File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
So /p/, from your experiences, which is the best RAW converter?
>> j005u
Lightroom

Ya rly.
>> Anonymous
>>59436
Picasa. Free, easy to use, fast, more features than I need.
>> pskaught
aperture by far.
but lightroom is really great too.
>> Anonymous
UFRaw, though I've not really experimented.
>> Anonymous
capture one is pretty good. lightroom is good, too, but with higher iso (above 800) and more noise, capture one outperforms lightroom.
>> des
>>59436
I really, really like the results I get from s3 toneup. Unfortunately, the program is not ready for primetime *at all*
I'm thinking of switching to bibble or capture, I dunno.
>> Anonymous
Lightroom hands down. I used it and Aperture for comparison for a month and decided that Lightroom was the definite winner. Apertures was slow, buggy, and crashed at least once per session (on a new intel mac) and I found the controls to be less intuitive. Overall I just liked working in Lightroom better.
>> Anonyfag of Borneo !bHymOqU5YY
I'm using Lightroom at the moment. Really a lifesaver.
>> Anonymous
I like AP for my file management and LR for editing
>> Anonymous
I've tried using Lightroom but I didn't get the point of it. Is it significantly better than just using Bridge/ACR/Photoshop? From what I could tell it just did a lot of the same stuff they do but with prettier interfaces. Does it speed up work compared to using Bridge/ACR/Photoshop?
>> Anonymous
>>59498

basicly it has all the editing options you need. and it is great form managing large amounts of photos. the workflow is definitely made for pros for which speed is money. I for one get to do my work much faster than before, making the same money in a shorter time.
>> Teus !QbSstcPD6U
LR is awesome. it has all tools you need to adjust photos that are properly taken (no need for shitty PS manipulations). I get a LOT of work done quite quickly in lightroom
>> Teus !QbSstcPD6U
addendum>>59509
it has profiles and copypaste settings, so you can do routine work with only a few clicks.

it's great for processing whole series of photos, like from an event or documentary
>> Anonymous
>>59498

It is better in that it is much more streamlined. I used to do all of my editing in Photoshop, but Lightroom gives me all the tools I need to do all of my post processing barring any heavy editing, and does it in a way that takes a whole lot less time and effort.

The organizational features of Lightroom are excellent and it's great for processing huge batches of photos. It has probably cut my post processing times in half, if not better, and the end results are more consistant.
>> Anonyfag of Borneo !bHymOqU5YY
>>59505
>>59509
>>59510
>>59511
Exactly the reasons why I'm using Lightroom. Except that I'm not making money. Not yet.
>> Anonymous
>>59465
>s3 toneup

I just searched for this; it looks interesting.

> the program is not ready for primetime *at all*
Why's that?

>>59498
I've got the same question. Is LR any BETTER than ACR and Photoshop, or is it just faster?
>> Anonymous
i love the exporting and resizing you can do in lightroom all in one step. best way to quickly choose and get the images you want saved at the size you want. also the filtering you can do to your library is ownage.
>> Anonymous
>>59513
Pronote: Photoshop CS3 has the same post-processing feautures as LR.
>> Anonymous
>>59618
but not the same film management and workflow.
>> Anonymous
>>59621
Nope. But most people are already used to the photoshop workflow anyhow, so you'll have to think by yourself if the change is really needed. (Changing your workflow can have negative effects)
>> des
>>59513
It's just immature. Once you've got it wrangled, like I said, the results are great. However, the in-program renderer can sometimes get ridiculously slow. Sometimes window zoom/position, and even settings get "stuck."
The way I get around the fail now is to just use its image browser to find clumps of images, open one, tweak the settings for the clump and then batch convert. If you try opening a bunch of images inside the program, it bogs hard. (4600x2/2GB ram,P4-2.0/2GB; shouldn't happen)
DCRaw sucks, ime, for NEF but it is on by default for ALL raw importing. Which is silly since a big reason why I think it works great is that it uses the nikon capture algorithms for raw processing (w/ dcraw off).
Exporting to an editor is funky, it doesn't send the filename. Its EXIF output seems to rape 4chan's EXIF renderer for some reason.
I think that's everything but I just woke up.
I don't fault the guy because it's such a great bargain but he really should work on stability and speed before adding more features.
>> des
>>59626
I'd wager most people who actually have purchased CS3 (4chan lol) already have workflow/asset management solutions. (thx extensis)
>> Anonymous
>>59628
As an asset manager, I can assure you that liberal artists and overall liberal professions are a growing market. I guess there are lots of honest people who buy photoshop and don't have any asset management solution.

It's not like Photoshop is crazy expensive anymore, too. 833€ for normal version, less than 200€ for student edition, which seem quite reasonable prices.

Or you can just download it, at the risk of getting fined, or not :P
>> Rick
lightroom is a little better