Affinity Photo - Capture One

[Jill Morgan]

I am getting tired of my monthly PS fee.  With exchange it is costing over $15 CDN per month or $180 per year.  Just getting too pricey.  Anyone using Affinity Photo/Capture One?  I use Affinity Designer and Affinity Publisher but awhile ago I tried Affinity Photo and decided to stick with PS.  But I'm reconsidering.

 

I don't think I can do another free trial, so opinions gladly taken.  When I checked it out before, it did not have a adjustment brush tool like ACR, so that kind of disqualified it for me.  Does it have one know?

 

Jill

[M.Chapman]

25 minutes ago, MDM said:

Not true Harry. The development information travels with the sidecar files. The problem would be that any new features used in the newer version would not be understood by the older one. However, once one uses the newer one and realises the benefits, going back is very unlikely. 

 

I think Harry is partly right. I think the xmp file only holds the final state of any adjustments made. In my experience, it looses the history/sequence in which those changes were made (the history panel goes blank when a RAW and associated XMP are imported into a new catalog). That information seems to be stored exclusively in the catalog. Or maybe you know a trick?

 

Mark

Edited September 25, 2019 by M.Chapman

[Allan Bell]

1 hour ago, NYCat said:

 

I already have the standalone version. Would I need to do anything to preserve it? 

 

Paulette

 

 

 

 

I had LR 6.14 on my computer. When I started on the subscription model it wiped the original 6.14 so I cannot go back to it now.

 

Allan

 

[MDM]

13 minutes ago, M.Chapman said:

 

I think Harry is partly right. I think the xmp file only holds the final state of any adjustments made. In my experience, it looses the history/sequence in which those changes were made (the history panel goes blank when a RAW and associated XMP are imported into a new catalog). That information seems to be stored exclusively in the catalog. Or maybe you know a trick?

 

Mark

Correct it loses the history and also snapshots and probably virtual copies but I think it is likely to be moot as the important point is that it loses anything that used new features of which there are many. I don’t know how an older version would interpret the development metadata from a new version. The main point to take from my previous comment is that the development data (final) is in the  xmp file and not just in the catalog as Harry said. 

[MDM]

17 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

 

I had LR 6.14 on my computer. When I started on the subscription model it wiped the original 6.14 so I cannot go back to it now.

 

Allan

 

I don’t know if you can run the two simultaneously on the same installation but you can install on separate OSs if you want by creating a second Adobe ID. Not tried but there are instructions somewhere on the Adobe website. Why would you.want the older version though?

[John Mitchell]

I agree, the exchange rate can be a killer, and Adobe is rich enough already. I've been using a free version of DxO OpticsPro that DxO gave away a couple of years ago plus Photoshop Elements. I don't do anything fancy, so this combo has been working fine for me. Capture One makes a free "Express" version for Sony that looks pretty good. I'm going to give it a try when I upgrade my PC next year.

[Harry Harrison]

1 hour ago, MDM said:

Not true Harry. The development information travels with the sidecar files

Thank you, you're absolutely right of course, I will correct my post. I can't test how backwards compatible it is but I'll take your word for the fact that it will simply ignore any new LR features in the xmp. I'm slightly concerned as to how it would deal with a new Process Version that changed the name and function of certain features though.

[Harry Harrison]

1 hour ago, M.Chapman said:

I think Harry is partly right

Thanks, I shall take some comfort in the 'partly'!

[NYCat]

Just a note about why I want to preserve the possibility of going back to my standalone Lightroom. The retirement income I have that will last my entire life will only cover basic expenses with nothing left for food and clothing. I have a good nest egg and am doing pleasant part-time work now. But I may not be able to do the work forever and if I were to find I was going too quickly through my nest egg I would want to cut expenses. That could include the subscription. My post processing is usually not elaborate. 

 

Paulette

[MizBrown]

45 minutes ago, NYCat said:

Just a note about why I want to preserve the possibility of going back to my standalone Lightroom. The retirement income I have that will last my entire life will only cover basic expenses with nothing left for food and clothing. I have a good nest egg and am doing pleasant part-time work now. But I may not be able to do the work forever and if I were to find I was going too quickly through my nest egg I would want to cut expenses. That could include the subscription. My post processing is usually not elaborate. 

 

Paulette

 

I have Capture One Express for Sony which does most of what i need if I use it, but it isn't as easy for me as Lightroom, which I've been using for years.   Nikon and Canon both have proprietary programs for processing their raw files, but I have no experience with them.  DXO PhotoLab also has some tricks that the other programs don't appear to have, including very good noise reduction.

 

[John Mitchell]

8 minutes ago, MizBrown said:

 

I have Capture One Express for Sony which does most of what i need if I use it, but it isn't as easy for me as Lightroom, which I've been using for years.   Nikon and Canon both have proprietary programs for processing their raw files, but I have no experience with them.  DXO PhotoLab also has some tricks that the other programs don't appear to have, including very good noise reduction.

 

 

DxO's "prime" noise reduction is really impressive and all automatic, no fiddling around with weird sliders, etc. Love it.

[NYCat]

14 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

 

DxO's "prime" noise reduction is really impressive and all automatic, no fiddling around with weird sliders, etc. Love it.

 

Does it also have a catalog function similar to Lightroom?

 

Paulette

[MDM]

3 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

Thank you, you're absolutely right of course, I will correct my post. I can't test how backwards compatible it is but I'll take your word for the fact that it will simply ignore any new LR features in the xmp. I'm slightly concerned as to how it would deal with a new Process Version that changed the name and function of certain features though.

 

It is simple common sense that an older version cannot interpret new features that didn't exist when it was created. That has been the case with ACR and Lightroom all along. Similarly If using the DNG converter as a workaround for not upgrading because a new camera is not supported in old software, it is not going to introduce new features that don't exist in one's existing version.bNot sure what you mean in your last sentence.

 

1 hour ago, NYCat said:

Just a note about why I want to preserve the possibility of going back to my standalone Lightroom. The retirement income I have that will last my entire life will only cover basic expenses with nothing left for food and clothing. I have a good nest egg and am doing pleasant part-time work now. But I may not be able to do the work forever and if I were to find I was going too quickly through my nest egg I would want to cut expenses. That could include the subscription. My post processing is usually not elaborate. 

 

Paulette

 

Given what you say, I think you should probably stick with what you've got if you don't need to upgrade. I don't think DxO has a database. That is one of the main features of the CC package: it has a database (catalog), an advanced raw converter and the best pixel editing program in existence by far (Photoshop).

 

 

[Harry Harrison]

34 minutes ago, MDM said:

it is not going to introduce new features that don't exist in one's existing version.bNot sure what you mean in your last sentence.

My point about the Process Version was just that after a new Process Version is introduced, as I believe "Version 4" was in 2017, then the parameters recorded in the xmp file will move even further away from those that would have been recorded from 6.14, before that I would surmise that if you didn't use, say, the Haze filter then 6.14 might have interpreted the xmp file correctly. I can't test it so I don't know. The xmp file is just a text file that basically records parameters and values as you know.

 

In fact I would suggest that in certain circumstances the exported xmp file can only be interpreted correctly by your own personal copy of Lightroom. For example, I have a custom curve that I have created for inverting and adding contrast to scans of B&W negatives, the curve, clearly personal to me and called "Inverted + contrast curve", is recorded in the xmp file as follows:

 

crs:ToneCurveName2012="Inverted + contrast curve"

 

So if I was importing that RAW file with its xmp sidecar file into another fresh copy of Lightroom then the image would not be inverted and would have no contrast added. I would have to import that curve into the new version of Lightroom for things to work correctly. I haven't tried it, perhaps I should.

 

Simlilarly I have a custom camera profile which is recorded as:

 

crs:CameraProfile="7D cropped target"

 

I've never really thought about this before so it's probably obvious to you anyway but it does mean that writing to xmp has its limitations with respect to archiving.

 

 

 

[John Mitchell]

1 hour ago, NYCat said:

 

Does it also have a catalog function similar to Lightroom?

 

Paulette

 

No, it's strictly RAW processing software.

[NYCat]

It looks like DXO has made it as easy as possible to use their develop capabilities with Lightroom.... https://www.dxo.com/project/optimizing-your-dxo-opticspro-10-and-lightroom-workflow/   I see John has just replied so I'll end this and take a look at what he has to say. ......OK. I've now read John's post. So the information from DXO looks like my best bet might be to get their program as a plug-in to Lightroom. Could be the best of all possible worlds for me.

 

Paulette

Edited September 25, 2019 by NYCat

[Harry Harrison]

11 hours ago, NYCat said:

It looks like DXO has made it as easy as possible to use their develop capabilities with Lightroom

That loooks potentially like a very good solution for you, useful to know.

[Allan Bell]

17 hours ago, MDM said:

Why would you.want the older version though?

 

Moot point as I cannot go back to it anyway.

 

Allan

 

[Colin Woods]

14 hours ago, NYCat said:

It looks like DXO has made it as easy as possible to use their develop capabilities with Lightroom

I am a DxO user and love it. I tested Lightroom a while back and never got on with it. DxO's automated lens corrections are spot on and, as John said, the noise reduction is excellent. They also now own the Nik collection of plug-ins which are also very good. Its well worth giving DxO a test drive.

[Allan Bell]

17 hours ago, MizBrown said:

Nikon and Canon both have proprietary programs for processing their raw files, but I have no experience with them.

 

When I first started with Alamy I was a Canon user and used their program to process files. I found it to be very good compared to some other newer proprietary programs. In fact I sill have the Canon updated program on my computer just in case I need to use it on the old images.

 

Allan

 

[Allan Bell]

 

Jill and Paulette why don't you both look at Adobe's "Photoshop Elements 2019" selling in the UK for £86.56. It comes with a cut down version of the RAW processor but is most useful in other ways.

 

I have PSE 2014 and still use it for final touching up of images. I prefer the spot removal tool in PSE to the one in LR classic for some jobs.

 

I still get updates for the RAW processor.

 

Allan

 

[M.Chapman]

22 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

 

Jill and Paulette why don't you both look at Adobe's "Photoshop Elements 2019" selling in the UK for £86.56. It comes with a cut down version of the RAW processor but is most useful in other ways.

 

Allan

 

 

Unless it's changed, a key omission in PSE is the excellent automated CA removal which LR and PS CC both have. Whether this matters to you will depend on the quality of your lenses. But in my case my lenses do sometimes show CA and  I couldn't face going back to using those manual CA removal sliders, so that ruled out PSE fo me.

 

Mark

Edited September 26, 2019 by M.Chapman

[NYCat]

2 hours ago, Colin Woods said:

I am a DxO user and love it. I tested Lightroom a while back and never got on with it. DxO's automated lens corrections are spot on and, as John said, the noise reduction is excellent. They also now own the Nik collection of plug-ins which are also very good. Its well worth giving DxO a test drive.

 

I've been using the Nik filters since they were Nik. I was so sorry when they disappeared because they were so supportive. It is a challenge for me to learn new things on the computer and they had wonderful tutorials. I was happy when DXO got them. I still use my original ones. Have they added new capabilities? I have too much going on right now to add DXO but it will happen, I think. 

[NYCat]

49 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

 

Jill and Paulette why don't you both look at Adobe's "Photoshop Elements 2019" selling in the UK for £86.56. It comes with a cut down version of the RAW processor but is most useful in other ways.

 

I have PSE 2014 and still use it for final touching up of images. I prefer the spot removal tool in PSE to the one in LR classic for some jobs.

 

I still get updates for the RAW processor.

 

Allan

 

 

Thanks Allan. I do have Photoshop Elements but never find time to learn how to use it. Anyway, I know that is always an option.

 

Paulette

[Jill Morgan]

1 hour ago, Allan Bell said:

 

Jill and Paulette why don't you both look at Adobe's "Photoshop Elements 2019" selling in the UK for £86.56. It comes with a cut down version of the RAW processor but is most useful in other ways.

 

I have PSE 2014 and still use it for final touching up of images. I prefer the spot removal tool in PSE to the one in LR classic for some jobs.

 

I still get updates for the RAW processor.

 

Allan

 

 

I did try it Allan. No adjustment brush.  That's a tool I'm addicted to as it use it all in my graphic design as well as images.

 

jILL

[Colin Woods]

3 hours ago, NYCat said:

Have they added new capabilities?

No they haven't. If your originals still work they no need to pay for DxO's versions.