In fact FWIW one set of files were M9 ones and they looked complete turd in C1 compared to LR which made them look great. I downloaded some files for other cameras and played with them in both LR and C1 and my perception of these files wasn't nearly as clear cut as it is with Fuji. 100 times more time in C1 than I have LR. I just seem to prefer the look of MY images outta C1 which is a shame, cos LR is nicer to use. Well unless you're not me, which I'm sure none of you are, in which case you might play different. In my teeny tiny PP experience, wanna get sharp? Sort the black points and white points, fix highlights and shadows, settle on a tone curve and exposure that works for the WHOLE of the image, chances are you won't wanna sharpen anything. I never touch the actual sharpening sliders one way or t'other. And by that I mean reducing contrast and clarity. I don't give a F about dam, but to be honest with C1 I seem to turn sharpening down a lot. also IN GENERAL NOT SAYING PEOPLE HERE many people bitching about LR seem to confuse raw conversation and focus issues. Now take take a step back and behold the painting as it's meant to be seen! ![]() ![]() I mean go to an art gallery, get real close to an old master, it's just coarse brush stokes and layers of paint. To switch to a different photo in the Develop module, choose it from the Collections panel or the Filmstrip. Select a photo in the Library module and press D to switch to the Develop module. Sure at pixel level you can see that other convertors do a better job, but IMO there's not much in it at standard viewing sizes. Use the following steps as a guide for editing photos in the Develop module. I have no issues at all with how LR handles X files. I want to like LR I really do, I thought I had a break through with it, when I set it to 2010 mode and could get what I wanted with just a few sliders. It's all about personal preference and what you feel comfortable with. The cataloging system is also less user-friendly. ![]() I also had a lot of issues with PN's highlight recovery adding false color rather than real recovered image data.Ĭ1 is probably the best alternative to LR and can do a great job, but the interface is obtuse and difficult. PN also opens a good looking RAW, but it's just that it's been "cooked" by default. I like to shoot cityscapes, and fine repeating textures would become a pixellated, "prismatic" lump of garbage. That said, Iridient does a good job with X-trans, but I had a lot of issues with false "moire" in fine textures. That's the whole idea, right? Other programs, like PN, Iridient and C1, simply have more aggressive default processing and sharpening, so the images look "better" from the start. LR opens RAWs with a very "flat" image that is ready to be "developed". Iridient Developer 3.7.1 HCiSO Metadatics 1.6.8 HCiSO Mp3tag 1.5.2. What a lot of folks perceive as a "better" conversion in other programs is just more aggressive default settings. Adobe Lightroom Classic v11.3 U2B RiD One Switch 1.25 TNT NeoOffice 2017.33. I've played with all the major RAW players a number of times, and happily ended up back with LightRoom every time.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |