![]() ![]() The other limitation of these tests is that I have tried one high-end camera from each brand: what applies to the Canon EOS R might not to a Rebel T7, and less sharp kit lenses might give different results too. However, for my high-quality limited edition prints, I will now choose a different program to develop my raw files, and my conclusion will be in one of the follow-up articles. Furthermore, many people will be happy to address its shortcomings by opening their images into Photoshop and the various external plugins, especially the AI noise reduction and sharpening plugins. Its library module is impressive, and for applying rapid developments, something I do for writing articles, I would happily continue to use it. Nevertheless, you will see in future articles, when I reveal those that did better or worse, that each other program has its advantages and disadvantages too. I found color, tone, sharpness, and noise control better elsewhere. ![]() That is true, but here's the crunch: with some other programs, even those new to me, I could achieve better results than I could with Lightroom Classic, which I am reasonably familiar with. I can already hear some screaming that these are just the default values with no adjustment settings applied. The layout of the Develop module is excellent, and the raw results at default are not bad. I like its workflow, and it has a lot to be said in favor of it. What I Like and What can be Improved with Lightroom Classic's Raw results Better results were achievable elsewhere. However, the OM-1 has a newer stacked sensor, which might account for that.Īfter adjusting the shadows and decreasingsharpening, the fine details in the yellow/greens were still a little strange. In fact, increasing the shadows introduced more noise than with the OM-1, which was surprising because of the difference in sensor sizes. Increasing the shadows accentuated that noise. Similarly, the Sony a7 IV images appeared noisy at default values, which I could not see in other programs. My results seem to support the claim by OM System professionals that Lightroom doesn't do the OM System raw files justice. However, as you will see in future articles, this wasn't the case with some other programs I tried, plus the following two cameras with larger sensors suffered from detail issues too, when run through Lightroom Classic. Of course, one might blame the noise on the camera and the smaller sensor size. Lightroom Classic Test Results Lightroom Classic and NikonĬlick on this image and you will see the artifacts that were only appearing with Lightroom.įurthermore, increasing the shadows worked poorly, leaving a purple hue of chroma noise and not showing the detail. The cataloging was second to none, but others are catching up, if not yet overtaking it. Although not perfect, I consider it a good program. It's also probably the most popular program. I find it intuitive, although I've met some who struggle using it that's true of any program. I use it almost daily, so I am familiar with it. I'm using Lightroom Classic as a benchmark for these tests. The intention is not to tell you that any program is great or dreadful. In other words, it's perfectly okay for one person to love Lightroom (or insert another program name here) and another to hate it. Furthermore, each program has its unique features, and they might be necessary for some and not for others. Price may be important to you – these were shown in the previous article – and you may find some programs more intuitive than someone else. Of course, the results shown here won't be the only deciding factor in choosing a program. Instead, I started by looking at the details in the shadows and highlights and whether they were recovered equally using the adjustment sliders, especially how much noise was produced in the case of the shadows. I'm not trying to develop the images for these tests to get the best possible final results. However, there were some appreciable differences I came across, and it's these I concentrated on. Minor differences can probably be ignored because they will be correctable in the software or plugins. There are real-world tests intended as a guideline, giving you an idea of what to look for when investing in software. ![]() The anecdotal evidence suggested that some programs performed better with some brands than others, and I wanted to see if this were true. In this series of articles, I'll use the same images from different brands of cameras: Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fujifilm, and my OM System camera and how they look when opened under various raw development programs. Lightroom has a great range of tools in its Develop module. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |