One image, 2 editors… why does are the resulting images different? I’ve compared the calibration algorithms in Adobe Lightroom and Capture One and the results are extremely interesting. To understand the resulting photos, you have to understand a few things about RAW format and how it is interpreted.
Adobe Lightroom has been the market leading software for image editing for what seems like forever. But we are entering a time where we actually have choices and depending on your priorities as a photographer you can choose what image editor works best for the photography you make.
Get your Art of Photography T-Shirt!
Music from Epidemic Sound:
Make your next move with Squarespace
Visit for a free trial and use offer code AOP on checkout to save 10% on your order
Subscribe for more videos!
Watch More Videos:
YOU CAN DO THIS WITH AN INSTAGRAM PHOTO?!?
THE ONE SECRET LIGHTROOM FEATURE EVERY PHOTOGRAPHER SHOULD BE USING
MEDIUM FORMAT LENSES AND THE HASSELBLAD X1D
Thanks for watching – if you like this video, remember to share it with your friends!
Ted Forbes
The Art of Photography
2830 S. Hulen, Studio 133
Fort Worth, TX 76109
USA
My name is Ted Forbes and I make videos about photography. I’ve been making photographs most of my life and I have a tremendously deep passion for photography that I want to share with you on YouTube.
The Art of Photography is my channel and I produce photography videos to provide a 360 degree look into the world of making images. We all want to get better so lets do this together!
I make videos covering famous photographers, photography techniques, composition, the history of photography, philosophy and much more.
I also have a strong community of photographers who watch the show and we frequently do social media challenges for photographers to submit their own work. I feature the best and most interesting on the show when we do these so come check it out and get involved!
Surely the question is – who has the deeper pixels?
Still have to use Photoshop to stitch but most of my processing these days is done in C1PRO. Can't beat the out of camera color rendition
Super interesting video. Thx!
Same as in audio. If you play the same file, the same CD, you won't ear the same thing depending on your HIFI … Why sould it be different with photography ?
In somehow, a RAW file is just like a music sheet ! Some musicians are better for classic, other for rock … and some are just better than others 😉
I am a big fan of the open source app called darktable. Upon first importing the image into the app, darktable automatically applies a few of the modules, such as sharpening and base curve based on exif info on camera and lens. You can except them right off the bat or tweak them from the non-destructive history.
the images look different because they are using different colour profiles, derp.
I'm an X-Pro-2 shooter and the only thing holding me back from C1 is the purported steep learning curve. I want to spend my time with the camera, not sitting at a desk. But now that they have a dedicated Fuji product I'm starting to loose that argument with myself. They also offer a free 30-day trial so I'm also running out of excuses. (FYI, C1 does support the GFX files)
What bothers me more than a look difference between two pieces of software, is the difference between the look of JPEG and RAW files inside the same software! I have an old Canon 550D, and when I shoot RAW + JPEG and import those into Capture One, I see two completely different previews like they were shot on two different cameras, in spite of the fact that a Capture One applies its so-called Canon 550D Generic Color profile to the RAW file. What I expect is that when a software applies the color profile with the name of my camera, I should see the same RAW preview looking exactly like the JPEG from the camera, but it doesn't happen… That's quite frustrating because what you see in the rear screen during the shoot won't match what you get in post processing and you have to do so much work to bring those images back to the neutral Canon-like starting point. Is it true to Canon only? And is there any way how to deal with this – what should be the RAW+JPEG workflow in Capture One?
I just wish that companies should stop this incompatibility childish marketing game and just deliver people what they want:
AN ALL INTO ONE SOFTWARE that does it all. And make it very good.
Let then people decide what interface (gui) they wish to buy and which company to support, but, please do not be stupid and lazy
and put something out for just ONE PART of the population…
Same goes with Windows, Apple, Sony vs the rest and so on.
YOU ARE WASTING resources for your stupid marketing wars.
Very informative! Thank you!
you talk a lot.. pls. better if you go straight to the point
Thank you so much for this fascinating video
So, is the upshot that image difference in your case is due to different camera profiles and the software's interpretation of the baseline?
Capture One looks WAY better. I'm actually at a crossroads right now and I was looking for new editing software. I'm going to pick up the trial version of Capture One and see how it works!
Is the same with Canon DPP software. I don't use any adobe softwares to convert RAW files, because all photos look not natural.
Just to be clear, if I look at jpeg made from a raw file made in Capture One, in Lightroom, the jpeg will look the same as in Capture One? And, if I shoot jpeg only, all pictures will look the same in both programs.
Would you consider updating / expanding on this? I think I'm not alone in wanting to get away from Adobe to support more competition in the industry and more choices for photographers. At the same time I don't want to spend so much as for Capture One. I'm evaluating On1 Photo Raw and DXO Photolab2. I skipped over Luminar and Alienskin etc. pretty quickly. I'm gonna say I'm really intrigued by DXO – these are French guys who sell themselves on being super geeky about all the math and the algorithms etc. and it looks like they have something interesting on their hands.
There's four questions I'm mulling at the moment.
1. Raw file handling
2. Dynamic range recovery and noise reduction (DXO winning here)
3. Using Datacolor and Xrite camera colour calibration. (On1 support suggested a workaround of sorts involving Hasselblad Phocus as an intermediate step. I haven't even looked at Hasselblad Phocus yet.)
4. Importing the 1000s of non-destructively edited images that I did in LR and PS and have sidecars.
I'd say don't bother going in to discussing DAM. Adobe is definitely the leader for that – mainly because we're all so used to it – but there are plenty of non photography specific solutions which are excellent and also, with the continuous improvements to Windows Explorer, you may soon not need a third-party DAM at all.
I hope this caught your interest! Please do let me know if you go ahead and do this because your's is a voice I would definitely listen to.
Cheers!
Is Capture 1 a one off payment, or is it yearly ?
I use Capture One because I can do my editing MUCH faster and efficient than in Lr. Not only Lr is utterly slow/laggy/jerky on high-end machine (unless you turn all but 2 cores of processor off and not use GPU acceleration), but also Adobe never was known for efficient and intuitive software. They progrssivelly make programs worse over the course of generations. I had also enough their subscription model. Endless paying for same crap they never fix. Even if I do not use Lr anymoore I need active licence, to just open previous files. This is disgrace of users that you need to pay in order to upen and export image that you created with PAID software.
C1 saw opportunity and raised prices. But still I BOUHGT licence, no subscriptions anymore. I calculated I saved 14 workdays per year, compared to Lr. When I need to go to Lightroom, I can believe that I used that clunky slow laggy software. SOOO slow on same machine where C1 flyes. Lr and C1 are at equvalent speed for import, preview generation and export. Here Lr does not fall short. But actuall developing is impossible in Lr. Not only C1 is fluid, the logic of doing it is much neater and optimal. Also where I had to move 10-12 sliders in Lr for EVERY image taken (even for home kids snapshot), I feel guity in C1 that sometimes I do not move any. Crawling through 1000 of images is FAST and fluid. I have no more headaches to quickly deliver 450 images from event. Also my trips to Photoshop reduced to less than 1% of images. I can say I do not need it anymore. I have more success cloning/patching inside C1 than in Ps, even demanding stuff. I prefer C1, to stay in original raw file. I do not care for panorama (Microsoft ICE is free and better), I do not care for HDR…
I become happier and more efficient, my prices could get lower or offer me more profit. My bussiness improved because of C1.
Drawbacks: CROP tool is not ideal, no NR for JPEG images, no lens profiles for most of my lenses and no generic profiling for JPEG. Hard (expensive) to implement custom profiles using ColorChecker (but I can say I do not need that, while in Lr was MUST). I use Pentax, so some features are not supported. Also my OLD FUJI cameras are not supported. But I find out that I can use DCRAW to develop 16-bit flat image out from RAF files that can be edited in C1 or any other software. In fact Lr uses DCRAW engine to deal with those cameras anyway. I did several test down to pixel level and found out that developing image extracted with DCRAW gives me the best result out of all software – only very unconvenient. C1 is not better at it, it is just not far behind, while MUCH more convenient. But for FUJI files, I do not miss Lr since It was not great anyway.
What I learned about processes in Lr (or generations in C1) is that the main difference is noise handling. Especially color noise reduction without ruining details. Some are better at it, some worse. And Lr lags behind most other in this area. Next differencies are "curve magic" and handling (recreating) of overexposed areas. Also here C1 beats Lr hands down. Not only overexposed skin is not grey, it can be restored to the point even texture is back (using heal tool at small opacity – since heal/clone tool can have transparency) – before I had to use PS for that.
Using C1 on same files it seems I upgraded lens, camera or both.
I tested ON1 as well. Actually image looked better in most situation (a bit rough highlight / overexposure areas), but software is cumbersome and buggy (was at least). It did not gave me confidence of Lr replacement. (YET)
Great explanation and your are correct, film is "Fixed" 🙂