Bill Pierce
Well-known
One of the delights of black-and-white film photography is playing around with different developers in your darkroom. In addition to the standards Kodak D-76 and Ilford ID-11, there was fine grain Microdol-X, high acutance Rodinal and Microdol-X diluted 1:3, speed gaining Acufine and two-bath Diafine, D-23 for the mix it yourselfers and a host of other developers. Finding a magic developer didn’t make a huge difference in the overall beauty of your images, but it sure was fun.
At some point, however, you had to settle down and work with one developer if you were going to establish the fine tuned time and temperature and agitation requirements set by your shooting and printing goals. That’s not so different from working with today’s image processing programs for digital cameras. It’s certainly fun to play with different programs. And the basic settings of different programs do often provide different looks and, occasionally even different tools. And it is fun to process images with several programs and check out those differences.
But, like the different developers, there comes a time to settle down and really learn one program. The question is which one? Lightroom/Photoshop and Capture One are probably the two most popular, but there are a number of absolutely excellent other programs.
So the question comes - what program do you use and why? I’m a Lightroom/Photoshop user simply because I started with the first release of Photoshop and the Adobe programs are the ones I have the most experience with and the broadest understanding of the tools and features. (Also, I love Lighroom’s select subject feature because I can tone down those irrelevant backgrounds that seem to show up in a large number of my photographs.)
So, what do you use? And, obviously, most important, why did you choose it over other programs? (And, having chosen that program, do you have the courage and moral strength to not occasionally play with other programs? I don’t.)
At some point, however, you had to settle down and work with one developer if you were going to establish the fine tuned time and temperature and agitation requirements set by your shooting and printing goals. That’s not so different from working with today’s image processing programs for digital cameras. It’s certainly fun to play with different programs. And the basic settings of different programs do often provide different looks and, occasionally even different tools. And it is fun to process images with several programs and check out those differences.
But, like the different developers, there comes a time to settle down and really learn one program. The question is which one? Lightroom/Photoshop and Capture One are probably the two most popular, but there are a number of absolutely excellent other programs.
So the question comes - what program do you use and why? I’m a Lightroom/Photoshop user simply because I started with the first release of Photoshop and the Adobe programs are the ones I have the most experience with and the broadest understanding of the tools and features. (Also, I love Lighroom’s select subject feature because I can tone down those irrelevant backgrounds that seem to show up in a large number of my photographs.)
So, what do you use? And, obviously, most important, why did you choose it over other programs? (And, having chosen that program, do you have the courage and moral strength to not occasionally play with other programs? I don’t.)
Dogman
Mentor
Lightroom. Still using the last version before the subscription requirements (but that's likely going to change this coming year). It was fairly straightforward to learn in the beginning and more related to darkroom processing than other programs I've tried. As for other programs, yeah I've tried all the free trial and low priced ones and I still go back to Lightroom. Mainly because I'm comfortable with it and it still satisfies my needs.
(For Tri-X, I used Rodinal with sodium sulfite based on Bill's old article in, I think, Camera 35 magazine. But I got lazy and eventually settled on D76 or ID11 diluted 1:1 developers. It was great with HP5+ and FP4, the last films I used.)
(For Tri-X, I used Rodinal with sodium sulfite based on Bill's old article in, I think, Camera 35 magazine. But I got lazy and eventually settled on D76 or ID11 diluted 1:1 developers. It was great with HP5+ and FP4, the last films I used.)
pluton
Well-known
In The Beginning... When Aperture and Lightroom came out, I had a fairly new Power PC Mac. Therefore, I'd need a brand new Intel Mac to even try Aperture. Lightroom worked with my old-style Mac, so that decision was easy.
IMO Aperture was the only serious competition for Lightroom. Capture One never shook that "cobbled together from an unrelated program" feel for me.
I've tried most or all of the emerging raw converters as they come into existence, and have kept a few (Photo Ninja, Iridient, Capture One 2020) but they're needed only very rarely.
IMO Aperture was the only serious competition for Lightroom. Capture One never shook that "cobbled together from an unrelated program" feel for me.
I've tried most or all of the emerging raw converters as they come into existence, and have kept a few (Photo Ninja, Iridient, Capture One 2020) but they're needed only very rarely.
pluton
Well-known
^^^This is the most important thing about Lightroom, then and even today.
I was able to bumble my way through Lightroom 1, without reading a how-to guide, from importing raw files to making a print. That means it was/is logically designed/organized.
Evergreen States
Pierre Saget (they/them)
Capture One, originally due to it having the best RAW conversions for Fuji X-Trans files. But also because one needn't buy it on subscription basis.
Lightroom. It just made sense to me as a photographer and I love the cataloging tools. It has made life easier from a storage standpoint. I do not use anything else unless I have to.
RichC
Well-known
Another Capture One (C1) user. Designed by Phase One primarily for its digital back users (costing about $60,000), it's performance is head and shoulders above other raw converters - though getting the best out of it has a definite learning curve, and it deliberately has fewer features than Lightroom as it's aimed at professional photographers (e.g. HDR only arrived this December as most users consider it anathema so adding this function wasn't a priority).
This article broadly outlines why I mostly don't use Lightroom (I own it, and it has its uses!): https://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotogr...-who-uses-both
Some folk think of C1 as a younger competitor to Lightroom. It's the opposite. C1 has been around for nearly 30 years, arriving in 1993, whereas Lightroom is half that age!
This article broadly outlines why I mostly don't use Lightroom (I own it, and it has its uses!): https://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotogr...-who-uses-both
Some folk think of C1 as a younger competitor to Lightroom. It's the opposite. C1 has been around for nearly 30 years, arriving in 1993, whereas Lightroom is half that age!
mapgraphs
Established
Viewer 2, 3 and PSP, C1 Express, Raw Therepee, back to Viewer 2 which is no longer available. An old version of PSP on occasion...
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
Lightroom, best tool for dealing with 1000 images from a shoot or trip. Also for RAW from iPhone with auto-sync.
Photoshop, best tool for ultimate post-processing of one image.
Negative Lab pro for converting camera-scans.
Focus Magic for improving really good digital images to even sharper.
Topaz DeNoise AI for smoother skies, grain reduction, and sharpening in camera scans.
Portrait Pro, Landscape Pro for specific retouching. PTGui Pro for stitching for über-pixels.
Photoshop, best tool for ultimate post-processing of one image.
Negative Lab pro for converting camera-scans.
Focus Magic for improving really good digital images to even sharper.
Topaz DeNoise AI for smoother skies, grain reduction, and sharpening in camera scans.
Portrait Pro, Landscape Pro for specific retouching. PTGui Pro for stitching for über-pixels.
35photo
Well-known
Is Adobe actually going to go back and offer a stand alone non subscription version? Is that a rumor going around?
Dogman
Mentor
I would hope so but I doubt it. My remark about a change in the upcoming year was based on the fact that I'm two operating systems behind in my iMac and I'm going to have to upgrade it. That will probably wipe out my LR 6.14 and I'll be forced into subscribing.
Doug A
Established
Affinity Photo. No subscription, very affordable, excellent online tutorials, and it's a pixel editor like PS, not a parametric editor like LR. All of my photo editing involves digital camera negative scans. The first or second operation I do on every single file is Invert. It's a single click in AP. When I was still using LR I could either switch to PS Elements for that one operation or do it in Curves with LR and deal with counterintuitive backwards sliders. I use nested OSX folders to catalog my physical negatives and inkjet "contact sheets."
willie_901
Mentor
There are many digital developers because the market supports diverse solutions.
In the end this is a Canon or Nikon? type of argument. The answer is the same: just use what you prefer. If changes or problems occur in the future, switch platforms.
I have enjoyed commercial and personal success with Lightroom.
I chose LR because it saves me huge amounts of time and was flexible. In those cases where LR's features were insufficient, using plug-ins or even manually transferring images back and forth with stand-alone solutions was simple. I stayed with LR for three reasons. 1) Switching platforms would require a significant amount of time I'd rather spend doing something else. 2) LR's capabilities have steadily improved with each update and over time these updates offer significant advantages. 3) The price is reasonable in relationship to other costs associated with digital and, or analog photography.
The Adobe subscription issue is moot. Application subscriptions are common place. Millions of people use them. They are not going away. Stand-alone purchases that eventually require re-purchases for updates aren't going away either. Millions of people prefer these.
For images I didn't create with my camera or phone I occasionally use Pixelmater (OS X) or OS X Photos . This isolates these two categories of images.
I have zero interest in exploring LR alternates.
In the end this is a Canon or Nikon? type of argument. The answer is the same: just use what you prefer. If changes or problems occur in the future, switch platforms.
I have enjoyed commercial and personal success with Lightroom.
I chose LR because it saves me huge amounts of time and was flexible. In those cases where LR's features were insufficient, using plug-ins or even manually transferring images back and forth with stand-alone solutions was simple. I stayed with LR for three reasons. 1) Switching platforms would require a significant amount of time I'd rather spend doing something else. 2) LR's capabilities have steadily improved with each update and over time these updates offer significant advantages. 3) The price is reasonable in relationship to other costs associated with digital and, or analog photography.
The Adobe subscription issue is moot. Application subscriptions are common place. Millions of people use them. They are not going away. Stand-alone purchases that eventually require re-purchases for updates aren't going away either. Millions of people prefer these.
For images I didn't create with my camera or phone I occasionally use Pixelmater (OS X) or OS X Photos . This isolates these two categories of images.
I have zero interest in exploring LR alternates.
oldwino
Well-known
I just can’t get along with Lightroom, so I’ve been using DXO’s Photolab. The last two iterations have been very good.
35photo
Well-known
Might consider leaving your old iMac as an editing machine if it still works… and get something newer on the used market…for your other uses… if you can my 2 cents
AAlfano
Well-known
Why should they sell you the cow when the can get more money from you by charging you a monthly fee for the milk?
35photo
Well-known
100%! Options are good…. But if they don’t offer them people will eventually figure they getting scammed and go elsewhere… or just eat the cost… I said from day one the whole subscription thing was a money suck they weren’t going to get you’re moneys worth in the long run..
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I seem to be almost hopelessly bonded to Aperture. I have it on all three of my Apple computers and have purchased an extra copy for when I add my next iMac. I like Aperture's method of filing the photos, as well as the controls for developing them. I feel confident with Aperture. I tried LR, and got messed up with the means of storing/filing/retrieving. I lost my pictures and couldn't get them back. And I tied Capture One--I still have the CD for installing it--but could never make it do anything.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
oldwino, could you tell what difficulties you had with LR? I would consider trying it again, if I could feel confident with it. Maybe we could get some helpful replies from the others.
oldwino
Well-known
Mostly, I never felt comfortable with using it. The way things are structured just doesn’t seem to click with my brain. For some reason, I find DXO more intuitive.
LR as had the better tools most of the time, but the last upgrade from DXO is very good.