People are sick of subscriptions and hate Adobe right now (they really deserve it). Subscriptions were never for us. So today I compare Lightroom vs DXO Photo Lab.
LR vs DXO Photo – Are there alternatives to Lightroom and C1?
Yes, but it’s complicated. Quality tools like Capture One (that reviewed here) are also turning against their users by going virtually subscription only. So I am going to start testing. Today we look at DXO Photo Lab vs Lightroom.
I mentioned Filmist which includes LUTS you can use right now in DXO! For my LR and C1 users, I used Silver 5, Natural HDR, and my Speed Masks.
Last year I compared Lightroom to Lumiar Neo.
It was not there at a pro level. Luminar Neo got a D in terms of pro-level ability in my review. Lets hope in improves but in the last year much has changed.
It’s a fun tool. But not a serious choice for a pro. We need better integrations and better process quality. But with Lightroom vs DXO Photo Lab 7, there’s a smaller gap.
Lightroom vs DXO Photo Lab – Speed
DXO also has some unique tools and it’s snappy. Something you can’t say for LIghtroom and barely for Capture One. Both are resource-intensive apps.
It’s DXO Photo Lab is not without faults.
The 20 minutes of the video is worth it because I’ll cover the important things that make a pro-level app usable for actual pros. Not just cool features that look good in a sponsored review.
Zero sponsors. Want me to compare more?
None of these apps sponsor me and I have no affiliate links here at this time. This is just an honest comparison from 20 years of professional experience doing real sessions. No shilling.
Rather than write the results of DXO nouse reduction vs Lightroom and extra tests like how it handles processing against Neo, Capture One, etc. It’s all in the video.
If you want more hard tests of these apps let me know and I will not hold back. DXO Photo Lab Vs Lightroom seems to be a real option. But with limitations that I hope they can improve.
Photography has seen many transitions. Glass plates to film, black and white to color. One of the biggest was the film to the digital which saw many photographers unable to transition.
Will we photographers be needed in a world of Ai?
I’ve shown you in recent videos how the Lightroom Ai with tools like Elegance Speed mask presets makes advanced retouching of portraits unreal. Watch that video here. But while we can’t do this in Capture One yet, it’s perhaps not as big a deal as it looks. I’ll show you why…
I’ve always started edits with presets like Filmist or Natural HDR. These work across LR and C1. Then I would go into Photoshop and use Alchemist or BlackRoom and others to refine. I still do all of this, but the new Ai tools make me do more in Lightroom.
We need to stay ahead of the curve but we don’t need to let every new tool change our look. Artificial intelligence is the buzzword. But tools like the Lightroom Ai masks are still not really that intelligent. They do however bring a sign of what’s to come.
For now, things like Lightroom Ai are about saving time. But do we really need the Ai, Is Lightroom really better than Capture One because of it? Is it the best way to edit or should we still use a little Photoshop or Affinity to refine our photos?
It’s pretty amazing what the Ai masks can do. This transformation was virtually instant using my Elegance Speed-Masks which define the parameters and stack the LR Ai masks in one click. But as we see in the video, other methods might take a tad longer but can yield nearly the same result.
In the end, it’s what we create in the camera that defines our photos. Let’s not get blind-sighted. But I also think software can be overhyped. A focus on creating with emotion and soul comes before the edit. The shadow hunt. I think those things are still king.
Don’t miss my next live Shadow hackers workshop so we can talk more about this. Also, leave a comment to share what you think about all these Ai tools such as Lightroom Ai.
Should you use Capture One or Lightroom for your black and white edits? PLUS where does Photoshop for black and white fit in?
We’re going to test that in today’s video with direct comparisons. Taking the sale filed and editing them in each to see what gives us the best black and white in the least time. I’ll give you tips for all of them along the way.
Also, see my Lightroom vs Capture on 2022 video here for a general overview of these two great apps. For now, let’s watch today’s video and do some black and white tests.
Since I started digital photography 20 years I’ve seen just about every technique for Black and White in digital Some needless complex. some are just ugly. Simplifying that process led me to bypass plugins and create tools Like Silver 4 presets and Blackroom BW Actions.
Pure Capture One. While there are fewer BW sliders, you can make up for it with the more advanced color tools and get a stunning result.
Honestly we B&W lovers occasionally get a little snobby, so this question can be complex. But since we no longer have the chemicals we used to use in the darkroom the traditional color filters do not have the same effect. Today to take the same principle and make it work digital.
The best black and white conversions usually start for a color photo because with those color channels we can convert and extract the colors, much like we did with filters in the film days but with more detail. Darkroom like green filter, lighter reds, etc. If you bake black and white in camera, you lose all that power. That’s not to say your BW photos are wrong. Just that they are not as flexible.
So I usually convert on the raw file. In LR or C1. I use my SIlver 4 presets if Filmist. But whether you use creative presets to go further, or all manual. You don’t want to supply desaturate. Use those channels and the power of your RAW.
Watch today’s video above, because we’re looking at Lightroom VS Capture ON in a side-by-side level. Does one give you a better black and white conversion than the other and what are the advantages between Lightroom and C1.
After that, you can go deeper into your black and white edits..
If I’m going to edit my best work. I go beyond RAW. I’ll restore the color channels before going into Photoshop, leaving my other edits in place. Then I can go deeper with my black and white edits. But they are also more complex in Photoshop.
Sometimes it’s not even clear how you can make a better black and white in Photoshop. I use Blackroom to convert to a more complex BW because it always helps me find a way to improve the edit without stumbling around. That’s what it was built for.
Lightroom is a little more user-friendly compares to Capture One. But with Styles or presets, you can get your look fast in both.
In conclusion. Which is best? LR, C1 or PS
When it comes to Lightroom VS Capture One for black and white. I think Lightroom has the edge for ease of use and results that just work. Capture One with its other available tools can perhaps give you more options but with more work. Both are going to work great if you save presets or styles or Have a pack like Silver 4 or Filmsist on hand.
In the end, both are good and the results will be good.
But comparing both to Photoshop. Photoshop offers more options, but with a lot more time spent. Even if you use Photoshop actions to vastly speed up these more advanced edits, Photoshop should probably not be where you start.
Edit normally in Lightroom or in Capture one or another RAW-type editor. Then take the very best images you want to showcase to Photoshop to give them that edge that makes them win.
Lastly, plugins for black and white are heavily hyped. I used them when I all this starting out but native tools have improved a LOT since those days. As I mentioned in the video, a plugin adds another step and takes away control.
Yes, using presets and styles and actions help a lot because they make hard tasks fast. But they use the native app tools in Lightroom, Capture One, and Photoshop. So instead of a new file or a flat image. You just highly refined sliders, adjustable layers, and a totally transparent process. To be that’s a huger win.
Let me know if the comments what you think is the best black and white tool.
Gavin Seim
The detail in Photoshop is almost impossible to beat. Layers and details equal more refinement. So I still take by best photos here in the end after using a RAW style editor.Don’t be afraid to edit your black and white a little more. Whatever app you use. In the end, it’s all about shadow and contrast.
I made a blog post the other day where I showed you the new Filmist 1.7. It has better Portra presets and my new Fuji Classic Chrome preset for Lightroom and as a Capture One Style and a video LUT.
Classic Chrome is a Kodachrome-inspired simulation popular in Fuji Cameras. I wanted a Classic Chrome Preset that worked on any camera.
Even if you don’t like the Classic Chrome look. You’ll find this video useful for your own editing as I’m going to share secrets about how to make more nuanced color edits that work across all kinds of photos and cameras.
Even if you don’t like the Classic Chrome look. You’ll find this video useful for your own editing as I’m going to share secrets about how to make more nuanced color edits that work across all kinds of photos and cameras.
NOTE: If you have my Filmist film presets pack, the latest Classic Chrome-like preset is included in. But in today’s video, I’ll show you the recipe so you can make your version if you prefer.
VIDEO: How to create a match of the look as a Classic Chrome preset.
Why use the preset over the Classic Chrome camera profile…
Balanced greens are still vibrant but not over the top. Bring that slide film feel even applied to a Canon RAW file like this one.
Simulations in-camera can be beautiful. But to get all the options you have, you have to bake them into a JPEG. This means throwing away information for a color recipe. Custom simulations can be made too, but they only work on the baked-in JPEG also.
The other option is to shoot RAW. Most cameras will then allow you to apply that look as a camera-specific profile. Fuji is one example of this. In Lightroom and Capture One you can select Classic Chrome to look as a profile and it will look very similar to it’s baked-in JPEG counterpart.
I wanted a Classic Chrome Preset that works on everything. I apply the Classic Chrome from FIlmist, I can do it on any file regardless of what camera it came from giving me a consistent look. And I can see every slider that’s been affected, adjusting it as needed.
Classic Chrome look in LIghtroom applied to a Sony RAW file. It produces those nice sift colors with rich tones inspired by Kodachrome
In Lightroom and in Capture One I can even adjust the intensity of the Classic Chrome preset. I can’t with a baked-in profile.
So In this video, I want to show you how the new Classic Chrome look stacks up with the Fuji version of this Kodoachrome-inspired look (hint it’s almost perfect). Then we’re going to rest in it non-Fuji file to get the Classic Chrom to look on Sony, Canon etc.
And in case you don’t have my Filmist pack and don’t want to buy it, I’m also going to spill the beans, showing you my settings and channels in case you want to make your own variation of Classic Chrome.
I hope this was helpful. Let me know in the comments if you have any questions. And subscribe to my YouTube channel for more videos like this.
Gavin Seim
While I can use camera-specific color profiles on Fuji files like this one from an XT3, I find it easier to just use the Classic Chrome preset or capture one and have the added control.
The Fuji worm invasion came after the film! In today’s video, I’ll show you how to fix it.
I want to tell you a story as we continue the LR vs C1 experiments because today I going to show more important ways to control details like the wormy artifacts sometimes caused by ISO noise.
I was starting photography in the late 90’s when I saved up for a Canon EOS 3. Oh I thought I was the coolest ever (hint, I was not)
I devoured the magazines. In those days we talked about fine-grain films like the new Portra 400, but words like worms and color noise were not topics. 1600 ISO was about the limit and it was noisy. Take it or leave it!
These days I’ll sit for hours and tinker with a formula for presets like Natural HDR 4 to get the best detail and tone from our files. Photographers that use presets actions and tools get better results. Because they see more without working harder.
35mm film was like having 10-20 megapixels.
This was me in the early 2000’s with my prized EOS 3.
Serious pros of the day said 35mm was not enough. Strangely they downgraded a few years later to the 6MP generation of digital SLR’s.
No matter. My EOS 3 cost $1000 without a lens and I used it for years, starting out my portrait and wedding work and being the official photographer at the local speedway. It had eye control focus, meaning it focused where you looked in the viewfinder. It did not detect the subject’s eyes like today’s cameras. It was just cool and it worked, some of the time.
Each Saturday I would go early to the speedway and pre-sell photos for 15 bucks. Then I would sit all night in the center field taking photos, playing with pans, and getting dusty. On Monday I developed 6-10 rolls of film, sort 4×6 prints, store the negatives and give the prints to my racers, hoping to profit about $200
That 35mm film with it’s noisy ISO 800 grain was what I had and I made it work and I learned a lot in that dusty center field.
But noisy was relative and more organic then. It was silver. These films were classic and looked beautiful. The formulas I’ve created in Filmist presets are more high-res than we had then, but they look great because they look like film.
PS: Download my FREE Filmist pack to get my noise presets and the film looks if you missed it. You’ll see what I mean about film color and detail.
Today I think about the hurdles we had to get a good print and how many stages of noise and artifacts and dust and scratches could be introduced.
Today we pixel peep and panic over a little blip in a sensor or a little noise that as I showed in last weeks video is easy to clean up with good use of detail and grain tools
Watch my worms video and learn how to control detail.
I love doing testing. It’s experimenting like in this week’s video that help us understand more. It’s that hunt that results is tools like my presets and like Emulsion 3 and Lumist for Photoshop.
So this week I uploaded another video looking at more grain and noise. It’s a focus on Fuji files, but also another look at LR vs C1 and how it will handle noise regardless of what camera your worms and artifacts come from.
That’s all for this week. I’m hitting the streets looking for light like I found here and processed with Filmist. Come Monday I’ll be back to my experiments, working on formulas and ideas for next week’s email.
See you then, Gavin Seim
Fuji X100V ISO 800, Filmist process and Gavs detail preset
This was me in the early 2000’s with my prized EOS 3.