Lightroom vs Capture One

I just got a dutch Photo Mag that compared Lightroom 2 to Capture One 4. I was amazed at the conclusion Capture One won the contest, based upon image quality results. I immediately downloaded a 30 day trial and compared LR, PS cS3 and CO side by side on my 30inch HD cinema display. Yes I could see a difference, especially that CO is able to deliver a bit more contrast while still keeping dark areas visible. It's difficult to compare sharpening because values don't match (compared LR 100-0,8 to CO 170-0,8).
Anyone working with Capture One and willing to share experiences?
Thank you.

I did a lot of work on this a while ago - C1 is very popular in the Leica M8 world. Bottom line is that a lot of the perceived difference in color is really a different tone curve. An LR brightness setting of about 35 gives a similar tone curve to C1.
If you want dig into enormous detail around color differences between LR, Aperture and C1, go here:
http://chromasoft.blogspot.com/2008/01/lightroom-aperture-and-capture-one-mini_24.html
Note however that the work above was pre-DNG profiles, it applies to old ACR type rendering.
I also posted some settings on how to get C1-like colors from Lightroom here:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-post-processing-forum/76171-aperture.htm l#post793752

Similar Messages

Can an iPhoto library be shared with Lightroom and capture one?

Since Aperture is being replaced by … nothing, how can I access the same library with multiple editors?

Neither iPhoto, Lightroom nor Capture One are editors. They are all database driven Photo Managers with non-destructive processing. There is no rational workflow that would use more than one of these apps, any more than it would make sense to write a novel in three different word processors at the same time.
Pick the one that suits your needs - if you're coming from Aperture then forget iPhoto, it's much less capable and also being end-of-lifed. Pick between Lightroom and Capture One. Then google the options for migration from Aperture to the one you choose.

Capture One RAW Tiffs not previewing properly in Aperture

We just wrapped a big photoshoot and the photographer was using Capture One Pro. He gave me all of the raw files, but Capture creates RAW Tiffs. I imported them all to my Aperture, but now it's only showing me low-res jpeg previews. We switched computers mid-way and some of the previews are bigger than others, so I realize it's probably a setting in Capture One, but I want Aperture to show me the real file.
any suggestions?
thanks,
-A

euroskip wrote:
thanks, but i have to say, that's pretty weak on Apple's end. it was from a Phase One back and if apple wants to get into the pro game, they better get on board with what most pros are using at the moment.
thanks for the response, hopefully they fix that stat.
what's that lightroom? you wanna play? ok.
I agree that they need to add Phase One support, no question. They've got Leaf and Hasselblad. It's a huge oversight for them not to have Phase One.
That said, if this was a "big proshoot" as you say and the photographer gave you all of his raws why are you bouncing around between programs? You are not a digital tech or you'd already know what was up. If you're thinking that you can hit the ground running, fresh from an assignment, with no experience in any of these programs (Aperture, Lightroom, ACR, Capture One, etc.) then you've got a learning curve ahead of you.
It would probably be much more efficient for you to have the photographer process the raws for you (I don't know of any pro's who would hand off their raw files - it's just assuming too much on the client's end) or outsourcing to a digital tech who's knows how to work the files.
Jon Roemer
http://www.jonroemer.com/

Lightroom with Phase One files?

I was wondering if anyone is using LR with Phase One files?
I use a P45 Phase One back and really would prefer to use Lightroom (over Capture One), but I also need to use the lens correction files for the way I shoot (wide angle lenses / technical cameras etc.)..... I know LR can now do this, but it only works with dng files; everything I've read tells me that the C1 conversion to dng is not a good conversion.
Does anyone have a good workflow for this? I suppose I could always just make a few basic corrections in C1 and then export a 16 bit Tiff to worrk on in LR, but I'd rather work with raw files as much as possible?
Thanks for any suggestions,
Alan.

Yes, I agree, it is fairly simple (now that I've investigated further).
LR does a very neat job of this...... you can export the Capture One file (TIF) as a dng and set LR to automaticaly add the new dng to the same folder (and have it stacked), then you can add the flat field correction and that comes in stacked also, so now all three files are together.
One thing that seems a bit odd is that the Capture One TIF file (IIQL) is 55.9 Mb from my P45, but the Lightroom dng is 64.9Mb? Why is the dng larger?
Thanks,
Alan.

How does one import Capture One 7.0 Pro files into Lightroom 5.3?

I'm trying to import CR2 files from Capture One Pro 7.0 into Lightroom 5.3. I've done this before but this time around LR5 is not seeing the files yet I know they're there.

Ok, I poorly communicated. I realize that the CR2 files came from my Canon camera. I made an assumption that the issue had something to do with the files being in a Capture One folder. It didn't make sense to me why I could view the files in a finder window. I had too many images in subfolders to drag and drop or move them. They were organized in Capture One subfolders from the shoot.
I also realize that the files are no more in Capture One then they are in LR.
Right after I posted this I decided to quit LR and restart my computer.
Issue resolved.
No idea what the issue was but it's moot.
Thank you both for the reply.

Current Lightroom / Camera Raw Camera Profile for Sony ILCE-6000 inaccurate: green cast in shadows! Capture one better! Please fix it!

Hi folks from Adobe!
Please take note that the current Lightroom / Adobe Camera Raw Camera Profile for the Sony ILCE-6000 is very inaccurate: There is a serious green cast in the shadows!
Capture One Express for Sony (which is free by the way) renders a lot more correctly!
Please correct this, since I'd rather buy the coming LR6 because of keeping my established workflow instead of going the Capture One route.
A good example can be found in the dpreview forum "LR5 A6K shadow pulling, a mess! Adobe LR is broken? "
Or search for Philp Reeves 3 weeks with the Sony A6000 review "3 Wochen mit der a6000", where he compares it to the Sony A7, using both times Lightroom to push the shadows.
The Sony A7 is fine where earth looks like brown earth, the A6000 picture looks like grass instead.
Please fix this! This is a high volume camera frequently bought by enthusiast or as second body for FF photographers. That would be really great!

I am talking about the two raw files linked in the very last post of page 6 of the Reeves comparison thread, not JPGs or screenshots of unknown manipulation. In LR they both say f/11 and ISO 100 and have a similar tone, but one is shot at twice the shutter speed as the other. This side-by-side is using Adobe Factory Defaults for each image where the profile is Adobe Standard, the toning sliders are all 0, tone-curve linear, and the Sharpening and Color NR are 25:
However, when I look at the camera-embedded JPGs, side-by-side, the 1/80th image on the left is darker than the 1/40th image on the right, as expected given the reported shutter-speed difference:
And it is indeed the darker image that has more shadow problems, also as expected.
When I do manipulate the darker (a6000) raw file in LR, I do see that the shadows are greenish when brightened unlike most other cameras which usually show magenta, which is the combination of the blue and red sensors showing more noise because there are half-as-many photosites as compared to the green, so I am seeing what people are complaining about and would expect shadow noise to be purple not green, I'm more concerned that these two example raws aren't actually comparable due to apparent differences in exposure. It is also odd that the lens listed in LR is different than the lens listed in the filename, so either someone has mistakenly or deliberately renamed the file wrong or someone or something has changed the EXIF parameters that LR is reporting to be the same when they're really not.

Capture One Export opening Lightroom

Out of the blue, when I am exporting a file from Capture One to a folder, Lightroom is opening to import it. Capture One is set to "Open with None". Yesterday, it did't do that and I don't believe I changed anything in either application. Is there a setting I am missing in Lightroom? Any suggestions?
Thanks,

Where's the folder?
Is Lr set to "Show import dialog when a memory card is selected" in Edit > Preferences... > General?
(Can't see why this would cause what you describe, but it's where I'd start).

Capture One to Lightroom transition process

I have many images that I have processed in Capture One. Now I want to transition to Lightroom and import them into LR. Will I still retain the edits I have made to the RAW files in Capture One once that program is uninstalled from the computer? I am using Windows 7 as the OS.
Alice S

Keith,
Thank you for the added information. I may have misinterpreted what I saw; I was working late at night and was very tired. That apparent recognition of C1 Raw edits in Ltrm has not happened again.
So I will continue to pull out the Tiff and JPG Output files I’ve made in C1 over the last year, putting them all in one folder, with subject subfolders, for backup to an external hard drive just in case.
This is taking some time due to my poor filing system (also to be fixed) and the way some Output files are “buried” within layers of other folders within the Capture One folder.
Once this is complete, I intend to uninstall C1, as having two Raw editing programs is unnecessarily complicated for me, and I find Lightroom easier to understand.
What happens to the RAW files that were processed in C1 when it is uninstalled? Are they still there to be used by Ltrm? There are likely some good images in these batches that I haven’t gotten around to processing yet.

Anyway to share original files from Aperture with Capture One & Lightroom

I would like to use the 10,000 RAW files I have downloaded with Aperture and be able to use them in Capture One and play with Lightroom. I could export the Originals but then I would be doubling or even tripling the space needed to use these 3 programs. All three programs have different advantages and would like to be able to use all three. I'm sure Apple doesn't want anyone to use anything but Aperture but in the real world, Aperture can't do all the things I want to do.
I have found the originals in Aperture (show package contents) but each picture seems to be in a seperate folder and not altogether in a central folder.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Jim

Best is way is as Jeff says, use referenced files, then to open a raw file with Capture One simply select it in Aperture's browser, ctrl+click (right click) on it and 'show in finder'. From there drag it to Capture One and done.
To automatically import the result to Apertue you can use a hot folder where the processed file from Capture One should be saved to.
I also need to process sometimes raw images in Capture One, specially those with coloured tungsten lighting. Capture One's white balance is way much better than Aperture's.

Highlight banding problems NOT encountered in Capture One

I have noticed one issue with Lightroom since I started using it that may become a deal-breaker if I am not able to find a solution (or at least an explanation). The Issue is this:
In areas of intense, sharp highlights in my images (usually when a light source is in the frame) LR interprets these highlight areas in the Raw image much less smoothly than Capture One does. I have an example of each here (an exported JPEG that basically matches what I saw when looking at the Raw files):
Lightroom:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2375/1600778249_58791abf02_b.jpg
Capture One:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2106/1600776525_2e976c1b86_b.jpg
Notice the much better handling of the blue tonal gradations in the highlights in the upper left corner of the example from Capture One.
Is there anyone with enough knowledge of both LR and C1 to explain why the difference is so striking in the upper left corner? I've tried everything I can think of in LR (Recovery, adjusting the HSL sliders for blue and aqua, changing the contrast, exposure, etc...) and nothing works to solve the problem. Is this perhaps a color space issue? The image was shot in the sRGB color space, but the images were output in the Adobe 1998 space (this shouldn't matter and I assume the highlight problems would appear in an sRGB output as well). Or maybe it is just the way LR interprets Canon's Raw data? I find this all very confusing. Help!
Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I can get the image to look like the C1 version in LR? Or is this impossible?
The image was shot with a Canon 5D at ISO 800 without flash. I made only slight changes to the image in both LR and C1 to make the man's face less saturated. Other than that, this is the default handling of the Raw file from each program.
I'm running LR and C1 on a G5 iMac with 2GB of RAM, an ATI Radeon 9600 graphic's card, and a calibrated monitor.
Thank you to anyone who can shed some (smooth) light on this issue.

Okay, so the deal is, this area is completely blown out, even in the RAW data. You prefer the way CO handles this situation on this particular image, and I tend to agree. However, in most cases, I prefer how LR handles this by adding contrast to try to recover detail from blown areas. In this case, adding that contrast is causing a problem.
I can see no way to alter this particular image using LR/ACR to get what you want (a low-contrast diffuse transition from blown to unblown). If you have more of these, or if others have similar examples, that would be helpful.

Is there a way to import Raw files into LR catalog ..including..any edits performed in an external raw file editor such as Capture One?

Is there a way to import Raw files into LR catalog ..including..any edits performed in an external raw file editor such as Capture One?
I can import the Raw file successfully but cannot see any edits that were applied in Capture One. Im assuming no but just checking.

Your assumption is correct, Capture One, Lightroom and other third party raw processors have their own proprietary processes and profiles for rendering the raw data.
They do not make permanent changes to the raw data and store the changes to an .xmp file or to a catalog file like Lightroom.

Capture One comparison

I have been using Lightroom for the last couple of months, and recently tried an output comparison with C1.
I have taken one raw file, output from both programs and view the tiffs with photoshop.
At the settings I tried C1 was way better, less noise and sharper.
Would someone be able to suggest some Lightroom settings that would compare with my C1 settings?
I tried adjusting the noise reduction, and sharpening, but can't seem to get as good a result as Capture One.
Any suggestions?

I haven't used C1 since 3.6 (or.7) At that time I switched to RSP. I did a lot of very exhaustive testing for detail extraction. I was still shooting a D30 (professionally) and needed every bit of detail the converter could squeeze out!
At that time RSP was neck and neck with C1. One was better in some areas while the other was better in others. But it was so close that I made the complete switch to RSP. I have not used C1 for years now. I am still due my upgrade, so once C1 4.0 is officially released I will download it and make new comparisons.
That said, when LR came out I did test against RSP. (disclaimer--I NEVER used ACRE prior to LR because the conversions were not on the same level as the aforementioned 2) When I compared RSP to LR I had similar findings to the C1-RSP testing I had done. Neck and Neck, both better in different area's. And Lr has continued to get better.
I look forward to testing C1 4.0. For general Day to Day work I like to stick to one converter/workflow. But for personal images that will be printed and possibly sold as art I like to take my time with the file and use the best tool for THAT image. So my preference is always to have more than one converter at my disposal.
Just my thoughts here

Teathered Capture Module or Capture One Raw Data Importer

In many commerical professional studios people like to use Capture One Pro in a teathered environment because it works with most cameras, its got an interface that is productive as images stream in (ie- updating white balance, checking focus, checking color number exposure thresholds, overlaying comps) and it's much faster at loading previews than capturing into a hot folder situation like Lightroom has it now. All in all, Capture One is better for live capture teathered environments.
There is a giant problem with capture one, that is that the raw image data created through adjustments in capture one is propietary to capture one and can't be imported into Lightroom for archiving without losing that valuable data. Therefore, i'm either requesting that you either create a Capture Module that is as quick, effiecent and has all the productive tools that capture one has so that we can ditch the glitchy program or create a way to import raw files from capture one to lightroom and maintain the same image appearance.

I agree, C1 pro 5 has made leaps and bounds in the last few years from 3.7. I like it as a capture program but not as a method for organizing and archiving my images. I wish the two could communicate better in a fashion that doesn't require a work around. It's a real workflow issue.

NEF vs. DNG : Different renderings in Capture One 4

I've just observed that -- when I convert a D200 NEF > DNG, and then import both to Capture One 4, the renderings are slightly different ... both of them with default settings.
I select ICC profiles for NEF > D200 Generic , DNG > Neutral.
DNG is darker than NEF.... not uniformly daker, but just some parts... like different curves applied.
Same Kelvin values (WB) applied to both files give different results -- DNG needs lower Kelvins degrees to look like the NEF.
NEF Reds are orang-ish in DNG. DNG yellows are orang-ish in NEF.
Something I'm not sure how to describe, but it looks like differences in color brilliance between the two files.
If I select ICC profile for DNG > D200 Generic , then the same applies, only that now DNG looks more saturated than NEF.
For reference, Lightroom renders both files exactly identical.
So ... is this something related only to how C1 renders both files (C1 not knowing how to manipulate a DNG), or is it related to the DNG conversion itself (adobe playing god with the raw data) ?

Honestly, I can infer from your posts by SIMPLE READING only that you are confused and speculating a lot.
I try to put the results in cleartext:
1. C1 creates result A from the native raw file.
2. C1 creates result B from the DNG file converted from the raw. B is different from A.
3. C1 created result C from the modified DNG file. C is different from A AND from B.
If the above is right, then we can say, that
a. C1 CAN work with the pure DNG data, which includes the color conversion Adobe's way. The modified DNG differs from the original DNG in that the camera name (maker and model) has been changed, AND the MakerNote tag has been made unaccessible, and this file has been accepted by C1.
This is in contrast to some other raw processors, which accept a DNG file only if they know the camera's characteristics; see the thread "Is DNG a universal raw format?" down below.
b. C1 DOES take some information from MakerNote if available, otherwise these two version would yield the same result.
The originating question was, why the "native" and DNG result are different. Based on the above test, I can not answer it with certainty, it is not clear, what C1 uses from MakerNote.
Now, to the question of "DNG - standard or not".
The DNG specification tries to put many aspects of a raw image in a uniform shape. However, there are two distinct areas posing problems:
1. Camera specific options. The Exif specification provides for a way of recording sharpness, contrast, saturation and white balance, but the specification has been created very short-sightedly and became useless. Other options, like Picture Style has not been envisioned at all. Such options are coming in series, the DNG specification does not cover them.
These options are available in the native raw file as well as in DNG, but programs have to make extra gymnastics to extract them from DNG; NOT DNG is to blame in this point.
Some raw processor go the extra way, others don't. ACR does not make anything, which can not be seen in DNG format as well, i.e. it does not support these options.
2. The other problem area is the color transformation. There is *no* generally accepted way to describe the sensors' behaviour. Most raw processors adopted camera and model specific solutions; Adobe defined a way in DNG, which is an *approximation*. Others don't share the enthusiasm, with some justification. It is not by chance, that camera makers' own converters give the best colors of their cameras.
So, a raw processor can process a DNG file using the hard-coded knowledge of the sensor - like Aperture does - or going ACR's way of color transformation.
C1 may take some setting(s) from the native raw file, while not doing so with a DNG, even if the data is available (but differently). This may be the reason for the difference between the results of the NEF and DNG conversion.
Note, that it is not necessary to access the MakerNote for identifying the camera.

Request: Capture One Style Teathering Module

In many commerical professional studios people like to use Capture One Pro in a teathered environment because it works with most cameras, its got an interface that is productive as images stream in (ie- updating white balance, checking focus, checking color number exposure thresholds, overlaying comps) and it's much faster at loading previews than capturing into a hot folder situation like Lightroom has it now. All in all, Capture One is better for live capture teathered environments.
There is a giant problem with capture one, that is that the raw image data created through adjustments in capture one is propietary to capture one and can't be imported into Lightroom for archiving without losing that valuable data. Therefore, i'm either requesting that you either create a Capture Module that is as quick, effiecent and has all the productive tools that capture one has so that we can ditch the glitchy program or create a way to import raw files from capture one to lightroom and maintain the same image appearance.

There is a feature request forum
here

Lightroom vs Capture One

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for