- no surprise that images looked sharper in C1 because you were starting with a preset instead of neutral.
I can see that if you're a pro who wants to spend minimal time editing then C1 can have advantages, providing you're happy with someone else's preset.
All raw processors need to use some sort of profile to render the preview from the Raw file, and C1 isn't using a preset anymore than LR is, they just have different default profiles. Which, at the time of LR5, was a more neutral profile than the contrastier and sharper profile used by C1. Today, the default profile for LR is now sharper and contrastier than the default C1 profile. Bringing about complaints from some LR users, who now immediately switch back to the old profile, and praise from others, because it gives a LR default with more "pop" than the older profile used to.
C1 develop their profiles using a mix of technical and subjective measures, including producing between 700 and 800 prints and discussions with clients. Although, they have never said this, it has been suggested that because of their origins, and still a major part of their business. is working with tethered cameras, with clients on set looking at images on a computer or iPad as they come out of the camera, the default profiles are designed to look close to a finished image to help clients judge the quality.
I've never really understood this as I can't see many professionals not developing their own profiles (LumaRiver is a program for making C1 profiles) or their own preset to use over the top of the C1 profile. But regardless, it may still save you editing time, not because you are happy with the C1 default profile, but because its a better starting point than LR. The editing tools in C1 is one of its attractions, and no serious user is going to be happy with the C1 default profile. And there is also an obvious assumption from Phase One that many/ most images will end up in Photoshop for final editing.
As I said in another post, I couldn't get LR output to match C1, even when using Evenings instructions, so I don't think its just a case of applying an appropriate preset to LR. And judging from comments made by professional retouchers where C1+PS now seems to be an almost default combination, the inability of LR to fully match the quality of C1 seems to be fairly commonly held belief.
I use home made Lumariver profiles in C1, or the C1 linear profile option (close to raw) that I apply my own presets to, so I rarely see this contrasty/sharp default profile, but I still find C1 processed files easier to edit than LR processed files, and I prefer the results from C1. Even, if I think the difference is marginal and only really noticeable when making a direct comparisons.
Out of interest, what do you now use to process RAWs, as it seems you don't use either C1 or LR. I wasted vast amounts of time and money testing Raw convertors at one time, and I've now given up and just stick to C1 with LR as a back up, which I have anyway as part of the PS sub. I also use DXO occasionally for the prime noise reduction, but don't like it all that much.