C1 looked more likeable and more streamlined to me as LRC and did what I expected it to do. I then switched to LR "online" as the interface is better, but feature-wise it didn't cut the mustard for me. I use C1 because I found LRC's interface intimidating and fiddly when I first opened it. He uses LR as it comes with the inevitable Adobe subscription and never thought of switching to C1 as LRC does for him what he wants. The photographer who runs that for them uses C1.Īnother friend is a commercial director who does here and then assignments in stills photography and photographs privately for the family. Every other fortnight or so, they have to shoot models in front of a white fond. A friend of mine is running a fashion label. With C1 Sessions as opposed to LR Catalogue and the decade-old legacy of tethered shooting, initially, C1 caters to the studio folks who work with agencies. It's an easy answer there is no such thing as a dispassionate answer that will come to a satisfying conclusion, as both applications differ in many ways and cater to different markets/needs. I don't doubt that there are good things about both systems, but I'd welcome recommendations to any dispassionate/honest comparisons! At the moment I don't know if those would be important or not. I would expect that I would identify other issues that I currently take for granted in LR but would miss in C1. Things I'm interested in (apart from the better raw conversion) include plugins (I use a plugin that allows me to link LR collections to my website) portability of edited raws ability to distribute images for download by clients online AI editing tools/masking noise reduction and sharpening (I use Topaz now). Storing edits just by sessions would be a retrograde step (I now know this is not the only way to store edits in C1). One site said that the way image edits were stored with sessions (not files) was an improvement on "other applications" that stored the edits in the catalog actually LR keeping the edits in an XMP sidecar makes it easy for me to edit on my Macbook, and continue on my PC desktop. But when I look into other matters such as where edits are stored, ease of sharing of images (with edits) across the cloud, availability of plugins, it is difficult to get beyond strong partisans and misinformation (not in the LUF, I should emphasise). Like others I am intrigued by the regular comments about how good the C1 raw conversion is. I find it difficult to get unbiased answers to questions I have about Capture One vis-a-vs Lightroom. But these are the main reasons why I stay with C1. The toolset is of the highest quality and as snappy as one can wish on the M1. These profiles are Input-ICC files that are practically LUTs, including transform information. I have my own profile for the SL2-S and Delta 400. You only have to tweak the exposure and lift the shadows or recover highlights. With some knowledge, you can create your own camera profile that may include your desired contrasts and colour setting. On an M1 Mac, C1 fires up as quickly as Word or Outlook, just as any regular app. You can customise your toolset to your liking and save serval working spaces with a tailored toolset, eg B&W negative capture or colour images from a particular camera.Įxport supports tokens in endless configs allowing exports from Instagram to super-sized print tiffs in one go. The same works later in the editing process with Smart Adjustments, a kind of mini-preset that speeds up the editing process. Machine learning helps to create groups that are based on motives. I don't use C1, but I don't find LR slow - what is it about C1 that makes it quicker?Ĭulling is as fast as possible with a super-quick preview that allows for critical focus checking as you wade through your shots.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |