jerrysdean43
Leading Member
It is somewhat similar to LR, I like it as well, a 30 day trial is available, give it a try.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
True Lightroom replacement
- Thread starter MallardDuck
- Start date
Yes, Rawtherapee is a choice for people who want a raw photo processor and non-destructive editor, but it does not have a simple DAM so is not the same as all the others I mentioned.
ISOhappy
Well-known member
- Messages
- 152
- Reaction score
- 35
pwmoree
Leading Member
Just today and with positive results.
Exposure X3 seems a lot easier to use compared to C1.
Have not made the definitive choice yet
Marcin 3M
Senior Member
Keep in mind, that Affinity Photo shares file format with Affinity Designer, and it is quite easy to switch between apps (You can switch to Designer while working with Photo and vice versa), giving as a result quite competent tool even when working with text (comparable to photoshop alone, in some features better, in some weaker). Considering that these two apps costs about $100, its very interesting set of tools.
ISOhappy
Well-known member
- Messages
- 152
- Reaction score
- 35
X3 looks great, but I can't get the sliders to move by using my mouse wheel. If that's not possible, then guess this one is crossed off my list.
I was looking at the Darktable 2.2 manual and it says that it can import some of the editing done in Lightroom:
At present, darktable is able to deal with the following metadata of Lightroom generated sidecar files during the import phase:
• tags and hierarchical tags
• color labels
• ratings
• GPS information
In addition, darktable has been designed to help migrate some image operations from specific other applications. The aim is not to make darktable a drop-in replacement for any other software; it's just meant to help you recover part of the work you have invested into your image in case you migrate to darktable. It is very important to understand that this import process will never give identical results. The underlying development engines are very different from application to application, and additionally depend a lot on the specific image. In some cases, it will probably be close, and in some cases, the development will need manual adjustment in darktable.
The migration happens automatically when entering the darkroom view, provided that a corresponding XMP sidecar is found.
At present, darktable is able to deal with the following development steps from Lightroom-generated XMP files (with the corresponding darktable module in parentheses):
• crop and rotate (crop and rotate)
• black level (exposure)
• exposure (exposure)
• vignette (vignette)
• clarity (local contrast)
• tone curve (tone curve)
• HSL (color zones)
• split toning (split toning)
• grain (grain)
• spot removal (spot removal)
JudyN
Senior Member
That might be more development adjustments than Capture One. Black level and exposure are both translated to "exposure" in Darktable. Lots of stuff left out in this area because in LR you have black, white, highlights, shadows. And if you use the adjustment brush, for example, you won't get out what was in LR. Then there are graduated and radial filters... And tone curve. And..... and...
For me it's clear I have to "export" all files with edits in LR. But I'm staying with LR for a while.
And the list of metadata seems short. There are standards for metadata and all of it is (or could be) in the XMP file or the file itself. It may not be important to most people...
I think it's unrealistic to expect a non-Adobe developer to allow you a complete retention of your LR edits. The whole LR processing pipeline would have to be copied by the developer, together with the camera profiles, embedded tone curves, baseline exposure shifts, hue twists, demosaicking algorithm, etc. to give you the same results (these things happen in LR without any user intervention) -- I'm not sure it would be legal to make such a LR clone. I've tested 15 raw converters and am in the position to say that darktable is the best out of the bunch to retain some basic processing done in LR, but the output will not ever look the same. Darktable ships with its own matrix camera profiles and accepts custom-made ICC profiles if you want, and they are not meant to re-create the Adobe Standard dcp, etc. You are responsible for the creation of the base curve, unlike in LR, which forces you to use the one and only true base curve (unless you create your own dcp profile). Then there are proprietary algorithms for Highlights/Shadows sliders in LR, which do not just allow you a simple shift of those tonal areas, but also have an edge-detection mechanism built-in. The sharpening Detail slider, which has a proprietary mixture of USM and deconvolution sharpening. Etc. etc.
What do you miss from the list? Rating is there, labels are there, (hierarchical) tags are retained, and so is the geolocation -- again, darktable seems to support the most, similarly to the expensive Capture One. The xmp-embedded processing instructions are re-created as well, as far as the darktable architecture and processing pipeline allow.
_vlad
Senior Member
Being in the same boat I tried it yesterday. It was very fast (pleasant surprise) plenty of usefull features (some extrenal plugins free of charge) - and the price was 40USD (as for upgrader from LR). It is tempting - however I have had some very sad days using corel in Graphic so I am hesitating. Some insight on Aftershot?
wjgo
Forum Enthusiast
The new Luminar will have DAM support. And there will be some way to port over your existing LR presets. A different link says that it will also be able to work with your existing LR library, it was not specific if it could import though or just what the details were. It might be something to wait to test out before you buy anything new.
There is a free Windows Beta version available. The makers of this (Macphun) also make Aurora HDR.
There is a free Windows Beta version available. The makers of this (Macphun) also make Aurora HDR.
Loading…
macphun.com
Last edited:
JudyN
Senior Member
I knew choosing a cataloging program (database) was risky because how do you get out of it with your information. Well, we can get out with our information but if we were stupid enough to use the Develop module, we may be in trouble. I have way too many photos to go over them one by one to see if there is a way to automatically export them all (into the same folder of course). I thought I ran across such an option in Capture One reviews but when I went back to find it I could not find it.
To me losing PS is no problem at all compared to losing LR. There are many editing tools. Very few good cataloging tools. Plus the problem mentioned above of getting my information out of LR.
As far as legality is concerned, the PSD format is apparently available to anyone. So when they invented their develop procedures in LR, they were going a proprietary step that just didn't sink in to me as dangerous. Maybe in the back of my mind, but, well, like most people, I trusted Adobe.
JudyN
Senior Member
I don't trust Corel either. They like to buy products and then seem to just collect money from them until no one wants to use them any more. I may be exaggerating... I think the strangle-hold of Photoshop is partly because Corel bought two major image editing software packages and then didn't continue to make them competitive.
I don't see the upgrade from LR for Aftershot. I remember they had them when Adobe first went rental but I can't find it on their site now. I'm not moving now, for now I'm just curious as to action on the part of competitors.
I believe Adobe does charge a licensing fee foruse of the PSD file format. DNG on the other hand is available to anyone.
Algorithms for Raw converters always differ, are proprietary and often don't translate well from one to another. If you started with one app 5 years ago and have a catalog of 50.000 images it'll always be dificult to switch, no matter the company you bought it from.
HatWearingFool
Senior Member
_vlad
Senior Member
JudyN
Senior Member
I was thinking more of their image editing tools they purchased. They bought both PSP and Photo Impact. I used Photo Impact for several years before Corel purchased it from Ulead because it had I thought tools more suited to image editing the way I did it. Photoshop later got those features and I went back to PS. PSP was very popular at one point. The remaining rather popular program that Corel didn't buy is ACDSee.
Well, and their vector tool Corel Draw. It was once very popular with graphic designers. I even have an old old copy.
My apologies, you're right. Just watched last WE and there are LR or PS CC available on these "file sharing" websites. I didn't try these but comments point out complexity of procedures to bypass or crack Adobe's protections. At least they tried.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum