![]() ![]()
RawTherapee - I've only recently looked at it again for the first time in years. One thing I hate is that it makes a mess of your file system by creating a labyrinth of sub-folders with buddy files for every folder with images that it scans. It has a LOT of colour correction options, so pros love it. It ticks most of the boxes, although it doesn't come with a lot of look profiles, and I find its colours under artificial light a bit unconvincing. There are 30% off deals sometimes, but you have to be quick. #RAWTHERAPEE NIK COLLECTION UPGRADE#There is a major upgrade coming soon, supposedly.Ĭapture One Pro 7 - This a good alround program that matches LR, but it's expensive. #RAWTHERAPEE NIK COLLECTION ISO#I used to find it poor at high ISO but the later versions are better. No included lens correction profiles - you have to calculate your own. Some people love its colours, although I am not wild about them in all cases and you don't get a wide range of look profiles. A wedding photographer with thousands of images would go crazy trying to use this program. Photoninja - this has a cult following because of its ability to recover fine detail (esp on Fuji) so it's the converter of choice for landscape photographers, but I find its workflow slow and cumbersome. But don't expect fast development or fast camera updates. It's a good option if it supports your camera and you like the colours as it doesn't require you to use a database and it is fast. It has good workflow and good plugins but I don't like the colours any more and it has limited support from Corel and the NR in the latest version is poor. Can be a bit slow.Īftershot - I used to use this all the time but I don't use it much any more as it doesn't support Fuji X. The "Adobe LR look" is very common as it's so widely used. Fuji), good set of auto lens corrections. Lightroom - fast workflow, good high ISO, good local editing tools, average fine detail recovery & primitive sharpening, good highlight recovery, good film simulations, problematic for some cameras (e.g. There are one or two other converters meeting my requirements but I either found their image quality not quite good enough or I did not like the price or licensing scheme. I use DxO for 95% of my images, I use ASP when I need their layer capability for some local corrections. crw format)Īs I am retired time is not always an issue, so speed of the converter is not a high priority requirementįor me this set of requirements converged to DxO Optics Pro and AfterShot Professional.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |