I understand that I should upgrade from my basic workflow (mostly Picasa + some Cyberlink PhotoDirector).
edit
The basic of what I'm looking into is a step-up, single stop (if possible!) solution to:
- keep my large library organized
- enhance my pics (mostly jpg*) with a fair balance of feature vs. easy-of-use
local enhancements
- I'll be trying to shot more raw as soon as I realize that, with the appropriate tool, the result is worth it over in-camera jpg conversion
I'm quite satisfied with Picasa as a catalogue, definitely not for any photo processing other thank a quick saturation and sharpening bumb, but without local edits it does not work all the time.
I'm looking into the following:
(I do not have a mac so Aperture is not an option)
I'm wondering whether somebody has been able to test them all (or most!) and provide a first-person feedback on which features stand up / are lacking in comparison, plus any additional experience advise in comparing these software. I do know that lightroom is great and that you don't get wrong with that ;-) , and that I could test drive all of them. My experience though is that it takes way more than 30 days to discover the real features AND limitations of this kind of software.
Price is of course an element of the comparison, but only at an equal feature point.
There is more than just the features; for instance I hear color management on Linux is hard - I don't want to launch an off-topic discussion about it, but if there's a very strong agreement on such a point it will be an issue against DarkTable(edit: i investigated and it's actually false).
I understand there might be some subjectiveness into this, please let me know with comments if there's any interest in making the answer a collaborative wiki.
Answer
AfterShotPro 1.0.1 = ASP, Lightroom = LR 4.1 (sorry I don't have personal experience with DarkTable)
- Speed: ASP way faster. LR - sloooow (on Core i5 3550, 16GB RAM, Win7)
- Importing: ASP no need to import to do enough tasks with files. LR - mandatory
- Multi catalog searching: ASP only
- Non-distructive editing: both.
- Split Toning: LR only
- Local editing: The following two are competing. It depends what you preffer:
- Adjustment brush: LR only
- Layered editing: ASP only EDIT:(however you can have masks on each layer)
- Gradients: LR only
- Straighten: ASP much better (in fact, LR doesn't have but one could fake it)
- Noise Removal: ASP better (IMHO - it has several ways including Noise Ninja OOTB)
- Plugins: ASP is better (you can have plugins for the entire image processing pipeline)
- Lens Correction: LR has slightly more lenses
- Real Multi monitor support: LR only
- AutoCorrect: Much better (IMHO) in ASP
- Survey: Better in LR
- Map, Book, Web: LR only
- Red eye removal: LR only
- Print: Didn't use
- Keywording:
- ASP has Shortcut assignment for keywords
- LR gives you the last 9 keywords used and the entire keyword tree in place to pick from it.
- EDIT: Both give keyword sets for Outdoor/Wedding/Custom etc. However:
- LR - only 9 keywords in a set
- ASP - unlimited
- (Batch) Export/Save As:
- ASP allows you to specify full custom processing settings to apply before saving as JPEG/TIFF
- DNG: LR only
- Watermarking: LR only
- Speed: ASP better
- Export to other targets (email etc.): LR only
...and many many more. :-) Generally speaking, LR is more bloated, slow and more mature. Also, the LR's GUI is much more shiny (ornaments, more animations etc.). ASP (in fact Bibble 5 Pro rebranded) is a "fresh" newcomer which covers some areas in which LR has problems (speed, catalog management, layered editing come in mind).
The best thing for you is to download both trials (ASP is quite small) and see for yourself.
However, IMHO, if you can stick with ASP and covers you in anything what you want, then go with it. Otherwise LR.
HTH
No comments:
Post a Comment