These days, there is a vast range of post-processing software available for photographers, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. This excellent video takes a look at five of the most popular options to help you decide which is right for you.
Coming to you from Anthony Morganti, this great video takes a look at five common post-processing apps: Capture One 20, Exposure X5, Lightroom Classic, Luminar 4, and On1 Photo RAW 2020. I have used a combination of Lightroom, Photoshop, and Capture One for quite some time now, but in the last few months, I have also added Luminar 4 to my workflow quite a bit more. While Lightroom, Photoshop, and Capture One tend to get the majority of my work, Luminar 4 is simply more fun than any other software I have ever used. The AI tools have reinvigorated my creativity and inspired me to explore edits a lot further. It has also reminded me that while professional functionality is of course crucial in any tool, its ability to inspire your creativity is also quite important. Check out the video above for Morganti's full thoughts.
If you are interested in taking a closer look at the results, you can download Morganti's raw file and all his edits here.
For me, Capture One 20 > Capture One 12 > Lightroom Classic.
On1 coming from Lightroom. But then I also had betamax and laser discs.
Personally, the right software for any person is going to be the one they can best understand and master. Most, if not all of these brands allow the user to download a trial version. So that would b my recommendation - just download them and see which one you feel is best for you. Or at the very least, watch a few videos from unbiased sources (if you can find one) and then decide if that particular program is one you feel you can work with. Either way, you're going to have to do some leg work (or should I say some hand work).
95% LR with a smattering of PS. I also use Nik, Photomatix 6, and Topaz plugins from time to time. I have Luminar 3, but it's used as a plugin as well.
For this photo, Capture 1 appears to have produced the best result based on the adjustments Anthony made. DAM are more than the RAW engines, though this was a useful comparison. If I learned anything, it's how good these have become over the years and that one can chose one or another editor based on price, features, workflow etc. without hesitation.
One should say for this camera RAW Format and actually it is clearly measured and measurable that LR sucks in bringing back highlights. It’s not an opinion you can just try it out. Sucked on Nikon, Sony, Canon and Fuji. Others I don’t know. By the way Aperture used to do it the best but people didn’t like that Aperture was just a RAW converter. Beats me.
Any capture one is better that anything adobe has.
The one that does the best RAW conversion for your camera. Just try it. Plug in your camera and look which one brings back the most details in the highlights and shadows and you got a winner. All the other bells and whistles are best done in Photoshop anyway.
God really got to spell it out to people. RAW converters are there to convert RAW files. I guess everyone bought the « RAW converter are there to replace Photoshop » Koolaid