rename the files in all sorts of useful ways as it imports, add copyright text, and do a few other useful things.)

2. Once the import finishes, a new window opens in Bridge that shows small views of the imported images along with some data about each file. (The displayed data can easily be customized.) Clicking an image (or a group of images) displays larger versions in the main window.

3. Double-clicking the small images opens them in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR). Some people still think of ACR as a “raw converter,” which it is. But it is much more than that these days. AS ACR has evolved, I now generally do the majority of my post-processing right in ACR, since I’m working on the raw files and because all edits are entirely non-destructive.

4. Once the file is adjusted to your taste, you click a button to open the file in Photoshop. I prefer to open it as a so-called “smart object.” This maintains a live connection back to ACR — you can double click the layer ina Photoshop and return to the ACR edit at any time and reedit the raw image itself, again non-destructively.

There’s a whole lot more to it than that. In fact, I am pretty sure that people who have not used the Bridge/ACR/Photoshop workflow are operating under some significant preconceptions about how this works that are no longer correct.

- - - - -

shutterbug guy wrote:
All these people are buying subscriptions when the software used to be bought and paid for. My, how times have changed.


If you were the sort who bought one version of the software (say Photoshop) and did not upgrade to successive versions, then the old model of purchasing an unlimited term licensed copy was less expensive. But that meant no upgrades and being stuck with a version from some years back, and eventually versions that were not compatible with raw files from newer cameras.

When the subscription model was first introduced I was extremely skeptical, to say the least. Actually, I was pretty upset. I thought the companies were ripping us off, that they would begin with a lowball teaser price and then jack the price up continuously after they had us hooked — and we’d end up paying more for subscription software than for license purchase software. (I also thought they would stop updating the programs as much, since they no longer had to claim that updates made it worthwhile to purchase the next new version.)

Basically, it turned out that I was completely wrong.

The did not jack up the subscription price. In fact, Adobe actually lowered the cost of the photographers’ apps from the original subscription cost, kept it at the same price for over a decade, and rolled together apps for free. (You now get Bridge, ACR, Photoshop, LR, and tablet versions of the software with your license.) If you made a smart decision to pay annually rather than monthly, the cost is STILL the same as it was!

And they continuously update the software, regularly adding useful new features.

Here’s the thing, though. At one point I still suspected that purchasing the comparable alternatives might be less expensive. So I looked at purchasing the mainstream alternatives and then buying the upgrades as they came out, and compared that to the cumulative cost of paying the monthly subscription. The result? The costs were basically the same.

Unless you are the sort of user who doesn’t care about new features and who sticks with one version an doesn’t upgrade… there was no savings at all from sticking with the purchase model.



Edited on Jul 27, 2026 at 10:29 AM · View previous versions



Jul 27, 2026 at 10:01 AM
RoamingScott
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


shutterbug guy wrote:
All these people are buying subscriptions when the software used to be bought and paid for. My, how times have changed.


Software, bought and paid for, that would stop receiving updates for new cameras and lenses. Yes, I remember. Dark times.



Jul 27, 2026 at 10:12 AM
Jack Flesher
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #17 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


gdanmitchell wrote:
Jack, I don’t use and have not used C1. Can you enlighten me? Specifically, What does it do in these areas (“color, light, sharpening, sizing and all other basic conversion controls”) that ACR and LR can’t do?

Thanks.


Dan, @ruthenium has shared much of what I would say. I will elaborate on a few items that I assume are more relevant to your uses, but first let me address NR. When I cancelled C1 January of this year, its AI NR was significantly behind ACR's, though I cannot speak to right now as I no longer have access. For me, non EDU I believe the subscription was $240/yr and why I decided to see if I could "live without it." So far I'm living, but definitely preferred having my older C1 to PS workflow.

Some specific things C1 did better than ACR/PS IMO. Sharpening, C1 still allows you to select radius and amount so you can more critically control the frequency and amount in specific areas you want sharpened, plus C1's engine just simply does a better job overall and ACR's global slider can't come close IMO -- but we'd need to compare side-by-side at 200% to really see it, so perhaps not as significant as I make it sound. Color, C1's base color profiles used to be dramatically better than Adobe's. I think Adobe has improved theirs significantly as of recent, but still I give a slight nod overall to C1 -- just to my eyes, better blues and greens in skies and foliage, but this is subtle and subjective so YMMV. C1 also has a tool called "Advanced Color Editor." This tool allows you to dropper a select color, adjust its width and feather or bleed, then adjust its specific H, S and L to desired effect. Not only that, you could photograph a McBeth CC chart under a specific lighting, and could save a dedicated ICC profile for your camera in that light. This tool was especially useful for images like fall foliage, where you could more carefully control saturation adjustments between individual colors. While ACR allows this to a certain degree, it isn't anywhere near as refined control as C1. Next, in this tool is also a "Skintone" option. That was hugely beneficial when shooting sheets for a given model under various lighting conditions; indoor, outdoor, studio, time of day, etc., making it one-button easy to keep their skin uniform under all lighting conditions without unduly altering the surrounding colors. Light, the main thing here I miss from C1 is its clarity adjustability. C1 gives you 4 different base clarity styles, from which you can adjust amounts and texture for each. This allows a much finer gradation control than I get with ACR. Curves and levels are basically identical to ACR, just no parametric capability in C1, but I didn't ever feel like I needed that, preferring more direct control. HDR adjustments in C1 are also virtually identical to ACR. Finally, C1 has a tool called "Match Look." This was hugely powerful for bulk image sets. In your case take the example of a series of images you take on landscape location one morning. You process out the first image to your taste, load it into the reference pane for Match-Look, and now just click each subsequent image and presto, they all "match" the look you processed the first one to, including color-balance, saturation, brightness, contrast and even vignette if you added one. In this the images in your set you wanted all looking similar, do match remarkably from a one-button edit step. (You can also pull an image off the web to use as your base -- so grab a film emulation example you like, and now you have it built in for future use.) C1 also allows a built-in watermark and/or overlay tool, so it's there in every image you process without any extra steps. You can also add tokens for exposure, camera, lens, date and time info if desired.

That's just a quick summary, there is more, but you get the idea. I will add as ruthenium indicated, learning C1 is non-trivial. It is a complex program with sometimes seemingly illogical implementation of tool use. Oh, one more thing. You can arrange and adjust C1's menus, look and layout so completely, my desktop probably wouldn't even resemble another users unless they copied my settings.

Oh, one more thing. C1 does not utilize your GPU nearly as effectively as ACR and relies more heavily on RAM, so why sometimes masks and adjustment layers lag a bit comparatively. Here, I find ACR/PS superior, so left things like dodging, burning, cloning and healing to PS.



Jul 27, 2026 at 10:36 AM
gregfountain
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #18 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


gdanmitchell wrote:
You can move the source area in ACR and LR, too.

- - - - -

I think what you are saying is that you are comfortable with the default settings you have in C1, and you re not comfortable with the default settings you choose in LR or ACR. I’ll agree that this might make C1 “better for you,” but once you find out which of the multitude of settings options and personal adjustments you prefer as your starting point in the Adobe software you just… save them and start that way every time.

I generally agree with that, and even
...Show more

Ah Bridge. Haven't used that for a long time. Actually the last time was in the pre-subscription era of Photoshop but I'm always looking to improve my processing flow. Generally, I import files directly into LR or C1, delete anything I don't find interesting, and go from there. Yup, there are settings in LR that can be selected and saved to create a profile to apply at import, but I have been hesitant because I have no idea. I've watch so-called experts on YouTube and selected what they suggested to ensure my Leica DNG's are Leica DNG's, but the struggle persists. I am sure I am missing something, so it's all me. With C1, I don't seem to have the same issue.

Maybe it's time for me to take a class



Jul 27, 2026 at 03:54 PM
pete478888
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #19 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


Jack Flesher wrote:
Oh, one more thing. C1 does not utilize your GPU nearly as effectively as ACR and relies more heavily on RAM, so why sometimes masks and adjustment layers lag a bit comparatively. Here, I find ACR/PS superior, so left things like dodging, burning, cloning and healing to PS.


I guess that's why its very fast with windows. LR on my machine with 32 GB RAM and Nvidia RTX 4050 is very sluggish, LR is built more for macs shared memory.

I like C1's level and curve tools. LR is missing luma curves.

I love C1's speed edit concept without dragging sliders. I wonder why Adobe and DXO never copied it.
Here is a info about speed edit for folks who never used it, or Capture One.
https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/articles/360015629178-Speed-Edit

C1 should get sky AI.

C1 should not grey out the sharpness falloff slider when they don't provide a lens profile. Their lens profiles never had the quality of DXO's lens profiles anyway. Recently they mostly rely on manufacturers profiles anyway. No support for Viltrox lenses. Hardly any for Nikon Z lenses.

I dislike C'1 soley focus on fashion, wedding and portrait photograpy industry, and neglecting other markets under their new management.



Jul 27, 2026 at 10:21 PM
Jack Flesher
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #20 · Is PS/LR still your default workflow?


pete478888 wrote:
I guess that's why its very fast with windows. LR on my machine with 32 GB RAM and Nvidia RTX 4050 is very sluggish, LR is built more for macs shared memory.

I like C1's level and curve tools. LR is missing luma curves.

I love C1's speed edit concept without dragging sliders. I wonder why Adobe and DXO never copied it.
Here is a info about speed edit for folks who never used it, or Capture One.
https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/articles/360015629178-Speed-Edit

C1 should get sky AI.

C1 should not grey out the sharpness falloff slider when they don't provide a lens profile. Their lens
...Show more

I don't use LR either so cannot comment, but ACR has luminosity curve available -- you have to click the "+" icon and get an interactive curve menu where luminosity is one of the options. Of course PS still includes it too in their curve tool.

Never used C1 on a win machine so cannot comment either, perhaps? But yes, C1 tended to lean into the fashion/commercial color accuracy and control crowd, probably because that's where the bulk of their backs were used (PhaseOne is the same umbrella company as CaptureOne). But that doesn't obviate it for other uses -- it's still incredibly powerful raw converter for any still imaging use.




Jul 27, 2026 at 10:46 PM
1       2              4       end






FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

1       2              4       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account