scalanc2 wrote: Robin Smith wrote:
I don't use it except for importing all my images into it prior to LR and for software updates. But it looks to me to be pretty good and useful, but I'm invested in LR so it gets little actual processing use from me.
Unfortunately LR is one of the worst for ORF files.
would you kindly explain you position please.
I am a longtime Lr/Ps user and Olympus/OMDS shooter. I have always dabbled/and more in depth than simple dabbling, with numerous other RAW converter/editing apps (both free and paid).
I occasionally run a file or two through Workspace if only to keep abreast of it on a whole.
In my opinion (and many, many, other's as well) OM Workspace was/is always very slow. Too slow for many users.
If a person's use for Workspace is to run a couple files through per month then that sounds perfect.
For some silly reason, simple things like highlight recovery (the most important of RAW converting utilities) was/is a convoluted/crudely implemented exercise in Workspace.
When Workspace implemented it's own Ai powered denoise I found that it did not work nearly as well as other's and was surprisingly very slow.
Since day one (circa 2003) of using Olympus' RAW converter/editing apps...I've noticed the app introduces artefacts, easily noticeable on, ie., smooth skin. It still did the last time I checked.
--Colour--
Workspace 'had' always produced the most pleasing colours in my opinion.
With Lr I had to use custom generated colour profiles in order to come close as possible to the more pleasing colours from Workspace.
*using/creating custom colour profiles is neither difficult nor time consuming which is why I stuck with Lr.
HOWEVER...It's been a good long while now that I haven't had to bother with custom colour profiles in Lr because Lr now has colour profiles that are just as good (*ON A WHOLE) as Workspace's
*what I mean is...there are some differences in some colours between Workspace files and Lr files BUT the differences do not indicate a bad thing for either app...each file is an equally nice, sometimes slightly different, rendition of colours.
to be perfectly honest...if the question is....yes sure bub...blah blah blah, but which file shows the more accurate colours.
in my opinion...Lr.
Workspace seems to (gently and nicely) boost saturation in some colours. Lr does not (depending on the chosen profile).
So, in my opinion;
Lr colours (profiles) are now as good as Workspace's.
Lr is much easier and quicker to use.
Lr does not introduce artefacts.
Lr's Denoise Ai is the best on the market...not the fastest (and neither is Workspace's) but well worth the weight times in my opinion.
*I feel like I'm missing some other stuff...
If you were to explain how Workplace has very recently changed, and much for the better, I could believe you and would be pleasantly surprised at the same time.
I'd no doubt run a few files through it to see for myself.
scalanc2 wrote: Robin Smith wrote:
I don't use it except for importing all my images into it prior to LR and for software updates. But it looks to me to be pretty good and useful, but I'm invested in LR so it gets little actual processing use from me.
Unfortunately LR is one of the worst for ORF files.
would you kindly explain you position please.
I am a longtime Lr/Ps user and Olympus/OMDS shooter. I have always dabbled/and more in depth than simple dabbling, with numerous other RAW converter/editing apps (both free and paid).
I occasionally run a file or two through Workspace if only to keep abreast of it on a whole.
In my opinion (and many, many, other's as well) OM Workspace was/is always very slow. Too slow for many users.
If a person's use for Workspace is to run a couple files through per month then that sounds perfect.
For some silly reason, simple things like highlight recovery (the most important of RAW converting utilities) was/is a convoluted/crudely implemented exercise in Workspace.
When Workspace implemented it's own Ai powered denoise I found that it did not work nearly as well as other's and was surprisingly very slow.
Since day one (circa 2003) of using Olympus' RAW converter/editing apps...I've noticed the app introduces artefacts, easily noticeable on, ie., smooth skin. It still did the last time I checked.
--Colour--
Workspace 'had' always produced the most pleasing colours in my opinion.
With Lr I had to use custom generated colour profiles in order to come close as possible to the more pleasing colours from Workspace.
*using/creating custom colour profiles is neither difficult nor time consuming which is why I stuck with Lr.
HOWEVER...It's been a good long while now that I haven't had to bother with custom colour profiles in Lr because Lr now has colour profiles that are just as good (*ON A WHOLE) as Workspace's
*what I mean is...there are some differences in some colours between Workspace files and Lr files BUT the differences do not indicate a bad thing for either app...each file is an equally nice, sometimes slightly different, rendition of colours.
to be perfectly honest...if the question is....yes sure bub...blah blah blah, but which file shows the more accurate colours.
in my opinion...Lr.
Workspace seems to (gently and nicely) boost saturation in some colours. Lr does not (depending on the chosen profile).
So, in my opinion;
Lr colours (profiles) are now as good as Workspace's.
Lr is much easier and quicker to use.
Lr does not introduce artefacts.
Lr's Denoise Ai is the best on the market...not the fastest (and neither is Workspace's) but well worth the weight times in my opinion.
*I feel like I'm missing some other stuff...
If you were to explain that Workplace has very recently changed, and much for the better, I could believe you and would be pleasantly surprised at the same time.
I'd no doubt run a few files through it to see for myself.
scalanc2 wrote: Robin Smith wrote:
I don't use it except for importing all my images into it prior to LR and for software updates. But it looks to me to be pretty good and useful, but I'm invested in LR so it gets little actual processing use from me.
Unfortunately LR is one of the worst for ORF files.
would you kindly explain you position please.
I am a longtime Lr/Ps user and Olympus/OMDS shooter. I have always dabbled/and more in depth than simple dabbling, with numerous other RAW converter/editing apps (both free and paid).
I occasionally run a file or two through Workspace if only to keep abreast of it on a whole.
In my opinion (and many, many, other's as well) OM Workspace was/is always very slow. Too slow for many users.
If a person's use for Workspace is to run a couple files through per month then that sounds perfect.
For some silly reason, simple things like highlight recovery (the most important of RAW converting utilities) was/is a convoluted/crudely implemented exercise in Workspace.
When Workspace implemented it's own Ai powered denoise I found that it did not work nearly as well as other's and was surprisingly very slow.
Since day one (circa 2003) of using Olympus' RAW converter/editing apps...I've noticed the app introduces artefacts, easily noticeable on, ie., smooth skin. It still did the last time I checked.
--Colour--
Workspace 'had' always produced the most pleasing colours in my opinion.
With Lr I had to use custom generated colour profiles in order to come close as possible to the more pleasing colours from Workspace.
*using/creating custom colour profiles is neither difficult nor time consuming which is why I stuck with Lr.
HOWEVER...It's been a good long while now that I haven't had to bother with custom colour profiles in Lr because Lr now has colour profiles that are just as good (*ON A WHOLE) as Workspace's
*what I mean is...there are some differences in some colours between Workspace files and Lr files BUT the differences do not indicate a bad thing for either app...each file is an equally nice, sometimes slightly different, rendition of colours.
to be perfectly honest...if the question is....yes sure bub...blah blah blah, but which file shows the more accurate colours.
in my opinion...Lr.
Workspace seems to (gently and nicely) boost saturation in some colours. Lr does not (depending on the chosen profile).
So, in my opinion;
Lr colours (profiles) are now as good as Workspace's.
Lr is much easier and quicker to use.
Lr does not introduce artefacts.
Lr's Denoise Ai is the best on the market...not the fastest (and neither is Workspace's) but well worth the weight times in my opinion),
*I feel like I'm missing some other stuff...
If you were to explain that Workplace has very recently changed, and much for the better, I could believe you and would be pleasantly surprised at the same time.
I'd no doubt run a few files through it to see for myself.
scalanc2 wrote: Robin Smith wrote:
I don't use it except for importing all my images into it prior to LR and for software updates. But it looks to me to be pretty good and useful, but I'm invested in LR so it gets little actual processing use from me.
Unfortunately LR is one of the worst for ORF files.
would you kindly explain you position please.
I am a longtime Lr/Ps user and Olympus/OMDS shooter. I have always dabbled/and more in depth than simple dabbling, with numerous other RAW converter/editing apps (both free and paid).
I occasionally run a file or two through Workspace if only to keep abreast of it on a whole.
In my opinion (and many, many, other's as well) OM Workspace was/is always very slow. Too slow for many users.
If a person's use for Workspace is to run a couple files through per month then that sounds perfect.
For some silly reason, simple things like highlight recovery (the most important of RAW converting utilities) was/is a convoluted/crudely implemented exercise in Workspace.
When Workspace implemented it's own Ai powered denoise I found that it did not work nearly as well as other's and was surprisingly very slow.
Since day one (circa 2003) of using Olympus' RAW converter/editing apps...I've noticed the app introduces artefacts, easily noticeable on, ie., smooth skin. It still did the last time I checked.
--Colour--
Workspace 'had' always produced the most pleasing colours in my opinion.
With Lr I had to use custom generated colour profiles in order to come close as possible to the more pleasing colours from Workspace.
*using/creating custom colour profiles is neither difficult nor time consuming which is why I stuck with Lr.
HOWEVER...It's been a good long while now that I haven't had to bother with custom colour profiles in Lr because Lr now has colour profiles that are just as good (*ON A WHOLE) as Workspace's
*what I mean is...there are some differences in some colours between Workspace files and Lr files BUT the differences do not indicate a bad thing for either app...each file is an equally nice rendition of colours.
to be perfectly honest...if the question is....yes sure bub...blah blah blah, but which file shows the more accurate colours.
in my opinion...Lr.
Workspace seems to (gently and nicely) boost saturation in some colours. Lr does not (depending on the chosen profile).
So, in my opinion;
Lr colours (profiles) are now as good as Workspace's.
Lr is much easier and quicker to use.
Lr does not introduce artefacts.
Lr's Denoise Ai is the best on the market...not the fastest (and neither is Workspace's) but well worth the weight times in my opinion),
*I feel like I'm missing some other stuff...
If you were to explain that Workplace has very recently changed, and much for the better, I could believe you and would be pleasantly surprised at the same time.
I'd no doubt run a few files through it to see for myself.
Sep 12, 2024 at 12:06 PM
Previous versions of Paul_100A's message #16639866 « Olympus OM Workspace »
