What you DON'T know about RAW image files :: Lightroom vs Capture One

[@donclose2028]

Thank you - very interesting - I'm 78 and just getting back into photography.

[@elliotstern1746]

I own most raw processors and subscribe to Capture One and Adobe Lightroom. You are correct in regards to files that I shot when digital cameras were just taking their first breaths. I worked for Nikon at that time and I had lots of files from the Nikon D100. I can say for sure that the processing of these files in todays software is quite different, better, than when I processed them years ago. It does not matter what cameras you were using and I have had the good fortune to shoot Olympus, Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Pentax and Leica so I have an extensive library to pull from for all those different cameras. Out of all the post processing software for raw files that I have had and still have and have updated I can say that the files are better. Out of all the software I have which includes, Adobe, Capture One, Polarr, Affinity, Picktorial, Luminar, I can personally say they all do an excellent job. What is interesting and I think you make note of this, is that each software package renders images slightly different from each other. So they look at the data differently. In the end, at least on my Macs, Capture One 11.0 seems to be the most refined, cleanest, and most accurate out of all the packages I have available to me. That said it is not necessarily the most creative in regards to features. Luminar would take the gold medals for that. My newest challenge is the IPad Pro 10.5 inch. I have several software packages for that device and just like on the Mac, they all render the raw images just a tiny bit different from each other. It is quite a journey and I find myself constantly learning but never finish.

[@dalewatkins9889]

I unfortunately don't have the time to check such differences, so I very much appreciate your comments. I'm also not one to 'rent' software, which has stopped me from upgrading my Adobe products, so I'm stuck with Lightroom6 basically, and Photoshop elements, but I am trying to stick to one product now, which are the Skylum products, Aurora & Luminar 4. It seems if you can get good at one software and it's challenges, it might be best to stick to it, so you constantly get better upon understanding the complexities. In saying that, I've always wondered if I should dip my toe into Capture One with my Nikon....so we'll see, after doing some more research on the topics.

[@Antsanc82]

Im a recording and mixing engineer and I just got into photography. I can totally appreciate all the tech talk because it’s kind of similar to science of acoustic and frequency analysis. You were talking a different dialect but I’m understanding the foundational principals. Your explanation actually helped me understand a little better. Thanks man!

[@dsfrye01]

Excellent synopsis of the two softwares. I switched to C1 about 5 years ago. I did a similar test, but took it a step further with printing. I processed both images to taste in each software. I then printed each image using the same icc profile. The results were dramatic with C1 winning by a landslide. Haven’t looked back since.

[@DanBullmanPhotography]

I switched to Capture One about two years ago and absolutely love it. There's a free version available for Sony camera users also :)

[@Jesusvanegas94]

what's missing in that version?

[@DanBullmanPhotography]

Capture One Express for Sony has most of the features. There's some limitations on installing presets and a few other features that are locked down. But hey it's free and does a great job :) It's a good way to test the waters with Capture One. I eventually upgraded to Capture One Pro for Sony for like $60. Totally worth it :D

[@Jesusvanegas94]

Really? I thought it was only a 30 days trial

[@GMLSX]

You can even remote controll the focus, is that right?

[@ugrandolini]

The problem at the moment is that it’s not compatible with OSX Mojave, they dont know when it will be and, from past experience, you will need to buy the upgrade to be able to use it on the latest OSX... so if you are on Mojave you need to wait....

[@sjoerdhoogeland9149]

That's why I use "Raw Therapee" (no, not misspelled). It has a ton of algorithms (and a steep learning curve) to fine tune demosaicing, color, denoising, sharpening. When I developed my old Nikon D70 RAW files I was amazed how much detail and color-tones I could retrieve from the 6MP RAW files. I rendered all my old RAW-files with RT and even started using my old D70 again.

[@lylestavast7652]

I shoot with a d70, d700 and d750. I just redid a file from 2004 of my dad (rip) shot in 2007 with today's LR CC desktop version and exported a jpg of it. I had the old jpg - SO much better detail in hair, edges of metal frame glasses and tone coloration... I spent 2 days looking at other key files, updating their "version" to "4" and applying new camera profiles and such... the software is much, much better... (RT is a good tool btw).

[@nicholassmith7723]

Just coming across this video now, because I keep getting that slight green/yellow cast on my Sony files with Lightroom. I'm constantly trying to work around it. This was extremely informative and I genuinely appreciate the non-biased conversational approach you took to this topic. Thank you

[@bigdhav]

Capture One unlocks your cameras hidden deeper pixels.

[@jimixjimix5097]

The demosaic part was just mind-blowing! Tank you for that, as it was an off-topic info and yet IMHO it turned out to be THE most important piece of info we all got here! Amazing! (I'm new to your channel, subscribed it as it is definitely worth it - you're doing a great job!)

[@readcastor2977]

I love your passion when talking about this! I could feel it.

[@kyungcolor]

Loved how informative this is! I've been using C1 for a few years now and when asked "why do you like C1", I always explained in extremely vague ways--"oh, the colors are nicer" or "I like the workflow and how it sits in between Lightroom and Photoshop in terms of things it can do". Now it's much clearer since I know the technical aspects behind it!

[@LLFA]

I am a computer engineer and photographer, and your explanation of software interpretation and our photos being in a constant state of development as software improves makes perfect sense. I hadn't thought about different software companies interpreting the RAW files in different ways ("zero" in one software package is not "zero" in another). This makes me more willing to try different editors to see what works best for me. It's also exciting to think some of my earlier photos can be markedly improved simply by updating the profile. I have updated profiles just as a matter of course in the software I use, but I haven't looked closely at how that might improve the image. Now I'll pay closer attention.

[@Mr-vr6lh]

As RAW software has improved, the quality of older cameras have gotten better. I looked at Kodak DSC-560 files from 2000. Back then ISO 200 was noisy using Adobe and Kodak software of that era. But today that same RAW file can be rendered with greater detail and with virtually no noise. Even interpolating up from 6mp to 11 yields a surprisingly detailed file

[@justindutcher89]

Thanks for the explanation! I recently switched to Capture One and tend to like the way it renders my RAW files better than Lightroom.

[@WizardOfCheese]

2:00 The main difference here is that they use different colour profiles by default, not sure why this dude didn't bother to check, but yeah, now you know.

[@thrashmedia]

How about the curve that Capture One applies in the Base Characteristics tool -- and the "Auto" vs. "Linear Response" options. What are the pros and cons of each?

[@JAS4BG]

I shoot theatre primarily, and I really dislike the CO film curve. I think it is too aggressive on highlights which are already accentuated anyway because of theatre lighting. I've had some success with Linear Response editing, but only after spending lots of time with it.

[@thedelortas]

Love the way you explained all of this ❤️

[@michaeloeser]

I switched from LR to Capture One about two years ago for various reasons. 1. much better when it comes to tethering 2. session workflow 3. layered edits 4. advanced color editor Plus I have the feeling it has the capability to get more out of my RAW files especially when it comes to save blown out highlights and dark shadows.

[@GrahamAtDesk]

You're an absolute boon to the photography community Ted. Thank you.

[@michael007ish]

I have given up on lightroom for a while now. Even the default noise reduction is much more appealing in Capture One. I open my image make a small adjustment if necessary and move on. I love that I spent the time to get familiar with C1. Well worth it.

[@thanosthefilmmaker8688]

30 + years and still learning photography, and this was a very welcome lesson. Thank you so much this was a revelation! I've now chosen a new RAW processor that has changed my workflow immensely. (Hint: It's Capture One)

[@cliffordpickett7360]

Great video. I'm glad you were able to clarify for people that all these NDE's are simply interpreting the images and it's an important point to grasp that these "interpretations" improve over time, ultimately resulting in improved image quality. What I'm not understanding though is why it's such a big deal. This only occurs when shooting RAW first of all, a point that many people may have overseen, but when shooting RAW, the point is to be able to adjust the image according to taste. The default "interpretation" is kind of a moot point. If you like the look of capture one's more saturated and contrasty look you can simply set that as your new default in LR. The more interesting question, to me, is if there are color and other image quality subtleties (highlight recovery/shadow detail) that actually do differ between the programs, one's that cannot be corrected for by simply playing around with a couple sliders. Thanks again for the informative video.

[@Apprendre-Photo]

THIS. EXACTLY. I always play a little bit with the sliders, so I don't mind any default look, as I don't keep it anyway.

[@LLFA]

That's a great question. I'd like to know the answer to that.

[@FrankNeulichedl]

In short - YES. Every Raw-Converter has his own formula and this influences not only the mood but how you can edit the picture. Just try for yourself. In Lightroom set any raw image to Version 2010 and you will see that the sliders in the Basic Panel will change --- even the name, from Highlight and Shadow to Recovery and Fill Light - and the results are dramatic.

[@jwinte]

Fascinating and thought provoking video. Especially near the end when talking about going back to older photographs and revisiting them with newer software. Thanks Ted for your easy to understand explanation of what can be complex technical elements. Good job! Keep up the great work.

[@rydka]

Both solutions are great. I appreciate your comment about revisiting older RAW files. As time goes on, our editing knowledge and software improves. It's a great time to be shooting RAW.

[@jamesgerboc]

Can you speak to cataloging and DAM if you were to change raw editors? How do you transfer the metadata between catalogs, ie Lightroom, CapOne, ON1, etc. ?

[@Queen_xo]

I just ordered a t-shirt for myself. I've been watching your videos for seven years now. Thank you for the inspiration, information, and community. I'll wear the T with pride.

[@daletaylor2433]

Thanks Ted, for bringing this up. I realize that we all have to know about this stuff, but a lot of us are photographers first, not software engineers, and just being aware of these issues is important to us.

[@jamilgotcher5456]

I just saw these camera calibrations and the previous versions while using Adobe Camera Raw the other day.

[@Cesar-ht5uz]

Awesome video! the thing I really want to know is if all the info is the same.. Considering that, in this case Capture One and Lr, have different Zero values at WB or exposure, whatever, but can I recover shadows in the same way? highlights, punch the reds, etc, etc..?

[@rodspov1915]

Great comparison, the difference is clear. I would love to see how prints from both differ. Will download the demo and test C1.

[@TwaynePereira]

Ted! This was wonderful and you've given me much to think about. I love how you expanded it to the bigger picture with previous work ! Cheers from Canada

[@galactic_kiwi]

I'm trying Capture One Pro at the moment and I found an unexpected feature which removes almost all hot pixels, which is very useful for me as an astrophotographer and does a lot of low light landscapes using very long exposures. I also think the colours look better, although I feel like my Lightroom preset had more nebulosity showing through in the Milky Way. I will have to tweak the settings in Capture One Pro and see if I can get something nicer. I think I prefer the look of clarity in Lightroom, but it can always be applied in Photoshop through the Camera Raw filter.

[@Crazy41ism]

Hello Ted, I love to see that you bring up this topic. Capture One is very underrated in my opinion. I switched my workflow to their software and I am very happy with the results from my Nikon camera. I much prefer phase one's approach to managing color and the fact they have separate profiles for cameras as with lightroom it uses one general. Also in C1 you work in that dedicated camera color space and you are even able to export within this space, so you can basically preserve all possible colors your camera can capture in output tiff file for instance.

[@scueva]

Ted, Love the T-shirt ordered two for support! Keep doing what your doing....I like the conversation of RAW but more importantly talk about taking OLD RAW files and redo them in the latest versions of CO or LR and then PRINT them. You would love it....the options you have are yummy. This is why I store in RAW. The future might be brighter.

[@bricedikoume5632]

Great Video Ted! I tried both software when I started photography back in 2015 and I found out as well that images looks differently in both not only in Camera Calibration, but also in Sharpness and Clarity. I have never been able to replicate the exact look from Capture One to Lightroom as the reading in images is quite distinct in both softwares. Elaborating only on Camera Calibration, in Adobe it is based on Adobe standard color profiles, while in Capture One it is based on Camera Manufacturers color profiles. At this point, i believe it is safe to assume that calibration boards used by Adobe engineers and Camera Manufacturer engineers at Sony, Nikon, Canon and others are different since Capture One always displays a look closer to the image In-Camera (by using calibration boards from camera manufacturers) than the image displayed by Lightroom when compared to the In-Camera version (by using calibration which do not necesarily match camera manufacturers color profiles).

[@polintr]

Thanks, Ted. I find these types of videos more valuable than the vlogs. I’m glad to know there are actually viable replacements for Lightroom.

[@jamesurzykowski4918]

I just received my T-Shirt and I love it. I will wear it to my next photo club meeting. I hope the shirts help you run your program. It will be fun to see how many shirts I see in my travels. Thanks again Ted for promoting the Art of Photography.

[@Americanomondays]

Such a timely video man - I've been a hardcore Lightroom user since day 1 - but recently - I reluctantly made the switch to Capture One after having LR crash on me this past summer on a shoot. I was tethering in - client standing there and LR crashed 3 times within 15 minutes. Was not good. Thankfully, my 1st assist was capture one certified so we switched to that for the rest of the shoot. As far as tethering - hands down Capture One is superior - but I still prefer the UI of LR - and just this past week - had a client ask me why my images were so yellow/red and contrasty after processing them in Capture One - so yeah, you're video is on the mark. Thanks for taking the time on this man, Jeff.

[@nb1223]

Different software will use different code to process the same image (bits). Think of it as two construction companies trying to build the same structure. The formulas they use in their blueprints will be slightly different, but will produce near identical results.

[@johnneiberger]

The Capture One results are even better since this video was made since they now have ProStandard profiles that are even more accurate. They adjust for the fact that RGB processing typically gets more red in the shadows and more yellow in the highlights. You get better colors, smoother transitions, and better skin tones with the ProStandard profiles in C1. Interestingly, in the pumpkin comparison, the Lightroom version did have better color representation, whereas the C1 version was too red in the shadows and too yellow in the highlights. The Lr version was a smoother orange. Regardless, for my work with a Canon R5, Capture One is vastly better than what I was getting in Lr.

[@bullsharkreef]

In CaptureOne I just cannot recover the amount of details in the highlight that I can in Lightroom for some reason, then the denoise algorithm is awful, the worst I have ever used in any software, the watermark feature is awful and, while C1 offers more granular control over colors I very often can achieve the same with a single slider in LR as opposed to spending hours tweaking in C1.

[@dirtywater5336]

The hardest thing about shooting with my new Fuji is waiting on Adobe to support my camera's RAW files. I've been shooting jpegs in the meantime but I think I'll back up RAW images to a second card for later editing

[@ThomasDutour]

I have been tempted to try out Capture One for months. Even more now after watching your video.

[@Hightreewalker]

Not looking for nice colors but unbiased authentic colors for reproducing art. If rawprocessors give totallly different colors as you clearly proof in this video, it's a red alert to me they both suck in some way. Still don't know which to use (is the rawprocessor from the cameramanufacturer for instance Nikon mostly better?). Hope the colors are accurate after calllibrating but that's another rabbithole.

[@hypnotoads]

Thanks Ted, really interesting. I've always been a committed LR/Adobe user but have recently been experimenting with C1 and I must say I'm really impressed with the results. In particular, the lack of the famous Adobe worms when sharpening is very apparent, which gives my images a noticeably cleaner look. Overall C1 appears to interpret images a lot closer to my idea of a finished edit than LR, therefore I am able to spend less time messing with sliders, and from a personal point of view I would rather dial down a couple of levels in C1 than dial up too many in LR. I am going to keep LR going because I will miss the cataloguing aspects and I am loathed to discard years of work in that respect. However, from my limited experience as a new C1 user, when it comes to editing those particular images which require careful work I think I will be leaning increasingly toward C1.

[@davidgardzellaable]

I follow a lot of KZbinrs but I'm inspired by your channel more than any other. Keep up the good work.

[@keithbrown454]

Damn good breakdown of how Lightroom and Capture One renders the raw data.

[@marka.ashford7059]

I migrated from Lightroom to Caprure One last year and have no regrets. I prefer the colour rendition, and the work flow in Capture One. Now I have the technical explanation of why there is a differnece. Thank you!

[@jlid1]

Really interesting subject! I liked what you said about being able to open older files and rework them using today's technology. I've been doing just that. Been going through some old shots I took long ago, long before Lightroom, and reworking them in Lightroom. Not all shots can be made better, but some can and it's really fun to mess with.

[@pat_makes_stuff]

And this video is why I keep coming back. Loads of value, lots of intelligent discussion and info

[@mannyvidsnyc]

I get everything you said, but, besides desaturating the Capture one raw photo did you try increasing the saturation on the light room adobe photo? If it isn’t just applied saturation there should be an obvious difference in how the data is reacts to changes in adjusting levels.

[@ClassicPolly]

Absolutely love your work. Your channel is one of the few that finally gave enough of a push to start doing more creative work, thank you so very much for the great and informative content. Also, on the side note here I was sitting completely sure I got down the basics of photography and here is a whole other side to RAW image files. Consider my mind blown Xx

[@shifteleven]

I've recently been moving over to Capture One and the funny thing is that it has made me a better LR/PS user user. For me, it was appreciating how Capture One saw color and luminosity workflows. I love being able to adjust the contrast in a scene using the Luma curves to avoid changing saturation. That was my introduction to the Lab color space. I also appreciated the color wheels and making color adjustments - even in Masks. Easier to work with a color wheel when they give you a color wheel. But ultimately, being able to see the differences - and that they exist, and trying to get two different rendering engines helped me learn more about what the tools do that the LR or Capture One docs just don't tell you.

[@charlesjjones]

This article brought out some good objective discussion, who/what you ultimately decide to use is subjective. In the time frame available it’s not possible to tease out all the nuances of LR versus COP so I think Ted has done a great job of stimulating healthy discourse amongst his viewers on what we prefer. I use Capture One, and have been since version 9, because I preferred the look of its raw processing when viewed in PS. Interestingly I showed a few mates and they preferred the look of the ACR (same raw processing engine as LR) processed image, we’re a product of the environment we’re raised in!!!

[@ricoandrade1520]

Super interesting topic. Its funny you said you can go back to old RAW photos you took years ago and improve them. I actually did just that last week! What a time to be alive

[@TimFitzwater]

I've definitely noticed new updates to Camera Raw(Lightroom) improving my images. There have been a few big ones over the years. I remember in the waning days of using my 7D a software update actually made it feel like a new camera. Also - there would be a third comparison worth doing - ho does Canon/Nikon/Sony etc software look? I used to try and use the Canon software(since they don't have to reverse engineer) and it looked really great - it was just too clunky a work-flow. I think we all make those trade-offs. There is a Phase One back on an RZ-67 here at my studio with a copy of Capture One - I still prefer to use my Canon 5DmkIV with a Bridge/Camera RAW workflow because it is faster and easier for me.

[@ASJC27]

I shoot Canon and prefer to use their DPP software for almost all of my photography. I find the end results to be much better than ACR (have'nt tried capture one). I used the guide by Arthur Morris and Arash Hazeghi (awesome bird photographers) to setup DPP 4 for a more convenient workflow, and after a short getting to know period I find the workflow to be quick and simple. The software itself is a bit slower than ACR, but maybe that is because of what it's doing in the background that results in a better image. Specifically I find that Canon's lens profiles are vastly superior to ACR. For example landscape shots with a 24-105 f/4L end up much sharper with better details using Canon's profile than what I get with ACR. Also, I find DPP to be much better at noise reduction without loosing details (I'm using values recommended by Artie and Arash). It is also easier for me to get accurate colors (if that is what I want) using DPP with Canon's "Faithful" or "Neutral" styles, and the other styles also offer very useful starting points for color manipulation. Typically I only use ACR with non Canon wide angle lenses (since there are no DPP profiles for those), and also for aircraft photography (for which I find the "dehaze" slider in ACR to be invaluable).

[@D1cko888]

Really interesting video. I would have never thought to revisit old images with new software.

[@MrPhr0sty]

I am a big fan of the open source app called darktable. Upon first importing the image into the app, darktable automatically applies a few of the modules, such as sharpening and base curve based on exif info on camera and lens. You can except them right off the bat or tweak them from the non-destructive history.

[@jbinmd]

Building on Ted's comment about there being three factors (data, processing, and settings) and comments below about demosaicing, it's important to remember two things: (1) the sensor doesn't capture full-color pixels. If you have a 1000x1000 pixel (i.e., 1 megapixel) sensor, half the pixels are green, a quarter are red, and a quarter are blue. You would think that the commercial raw converters would simply group two greens, one red, and one blue to create a full-color pixel but at a quarter resolution of the sensor. Instead, they have an algorithm (demosaicing) that interpolates at each of the 1 million pixels a full-color value by looking at neighboring pixels. As Ted implied, different processing algorithms and different settings (e.g., how much to weight the pixel one to the left vs two to the left when estimating the full-color value) will yield different results. (2) I'm willing to bet that what sensors capture isn't strictly correct. I.e., that red pixel site isn't precisely on the red wavelength and what was captured isn't exactly the right value. The raw converters, therefore, must make some judgement as to what the true value is.

[@benjaminwilkins1385]

I do enjoy hearing more about the technical end of photography. It's important to know how things work so that I can better understand how to create the art people expect to see from me as I grow as a photographer. Thank you.

[@poppyspix4444]

Very interesting! Been shooting RAW for many years and didn't understand the algorithmic differences but this actually makes a lot of sense. As you rightfully point out, in the end it's the photographers eye that differentiate us all. thanks again!

[@joekennington2858]

Great video just got sonyA7Riii love it starting out shoot in raw trying to decode between capture one a d Lightroom suggestions? Opinions?

[@RichMaciverPhoto]

The file organisation in Lightroom always seemed to be clunky, importing catalogues and all that stuff. Where as Capture1 was just a mirror of finder and so straightforward to work with. I assisted here in London for for a about four years and now shoot my own stuff, around 95% of photographers would use Capture1. So I really learnt my craft in Capture1, thus i have stuck to it and I'm always preaching to Lightroom users. (Although I do use the Lightroom app on my iPhone and it's incredible!) Like you mentioned Ted, plug a Hasselblad in and it is nothing but errors and re-starts all shoot. Fantastic video and the best breakdown of Capture1 vs Lightroom I've seen.

[@QuantumVariant]

I've used both Capture One and Camera Raw for years professionally as a retoucher. They each have there pros and cons. I prefer the adobe workflow because it's intergrades easily into photoshop. My big question about processing software is always which one looks the most realistic to what the shot really looked like. I prefer to edit from a place of accuracy and make it look the why I want, then from a state of someone else idea of what looks correct.

[@motttta]

Joseph Gerardi same here. But in my post-production studio I think we all used the best raw editor depending on the camera. C1 for phase one, phocus for hasselblad, ACR for the rest.

[@kevtiko]

Can you make an updated video talking about this? Or you'd say this is still current?

[@Nick.Carchidi]

Though this comment is 6 months old, on a 6 year old video, I too, would like to hear an update about C1 as I am considering the jump from Adobe.

[@kevtiko]

I did make the switch to C1 and couldn't be happier

[@Nick.Carchidi]

​@@kevtiko Thanks! I'm testing it out. Where is the option to import DCP profiles? I only see ICC. Edit: Apparently, C1 does not support DCP profiles. Per C1 support, ".dcp files are proprietary Adobe files, and aren't compatible with Capture One. Instead, Capture One uses the industry standard ICC profile format in the Base Characteristics tool." I couldn't find easily find an answer to this while searching, thought I would clarify for others who might see this. As of May 2024, Capture One software does not support DCP files.

[@matrixlee6392]

Very interesting video to watch! I wish I saw this earlier. Last year I started to try out Capture One, and noticed immediately that the color reproduction is largely different than what Adobe Lr does. Despite which one I personally like more, I just feel the Capture One result is closer to what the camera playback is showing. Lr tends to take something off from the image although I don't know how to verbalize that "something" and I hate when it does that. This difference really stimulated my curiosity so I downloaded Sony's official software called Imaging Edge. It's certainly not as powerful or efficient as the other two software, but I think If there is something about engineering, Sony's engineer certainly understands their color approach the best. Thus I assume Imaging Edge will give me what the camera manufacturer intended with their product. Well, the result isn't of any surprise, of course another different rendition, even closer to what my camera screen is showing and I like it. Especially when I shot with picture profiles, only Imaging Edge is able to read this setting from raw files. Capture One or Lr would just drop the profile unless I shot jpeg. So my understanding is: different manufacturer have their different color sciences, but different software have different algorithms too. What combination you use is really going to give you very different results. So before talking about things like Canon skin tone, maybe think about your photo editing software first. Capture One is on Sony's official website and they have one version that's just for Sony users so I bet they have closer partnership with Sony in terms of Color reproduction form raw files. Well, personal opinions only, I could be talking bull shit lol. Again, I loved your video.

[@JamesStevensonPhoto]

Very interesting indeed! I've been using one alongside the other for a time and trying to get to the bottom of exactly these questions. Thanks for the information!

[@SebastianWilsonswlfoto2014]

I've being Lightroom for about 10 years now, so my catalog is pretty solid there. I tried Capture One a couple of years ago, and loved the color rendition, and the way it rendered the final images, but I don't want to lose all the work done I'm going to stick with Lightroom, besides the latter is very friends with different social media or for uploading pictures to SmugMug, or editing on Photoshop. If I had known Capture One from the beginning, maybe I've decided to go that way.

[@BfoSHIZnats]

Does the Phase One program not have a profile selector so that you could switch to a common camera profile and not use the apps native/standard profiles?

[@romiemiller7876]

C1 works great with Nikon. I've said before that if C1 comes out with layers, HDR, focus stacking -which it has now-and compositing so I can change backgrounds in portraits, etc., it's goodby Adobe. C1 has a lot better color than Photoshop. And, Ps has unacceptable glitches when editing portraits. * Thank you for saying C1 won't recognize Fugi med. format. I was thinking of going that way. I can't afford Phaze One cameras.

[@Gabriel-wv1uz]

How about if you slide the WB green/magenta slider towards magenta in LR for that image, will they look more similar?

[@KayOSweaver]

With regards to your final thoughts about being able to go back and revisit digital files with new tech, that is indeed possible with film as well. I had a conversation with a film archivist who was converting old films into new 4K video files and he told me that they actually had to dial back the sensitivity on their scanner because it was getting too much detail. The example he gave me was a film where in the new scan you could see crew and equipment in an area that used to be shadow and rendered as just black when projected normally. Pretty amazing stuff.

[@b991228]

After you are done processing in the two raw processors and then render out to a print, jpg, tiff, psd or whatever are the colors and tones faithfully rendered over. I know there are lots of factors going into converting but ultimately it is the analog or digital image that will be judged.

[@ogonzilla]

What you said after 11:10 is exciting to me as well. Updating some old 5DMII images is eyeopening... and also scary....does a raw image really exist if it's in eternal flux?? Deep... lol

[@PetePistachio]

Omar Gonzalez Photography I think the whole point is that a raw file is not an image at all, but simply a whole bunch of data points that represent the light as it was perceived by the sensor. Just like data in a spreadsheet, it can be displayed in any number of different ways (bar chart, pie chart, Venn diagram, etc) without changing the underlying data. So, a raw file's image data is never in flux, but the interpretation of it is always able to change. It's up to the artist to choose what they are trying to convey, or what their client has hired them to convey, whether it be realistic, impressionistic, or other. And who is to be the judge of what is most realistic? I don't think the painting or photo exists that is totally realistic. Even the most realistic ones are just approximations of the real thing. And add to that the fact that we don't all see things the same way. So I guess it really is "to each his own".

[@PhillHalloran]

the audio quality of your videos is impeccable

[@RoadRunner27]

Unexpectedly brilliant review. Pleasantly unbiased. Well articulated. Nice work man!

[@stupedrandomname]

This is something that I spent a lot of time looking at and in the end, it was what caused me to buy Capture One Pro. I am not into the subscription model so Adobe was out of my test group but looking at Affinity, Capture One, native editors from Canon and Olympus, Exposure X5 where what I checked out. The differences where unbelievable. Some images were simply unusable. I processed several images and had my partner look at them and rank them in quality of colour from 1-5 simply based on what they felt looked good/real/pleasing and we discussed it. What I want to point out is that she is not a photographer/colorist/media editor or anything like this. She is your average customer with a good sense of style. She reverted to some of the images as being terrible from one editor and fantastic from another. So the argument "non-photographers will never notice a difference" absolute does not hold up in my opinion. The best results on average came either from the camera's own editor, Olympus Workspace. So in other words how it would have looked if I had just shot a JPEG out of the camera. Or Capture One Pro using all the default settings.

[@freecologne]

Thx for the great video. I come from Lightroom, after I buy a A7RIII I test C1 and in my opinion C1 do a much better Job in Noise Reduction. What’s your opinion? Thx

[@danielstern263]

question: I am still on Aperture, not a Pro, shoot street, minimal post(use Silver Efex for B&W), User Friendly front end and logical organizing(like Aperture does) and a good option for transitioning: Opinions?? Thank You in Advance!!

[@DavidBigandt]

Mind blowing video. Are camera profiles the only behind the scenes thing playing with the image in editors? Is there a way of displaying a completely uninterpreted Raw file, a raw Raw? Also is the cameras ISO simply an electrical amplification of the sensors signal? Or are there logarithms involved there too?

[@Sean-Seymour]

My need and question centers around tethering. Today, LR is OK, but it loses connection, if they do an update who knows, and it's slow. Any thoughts on Capture One vs LR for tether?

[@herickbeira]

Could someone tell me if there is a color variation from a photo edited in Lightroom to the same edited in Camera Raw following the same profile and adjustments patterns?

[@stephenmason5682]

If you don't like the standard, regular output, create a preset and save it?

[@Airboy123]

How do the images compare when using the camera manufacturer's own software?

[@mmarsbarr]

Great video but this is an unfair comparison, in Capture One it defaults to using the camera manufacturer's profile, in Lightroom it uses 'Adobe Standard' you ALMOST touched on this in the panel but missed it completely. If you go back and change Adobe Standard to the actual in camera profile you will see the colours in Lightroom look dramatically better. Adobe Standard is known to be a very flat profile.

[@kashyusaf9260]

No one's arguing about camera profiles, but C1 does render a raw file in a more natural manner than Lightroom. I think you need to download C1 demo and try to replicate the default look in Lightroom. It seems simple, but requires a whole lot more work. Profiles and camera calibration have something to do with it, but the default C1 look applied to images does things way differently than Lightroom.

[@zagan1]

You sure you have 3 color profiles standard, adobe, full. Each one offers more colors

[@kashyusaf9260]

zagan1 Again, no one is arguing about colour profiles but the way C1 renders Raw and the way Lightroom renders Raw. It's not the same.

[@somename8831]

I'm pretty sure camera developers do not give away their code so all profiles will just be interpretations of what that profile might do in camera.

[@LLFA]

I did NOT know this, but you are right! I did as you suggested, and the colors are way more saturated in Lightroom when I use the Camera Standard profile.

[@AnandaSim]

Good to start the conversation on this in the video. I used to use the Olympus Camera Calibration Profile in LR/ACR and choose Natural as the emulated look but the past few weeks, I've noticed that I prefer Adobe Profile Version 4. So things change. Also, I always smile when someone says "It's straight out of the raw editor, no adjustments" which actually is not a function of the camera but a combination of the sofware algorithm x default develop preset - not making a selection means you have made a selection, you have chosen "default" whatever the processing that "default" is for that software.

[@Schattenhieb]

Thanks for this interesting video. Cound you bring something about the difference between RAW and TIFF?

[@ted6229]

Hi very interesting.. This is the other side of our Photography process that I would love you to do some more on.. Keep up the good work..

[@HansKnikmanAV]

Informative video. I started out with CO v6 after working with LR from V1. I remember being shocked after comparing an image of a girl with a red coat I started working on in LR and used it to test the possibilities of CO. Shocked because it was so different, so much more subtle in sharpness and color rendering. Combined with the in my opinion not so professional direction Adobe was taking with LR I made the switch to CO for raw processing and only using LR as a DAM. And I never regretted taking that step. CO has its flaws, but with every new version I see a lot of improvement, not only in image quality but for sure also in user experience. And not to speak of their support. With the latest versions also the DAM part improved to a point I stopped using LR completely. Not going back or switch to another RAW converter any time soon. Keep it up! Hans

[@samsargdong1135]

Hi,thanks fot your interesting video.I'd like to know which raw image is closer to reality since the differences are not only in saturation and contrast but also in hue and color tone ( i.e,the colour of the marble or similar).Bye!

[@AndyAstbury]

Hi Ted - great video. There is something else that effects the 'look' of your raw file in a raw handler, and it's the demosaic algorithm used by the initial part of the editor. Lightroom doesn't have the best demosaicing algorithm in the market place. If you have the time, try the free Raw Therapee - you have a choice of demosaic algorithms - though I find AMaZE and DCB usually give the best results.

[@sarimner]

:D

[@aristones7132]

Hi I’ve had the A7riii for about a month now. Just been shooting jpeg because I only have Lightroom 5. I don’t want to get Lightroom CC. Will there be an update for Lightroom 5 to support A7riii arw files? Or can I just upgrade to Lightroom 6??

[@harrivayrynen]

Good information. The great part for me was this ”Zero in settings is not same in other raw Software”. Never before thinked that way the settings. But you are right! Thanx.

[@interestedmeow]

Have you done any work with Pixelmator Pro?

[@dominikbrands]

can you make a video about the different between lightroom & capture one in sharpen tool? i think LR is not so good in sharping .. he makes more image noise than CO. what do you think about this? best regards, dominik

[@romiemiller7876]

I think C1 has richer color than Photoshop or On1 that's not associated with saturation. It may be more saturated, but also better color.

[@Daniel_Zalman]

As an alternative, there's a program called Raw Photo Processor 64 (or just RPP) that I think is phenomenal. It doesn't have a ton of features. Essentially it's a starting point. Primarily, you can make exposure, color temperature, and contrast adjustments. It also has some color profiles that resemble film looks. There's even one that replicates Kodachrome 64 (and it's outstanding). It's doesn't necessarily look exactly like Kodachrome, but the colors and tonal gradations it achieves are astonishing. If you need to crop or make localized adjustments you'll have to move the image into Lightroom or Photoshop after, but for the things I mentioned above, it's right at the top (imho). One thing you'll notice is that your images are darker at the start. That's because the other photo processing programs make adjustments before you do anything to the image (as can be seen in this video). And to save the best for last: it's absolutely FREE. You can donate if you'd like (and you should if you like it and use it a lot).

[@emilycross4527]

Love this video, and also have a strong opinion. Recently started using capture one by necessity when I got my Sony a7riii, after using Lightroom for several years. I fell hard for capture one, and am in love with it for several reasons--sessions and layers among them. Regarding how the files come in, you can control it, I reset mine to linear, it comes in flat. The other choices are auto, which makes decisions based on your camera brand, film high contrast, film extra shadow, or film standard. It is under the Base Characteristics panel. The workspace is highly customizable. As I say, I am in love. For context, I am an engineer who did a fair amount of autocad back in the day. I may get a capture one tattoo. I love everything about it. Thanks for listening! Great informative video! PS, KZbin has a ton of videos that make it easy to switch. kthanksbye

[@tobiasputmanphotography5]

Nice video as always. I've been using Lightroom for a long time when shooting Nikon and loved it for how it's perfect as a catalog with solid raw conversion, but when I switched to Fujifilm (X-Pro1) I started liking Lightroom less and less, Mostly because the demosaicing on X-Trans sensors was really bad. It has improved over time but still not to the point where I am happy with the images, especially in, for example, grassy areas at the edge of the sharpness. A little while ago I got wind of this software called Iridient and I absolutely LOVE it. It was designed especially for X-trans sensors and it works really well. It renders the images with so much more detail and less "weirdness" in areas with a lot of grass or small branches in trees. If you (still) shoot Fuji give it a try! It feels like I've got a whole new camera!