Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

robgendreau

macrumors 68040
Jul 13, 2008
3,471
339
I was actually looking for folder sync feature in c1 like in Lightroom so once filled the files could be found in c1 album. Do you know where to find it?

Also would u kind explaining your round back trips workflow after editing somewhere else back to c1 please?

Still haven't found that command.

I just use the import command and import the files that have been edited elsewhere. I seem to recall if you have selected the target folder and go through the import you'll get a dialog box aimed at that folder. It'll just import the new photos. But in general once they are edited I'm done with them, and don't need to do more work in C1 on them. They are just there so I can compare with others in the collection.

EDIT: C1 Express doesn't have that feature; Pro does per Phase One. Kinda lame, but there you go.
 
Last edited:

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Jul 9, 2012
4,587
442
Atlanta
LR vs DXO vs C1 Pro

Keep in mind that this comparison is with LR4, not LR 5. It is focused on raw file handling and editing. As noted it does not compare all the other features (i.e., slideshows, web galleries) that some of these apps may be missing.


http://www.dpreview.com/articles/82...re-one-pro-7-dxo-optics-pro-8-and-lightroom-4

After taking an in-depth look at the performance of Capture One Pro 7, DxO Optics Pro 8 and Lightroom 4, it's clear that these applications all have areas of strength and weakness relative to each other. And that's undoubtedly good, as there's no truly bad choice among them. But this does make it more difficult as a consumer to decide among them. Indeed, selecting the 'best' raw converter really means identifying the one that best fits your photographic needs and priorities. With that in mind, let's recap the results from our showdown.

Speed

If you regularly come back with hundreds of images from a shoot, your first objective is evaluating what you have, separating the keepers from the rejects. While Capture One Pro 7 can import and render image previews twice as fast as Lightroom 4, Adobe's raw converter pays big workflow dividends as you can cycle quickly through your newly imported images without waiting for the screen to refresh with high resolution previews. To be fair, the lag in Capture One Pro 7 is only a second or two between images, and only occurs with the first instance of a newly imported file. And both apps outperform DxO Optics Pro 8, whose image preview cache appears to be rebuilt every time you relaunch the app.

And while Lightroom 4 does not allow you to export files to multiple formats all in one go, as both its rivals do, it does export images in about half the time.

Image quality

While image quality is what most of us think of as the defining trait of a raw converter, the truth is that the differences among Capture One Pro 7, DxO Optics Pro 8 and Lightroom 4 are relatively small. And those that do exist, revolve around default image rendering. Where global color, contrast and saturation are involved, it's rare that you achieve a result in one converter that cannot be reasonably matched in the others.

Having said that, there is obvious benefit to having the most pleasing image to work with at the very start of the image editing process. And while each app handles colors from some camera models better than others, it's hard to find much fault with DxO Optics Pro 8's default settings. Its highlight recovery and moiré removal capabilities are not as robust as the competition, and luminance noise reduction at very high ISO values can be overly aggressive, but if I were on a tight deadline and had to export a JPEG to a client with no time for even basic manual corrections, I'd probably have more confidence in DxO Optics Pro 8 to produce the most pleasing file.

Workflow

When it comes to putting in the work of making your image look the best via manual adjustments, I found Lightroom 4 to have significant advantages in efficiency. From multiple methods of tool slider manipulation, to brush and gradient localized editing tools that don't require user-generated masks, and highly flexible before-and-after comparisons, precision image editing is a very quick process. And batch-applying changes from a single image to multiple ones is very straightforward.

Output

Lightroom 4 offers by far the greatest number of options for sharing your work. Its API allows for publishing and syncing to social media and it also supports old-school book creation. An extensive collection of both HTML and Flash web templates lets you upload highly customizable gallery pages to your site via FTP, and custom onscreen slideshows can also be saved as video files.

Asset management

Capture One Pro has made significant strides as an asset management tool in version 7. Catalog support means you can search, sort and edit metadata for files that are currently offline. Images can be tagged with both keywords and IPTC metadata. You can easily separate keepers from rejects with a star rating system and highlight image status with color-coded labels. If all this sounds like a description of Lightroom 4, that's really the point. Both apps are well-suited to keeping track of your image collection and Capture One Pro 7 even has one trick that Lightroom does not: its catalogs can be shared on a network among multiple users.

Wait, which one should I use?

As I said earlier, the choice of which of these raw converters to use comes down to how you work. Shoot primarily in the studio and need robust tethering capability? Then you'll be very happy with Capture One Pro 7. If you work on a relatively small number of images and/or already have an existing asset management system in place, DxO Optics Pro 8 offers perhaps the best starting point for your edits. And if you're all about workflow efficiency, need tight integration with Adobe Bridge or Photoshop and want the most feature-rich cross-platform app on the market, Lightroom 4 can fit the bill. As raw-shooting photographers we've really got an embarrassment of riches at our disposal right now. You can create some great images no matter which one you choose.
 

hulk2012

macrumors 6502
Jul 13, 2012
336
5
Alternatives to Aperture (What are your plans?)

LR vs DXO vs C1 Pro

Keep in mind that this comparison is with LR4, not LR 5. It is focused on raw file handling and editing. As noted it does not compare all the other features (i.e., slideshows, web galleries) that some of these apps may be missing.


http://www.dpreview.com/articles/82...re-one-pro-7-dxo-optics-pro-8-and-lightroom-4

After taking an in-depth look at the performance of Capture One Pro 7, DxO Optics Pro 8 and Lightroom 4, it's clear that these applications all have areas of strength and weakness relative to each other. And that's undoubtedly good, as there's no truly bad choice among them. But this does make it more difficult as a consumer to decide among them. Indeed, selecting the 'best' raw converter really means identifying the one that best fits your photographic needs and priorities. With that in mind, let's recap the results from our showdown.

Speed

If you regularly come back with hundreds of images from a shoot, your first objective is evaluating what you have, separating the keepers from the rejects. While Capture One Pro 7 can import and render image previews twice as fast as Lightroom 4, Adobe's raw converter pays big workflow dividends as you can cycle quickly through your newly imported images without waiting for the screen to refresh with high resolution previews. To be fair, the lag in Capture One Pro 7 is only a second or two between images, and only occurs with the first instance of a newly imported file. And both apps outperform DxO Optics Pro 8, whose image preview cache appears to be rebuilt every time you relaunch the app.

And while Lightroom 4 does not allow you to export files to multiple formats all in one go, as both its rivals do, it does export images in about half the time.

Image quality

While image quality is what most of us think of as the defining trait of a raw converter, the truth is that the differences among Capture One Pro 7, DxO Optics Pro 8 and Lightroom 4 are relatively small. And those that do exist, revolve around default image rendering. Where global color, contrast and saturation are involved, it's rare that you achieve a result in one converter that cannot be reasonably matched in the others.

Having said that, there is obvious benefit to having the most pleasing image to work with at the very start of the image editing process. And while each app handles colors from some camera models better than others, it's hard to find much fault with DxO Optics Pro 8's default settings. Its highlight recovery and moiré removal capabilities are not as robust as the competition, and luminance noise reduction at very high ISO values can be overly aggressive, but if I were on a tight deadline and had to export a JPEG to a client with no time for even basic manual corrections, I'd probably have more confidence in DxO Optics Pro 8 to produce the most pleasing file.

Workflow

When it comes to putting in the work of making your image look the best via manual adjustments, I found Lightroom 4 to have significant advantages in efficiency. From multiple methods of tool slider manipulation, to brush and gradient localized editing tools that don't require user-generated masks, and highly flexible before-and-after comparisons, precision image editing is a very quick process. And batch-applying changes from a single image to multiple ones is very straightforward.

Output

Lightroom 4 offers by far the greatest number of options for sharing your work. Its API allows for publishing and syncing to social media and it also supports old-school book creation. An extensive collection of both HTML and Flash web templates lets you upload highly customizable gallery pages to your site via FTP, and custom onscreen slideshows can also be saved as video files.

Asset management

Capture One Pro has made significant strides as an asset management tool in version 7. Catalog support means you can search, sort and edit metadata for files that are currently offline. Images can be tagged with both keywords and IPTC metadata. You can easily separate keepers from rejects with a star rating system and highlight image status with color-coded labels. If all this sounds like a description of Lightroom 4, that's really the point. Both apps are well-suited to keeping track of your image collection and Capture One Pro 7 even has one trick that Lightroom does not: its catalogs can be shared on a network among multiple users.

Wait, which one should I use?

As I said earlier, the choice of which of these raw converters to use comes down to how you work. Shoot primarily in the studio and need robust tethering capability? Then you'll be very happy with Capture One Pro 7. If you work on a relatively small number of images and/or already have an existing asset management system in place, DxO Optics Pro 8 offers perhaps the best starting point for your edits. And if you're all about workflow efficiency, need tight integration with Adobe Bridge or Photoshop and want the most feature-rich cross-platform app on the market, Lightroom 4 can fit the bill. As raw-shooting photographers we've really got an embarrassment of riches at our disposal right now. You can create some great images no matter which one you choose.


And that's said by someone who knows nothing about c1. Get to know the programs extensively using them for few months all the same time practising on the same images and then make a judgment. All your "photographers" just making me angry with these stupid talks about what's better or worst. Get to know the product well first!!

C1 once known well blows up any workflow out of the water. Quality - no different. Once zoomed 100% and compared side by side on two 27" calibrated apple screens (or nec) you will know want it means quality. End of story. Chapter closed. C1 and rest miles behind...
 
Last edited:

maflynn

macrumors Haswell
May 3, 2009
73,682
43,740
C1 once known well blows up any workflow out of the water. Quality - no different. Once zoomed 100% and compared side by side on two 27" calibrated apple screens (or nec) you will know want it means quality. End of story. Chapter closed. C1 and rest miles behind...
I think C1 is a powerful tool, but does lack in some editing features that LR has. It largely seems to over come that short coming given its RAW rendering engine.

With that said, it has poor DAM capabilities - one major feature I want in an aperture replacement.

I think having the ability to use plugins is a major hole in the application feature set. No app is perfect, and does everything great. Where it falls down, you can supplement with a plug-in. For instance Aperture doesn't handle noise as well as it maybe should, but then you can use NIK's plugin. C1 may not do something as well as I want it too, but there's no integrated feature for me to leverage. I need to find a solution outside of the app, and then re-import that changed image.

I've been doing a ton of research on LR, C1 etc, and while I will not say I'm an expert in using either app, I think I have a good idea of the short comings in both apps. Make no mistake - both do have short comings.
 

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Jul 9, 2012
4,587
442
Atlanta
Macworld options for Aperture and iPhotos users.


http://www.macworld.com/article/245...photo-what-to-do-with-your-image-library.html



BTW, You can now use DXO as a plugin for LR. That lets use the LR raw converter or use the DXO raw converter and lens corrections......and still have LR as the underlying DAM. That is a great option if someone is very particular about which raw converter is used for a given image. But before signing up for that combo, I would wait to see what will be in LR 6.
 
Last edited:

phoenixsan

macrumors 65816
Oct 19, 2012
1,342
2
I am.....

a photo hobbyist/collector. Not so much into the editing/producing side of photography, and most por personal use. I like so much the way to do things in Aperture and find iPhoto not so much useful for my personal purposes. Out of the curiosity and getting a deal on Lightroom, some time ago I started to use it. But I am not yet fully accustomed....:eek:

Still, I plan for stick on Lightroom. At least Adobe upgrades their products and have a decent support site.....:eek:

:):apple:
 

egis

macrumors member
Sep 3, 2008
76
0
Bethesda, Maryland
LR vs DXO vs C1 Pro

Keep in mind that this comparison is with LR4, not LR 5. It is focused on raw file handling and editing. As noted it does not compare all the other features (i.e., slideshows, web galleries) that some of these apps may be missing.


http://www.dpreview.com/articles/82...re-one-pro-7-dxo-optics-pro-8-and-lightroom-4

snip.

The latest testing I have seen comparing CaptureOne Pro, DxO OP9 and LR5 is here:

http://www.lifeafterphotoshop.com/dxo-vs-lightroom-vs-capture-one-pro-best/

This comparison regarding image quality and noise reduction was done in November 2013. Since then DxO has upgraded their noise functionality several times (the test was done using DxO OP9.0 and they are now at 9.5, and LR has been updated at least twice with two new versions of ACR released, not sure what PhaseOne has released since November.)

Just saying...it would be nice to have a repeat of the testing and analysis.
 
Last edited:

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Jul 9, 2012
4,587
442
Atlanta
I think we are hinting at one of significant problems with comparisons. Namely that if you are comparing 2-4 products who all release 1-3 times a year, to get an accurate comparison of every combo on the market during the year you would have to test maybe 6 or more combos. And some of those combos may only be valid for a fews weeks before one of the products does another release.

Of course that is really good news for us consumers. Hopefully every release adds features, improves performance, and brings in corrections. Note I did say hopefully. ;)
 

r.harris1

macrumors 68020
Feb 20, 2012
2,210
12,757
Denver, Colorado, USA
I think it was posted here, but if not this comparison of raw processing was one of the best I found, but maybe it would depend on whether you used one of the cameras tested:

http://www.nomadlens.com/raw-converters-comparison

This is definitely a decently thorough review, thanks for sharing! It's also not too far off of what I notice anecdotally, some of which will likely be my own preferences, and as you say, potentially the camera. I don't have ASP 2.0, but do have the others.
 

Razeus

macrumors 603
Jul 11, 2008
5,358
2,054
I think it was posted here, but if not this comparison of raw processing was one of the best I found, but maybe it would depend on whether you used one of the cameras tested:

http://www.nomadlens.com/raw-converters-comparison

I've been looking into DXO+Capture One myself, so I'm glad to see this link. I wish Photo Mechanic was cheaper because it is a great ingestion and tagging program since it's so freaking fast.

His comments on Aperture reflect mine. I never saw why some of you thought it was special. Maybe because that initial release for processing RAW + management of files got you, but I thought the program was always sub par.

The Adobe subscription is still cheaper, but LR tries to be all things to everyone, but someone of these more specialized softwares may warrant further looks.

I can see it now:

Photo Mechanics (ingest) + DXO (RAW) + Capture One (RAW) + Photoshop CC + Nik Plug ins + Lightroom for managing files. Sigh. The deal breaker is that DxO doesn't support any of the X-Trans cameras, thus, saving me money.
 

egis

macrumors member
Sep 3, 2008
76
0
Bethesda, Maryland
I think we are hinting at one of significant problems with comparisons. Namely that if you are comparing 2-4 products who all release 1-3 times a year, to get an accurate comparison of every combo on the market during the year you would have to test maybe 6 or more combos. And some of those combos may only be valid for a fews weeks before one of the products does another release.

Of course that is really good news for us consumers. Hopefully every release adds features, improves performance, and brings in corrections. Note I did say hopefully. ;)

Good point MCAsan!! I would like to believe that pro's, pro-sumers and consumers would all benefit, and lets hope - if attempted - it is not limited to just full DAM/raw/retouch/edit software packages - Aperture/Photos(??)/Capture One, etc., but also those offerings that purport to excel at one aspect or another like, DxO OP, FilmPak, ViewPoint for raw, filmlooks, and architectural geometry, NIK for editing and effects, Photoshop, Perfect Photo Suite, Noise Ninja, the open source collections (GIMP, Darktable, Lightzone), the Nikon and Canon offerings, and on and on...

As has been expressed many times here and in other forums, the beauty of most of these offerings is there ability to be used virtually seamlessly with what ever one uses as their base via plug-ins.

Just think - given the recently announced capabilities shown by Apple -- its Core Image APIs, the extensibility of Photos via software extensions and API hooks to third party developers, the ease of use of SWIFT and the power behind METAL -- having some one provide good information and to track all the vendors offerings and functions on metrics like performance, ease of use, sharing, image quality across the workflow, along with lots of room for community involvement would be a fun, if not lucrative idea to pursue (any takers, let's talk!!!).

I thought Rod Lawton with his lifeafterphotoshop site was stepping up to the plate, alas he has migrated to a UK-based Nikon centric publication.

BTW, for all you OP9 users DxO just announced version 9.5.1 for OP (Sony, Nikon and Samsumg cameras are newly profiled). So, if you have one these newer rigs from one of these camera vendors you might want to give the software a whirl.
 

egis

macrumors member
Sep 3, 2008
76
0
Bethesda, Maryland
I've been looking into DXO+Capture One myself, so I'm glad to see this link. I wish Photo Mechanic was cheaper because it is a great ingestion and tagging program since it's so freaking fast.

His comments on Aperture reflect mine. I never saw why some of you thought it was special. Maybe because that initial release for processing RAW + management of files got you, but I thought the program was always sub par.

The Adobe subscription is still cheaper, but LR tries to be all things to everyone, but someone of these more specialized softwares may warrant further looks.

I can see it now:

Photo Mechanics (ingest) + DXO (RAW) + Capture One (RAW) + Lightroom for managing files. Sigh.

Perhaps, and this is a "perhaps" with a long tail, just might be possible - if the vendors play with Apple and provide modules that can be plugged-in - then the stack might be:

Photos/PhotoMechanics + DxO OP + Capture One (raw) + LR +...name your vendor.

OnOne is most certainly a vendor I would think will come to the Apple 3rd Party Photo circle, others like MacPhun, Photmatix, Pixemator, Acorn, HumanSoftware will too. Then Adobe - as they have no good reason (IMHO) to lead the charge.

This will take time. So, right now I am going with what I know works (see signature). I will keep AP3 up, but use LR5 connected with DxO OP and FilmPak, augmented by OnOne Perftect Photo Suite, and PS CS6. I am not moving into the CC world.
 

Razeus

macrumors 603
Jul 11, 2008
5,358
2,054
Perhaps, and this is a "perhaps" with a long tail, just might be possible - if the vendors play with Apple and provide modules that can be plugged-in - then the stack might be:

Photos/PhotoMechanics + DxO OP + Capture One (raw) + LR +...name your vendor.

OnOne is most certainly a vendor I would think will come to the Apple 3rd Party Photo circle, others like MacPhun, Photmatix, Pixemator, Acorn, HumanSoftware will too. Then Adobe - as they have no good reason (IMHO) to lead the charge.

This will take time. So, right now I am going with what I know works (see signature). I will keep AP3 up, but use LR5 connected with DxO OP and FilmPak, augmented by OnOne Perftect Photo Suite, and PS CS6. I am not moving into the CC world.

Still, I can't, and no one shouldn't, count on Apple to deliver a great RAW converter. That's the rub, especially since Apple can't be bothered to update support for new camera RAW files judging by the 4+ months wait to support my X-E2 and the verdict is still out on the Olympus EM 10 which is now 7 months without RAW file support.

Apple can't be counted on by the pros or serious amateur unless they shoot jpeg only, especially since some of us are using X-Trans sensors (Fuji is the odd man out, I know) instead of traditional Bayer sensors that 99.999% of the market uses.
 

r.harris1

macrumors 68020
Feb 20, 2012
2,210
12,757
Denver, Colorado, USA
I've been looking into DXO+Capture One myself, so I'm glad to see this link. I wish Photo Mechanic was cheaper because it is a great ingestion and tagging program since it's so freaking fast.

His comments on Aperture reflect mine. I never saw why some of you thought it was special. Maybe because that initial release for processing RAW + management of files got you, but I thought the program was always sub par.

The Adobe subscription is still cheaper, but LR tries to be all things to everyone, but someone of these more specialized softwares may warrant further looks.

I can see it now:

Photo Mechanics (ingest) + DXO (RAW) + Capture One (RAW) + Photoshop CC + Nik Plug ins + Lightroom for managing files. Sigh. The deal breaker is that DxO doesn't support any of the X-Trans cameras, thus, saving me money.

Aperture, for me, does very well on the DAM front and general light duty RAW operations. It makes a great base for my beloved Nik plugins. I've been using PM for quite a while on ingest and have been experiementing with something similar to the above over the last couple of weeks.

PM (ingest, backup, rename, grade, etc) + PhotoNinja/C1 for RAW + Photoshop CC + Nik and right now still Aperture for publishing, photobooks, etc, special projects.

----------

Still, I can't, and no one shouldn't, count on Apple to deliver a great RAW converter. That's the rub, especially since Apple can't be bothered to update support for new camera RAW files judging by the 4+ months wait to support my X-E2 and the verdict is still out on the Olympus EM 10 which is now 7 months without RAW file support.

Apple can't be counted on by the pros or serious amateur unless they shoot jpeg only, especially since some of us are using X-Trans sensors (Fuji is the odd man out, I know) instead of traditional Bayer sensors that 99.999% of the market uses.

Maybe, but I do honestly think that will change with Yosemite with the renewed focus on RAW processing they seem to be exhibiting. Whether that translates into camera model support remains to be seen, but RAW is at least semi front-and-center with them right now.
 

egis

macrumors member
Sep 3, 2008
76
0
Bethesda, Maryland


Maybe, but I do honestly think that will change with Yosemite with the renewed focus on RAW processing they seem to be exhibiting. Whether that translates into camera model support remains to be seen, but RAW is at least semi front-and-center with them right now.

Yep, +1...Razeus, look forward, not what Apple has now with Aperture. That architecture and their core API in Mavericks and previous versions of Mac OS X is being re-engineered and re-architected with Yosemite. https://developer.apple.com/videos/wwdc/2014/ (you can now download the slides)...
 
Last edited:

mlblacy

macrumors 6502a
Sep 23, 2006
524
40
the REAL Jersey Shore
not panicking, yet... waiting and seeing what actually comes out

https://www.macrumors.com/2014/06/27/aperture-development-stops/

This seems to all but seal the fate of Aperture, especially if Apple made the statement. I've used Aperture since it's introduction and have enjoyed it. In particular I've become comfortable with my "ecosystem" of Aperture, the NIK plugin, and the Zenfolio plugin. That has defined my prosumer (if you will) work flow for a few years now.

I'm not interested in bashing Apple for dropping Aperture or debating the merits of Ap vs LR vs Photos. What I'm interested in is what everyone is using for post and photo management and in particular what Aperture users are looking at to convert to.

To my limited knowledge (at this point) there seems to be a few options:

1. Continue to use Aperture/NIK for as long as I can. ...

Pretty clear choice for me, sticking with Aperture and NIK until the wheels fall off.

I have hopes that the new program will be sufficient. MOST of my image correction is done within NIK anyway. As long as it can handle large libraries, and multiple libraries, I am not worried yet. (I would be happier if they were continuing development though).

I hate Adobe, and especially hate their continual plan to milk users out of revenue (when the updates are less than compelling). To me, their sub plan is out of greed, and trying to capture us "update skippers". Also, I have zero faith that they are not going to just jack the rates up after a bit anyhow.

So, a clear vote for status quo, until the actual program details are out.
 

maflynn

macrumors Haswell
May 3, 2009
73,682
43,740
I think it was posted here, but if not this comparison of raw processing was one of the best I found, but maybe it would depend on whether you used one of the cameras tested:

http://www.nomadlens.com/raw-converters-comparison

Great link and it confirms my suspicions regarding LR vs. C1.

The thing is while the LR may have performed worse then C1, thanks to its tool set, plugins and superior DAM capability. Its hard to beat.

I was playing with C1 today and liked a lot of what I saw. I also played LR5 and liked a lot of what it had, such as the radial filter, healing tool etc.
 

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Jul 9, 2012
4,587
442
Atlanta
Then you should be fine though at least 10.10 Yosemite. Apple may have to give Aperture a small dot release to work on Yosemite. I guess we will know more in September.
 

r.harris1

macrumors 68020
Feb 20, 2012
2,210
12,757
Denver, Colorado, USA
I just read over at the Pixelmator website that they're kicking around ideas for extensions to Photos.app. I think the concept of extensions could potentially be pretty amazing and I'd love to see what those guys and others come up with. The ultimate fantasy is that Photos.app combines what Apple is good at (DAM stuff) with the best of Pixelmator, Nik, DxO, others for an outstanding experience. A modular, pluggable best of breed product.

Obviously, fantasies are just fantasies :D.
 

OreoCookie

macrumors 68030
Apr 14, 2001
2,727
90
Sendai, Japan
Apple can't be counted on by the pros or serious amateur unless they shoot jpeg only, especially since some of us are using X-Trans sensors (Fuji is the odd man out, I know) instead of traditional Bayer sensors that 99.999% of the market uses.
I don't get it: once Apple releases the RAW converter for Fuji cameras, what problem do you have left? I'm very happy with the conversion of my X100s' RAW files.
 

robgendreau

macrumors 68040
Jul 13, 2008
3,471
339
I don't get it: once Apple releases the RAW converter for Fuji cameras, what problem do you have left? I'm very happy with the conversion of my X100s' RAW files.

Brushing aside the use of "when" vs "if" there is still the question of the quality of the conversion. And lenses. And although some of that can of course be compensated for in other ways via editing, it sure is nice to have a better image to start with.

It's weird too. My E-M10 uses the same sensor as earlier models, such that even if I tweak some metadata and fake a M1 it will render a pretty decent image. So I don't really understand why Apple doesn't have RAW support for it, when even shareware programs do. That's a lack of commitment that I think is telling.
 

Razeus

macrumors 603
Jul 11, 2008
5,358
2,054
I don't get it: once Apple releases the RAW converter for Fuji cameras, what problem do you have left? I'm very happy with the conversion of my X100s' RAW files.

The questions is WHEN they'll release it. It's also a question of IF according to owner's of the EM-10. There commitment has proven to be lacking time and time again.

For all we know, Apple is just laying the framework for RAW conversion, expecting devs to take care of the rest.

I can see Apple:

Years the latest and greatest in RAW conversions. How you need lens corrections? See the App Store? Better geotagging? App Store. You need a DAM? App Store. HDR? App Store.

Showing me your exposure sliders and noise reduction algorithms built in to the OS doesn't tell me squat about the Photos app. I can see just from looking at it, that it's a cloud storage app for soccer mom's with the ability to edit. I'm hoping the reason the desktop app is taking much longer than the launch of Yosemite is that they have something in store for us serious users.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.