Alternatives to Lightroom?

jerry12953 said:
You could say that everyone with an opinion is biased! I found the article very useful.
Click to expand...
Kloslowski, or however you spell it, is well known as an Adobe and OnOne promoter/endorsee.

There are other alternatives to ON1, Luminar and Capture One available.
Anyone who lists alternative raw developers to Lightroom without including ACDSee, DXO, PhotoNinja and ExposureX3 and probably many others, is presenting an innacurate picture.

I still believe that Lightroom is the best raw developer available, but I have an open mind regarding an alternative.
All the replacements offer a 30-day trial, so there's no excuse for not investigating them.
 
He's actually very fair on PS v Affinity, but the stuff about paying the companies every year is very much from the point of view Adobe wants us to think is the new normal:

'When it comes to money, I believe they’re all going to extract $100-ish from you every year. How you choose to pay for that is up to you – one lump sum, or monthly. Just know that at the end of the year, you’ll end up paying $100-ish (give or take a little), if you’re going to stay updated. And I believe in this day and age (especially with competitors playing catch-up), you need to plan to upgrade every year. After all, besides the in-camera capture process, editing is the most important tool for your photography. So plan to invest in it accordingly.'

I suspect a lot of people used to upgrade LR only when they bought a new camera that wasn't supported by their existing version.
 
He does mention DXO at the end, but having DXO myself, I find it hard to treat as a lightroom replacement because the tools are so very limited for anything more than basic image development - even their dust spot removal tool didn't work properly in version 9, and it's not exactly great in V11. That may change next year when Nik gets regurgitated.
 
IMO, if you are a serious user with a lot of images or videos, there is simply no alternative to LR + PS.
No other products on the market can remotely compete with Adobe in all three departments: DAM, non destructive editing and Layered pixel oriented.
The price of $10 per month for LR plus PS is simply insanely cheap and I don't see how anyone can compete against this price.
Also, if you commit to another product, you are taking serious risk of reliability in the long term.
I am very happy with Adobe suite (I also use heavily After Effects and Premiere) and so far I am not overly bothered with LR shortcoming.
I have more than 10 TB of files in my only catalog (mostly 4k videos and timelapse), but so far I have managed to get decent performances from LR
 
Justin Case said:
IMO, if you are a serious user with a lot of images or videos, there is simply no alternative to LR + PS.
No other products on the market can remotely compete with Adobe in all three departments: DAM, non destructive editing and Layered pixel oriented.
The price of $10 per month for LR plus PS is simply insanely cheap and I don't see how anyone can compete against this price.
Also, if you commit to another product, you are taking serious risk of reliability in the long term.
I am very happy with Adobe suite (I also use heavily After Effects and Premiere) and so far I am not overly bothered with LR shortcoming.
I have more than 10 TB of files in my only catalog (mostly 4k videos and timelapse), but so far I have managed to get decent performances from LR
Click to expand...
I've been thinking about reasons not to subscribe to the Adobe CC model.

As an existing Photoshop (CS6) and Lightroom (6.13) user, I think the main reason I don't want to pay the monthly hire fee for Photoshop and Lightroom is because I've already bought them.

I object to paying an additional monthly amount for software that I already own.
Maybe if I were starting from nothing it would be a different story.

There's no arguiment that PS and LR are excellent products, and are the 'industry standard' for image editing.

I shall continue to use them as long as my operating system will allow me to run them.
When the time comes that they are no longer supported by Windows, I will then seek an alternative.
 
For the enthusiast/hobbyist i think any half decent software can give a satisfactory result.

For pros its a bit different as they probaby have a more critical eye and will need to use perhaps more advanced tools
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
For the enthusiast/hobbyist i think any half decent software can give a satisfactory result.
For pros its a bit different as they probaby have a more critical eye and will need to use perhaps more advanced tools
Click to expand...
Not just that... but for an enthusiast it can be enjoyable to learn to use new software, for a pro it can be a chore which gets in the way of what “important”: getting the job done in a timely fashion and getting paid. It’s the same thing Microsoft relied on - Windows and Office might not have been the best, but everyone was used to it so was (is) hard to swap; it’s only when you can’t do something specific with your existing tool you start to look elsewhere.
 
I agree and for example this forum consiste of pros semi pros and hobbyists beginners etc so one has to
be clear exactly what is important and not to get pulled into say the pro’s workflow,opinions on kit etc without realising there are many levels and i guess understanding just exactly what it is one really wants or needs in
Photography otherwise speaking from experience one can end up spending a lot of time and money and then realising well actually there was no need to have done so after all.
Having emerged not too badly scorched i m finding photography a lot more fun now without constantly trying to be what im not .YMMV
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
For the enthusiast/hobbyist i think any half decent software can give a satisfactory result.

For pros its a bit different as they probaby have a more critical eye and will need to use perhaps more advanced tools
Click to expand...
What an extremely condescending attitude!
Amateurs have lower standards than professsionals?
Not in our photo club, where most members (myself included) seem to use the same tools that are available to pros.

I for one, am not looking for a "satisfactory result" - I want an excellent (to my eyes) result.
 
Brian G said:
What an extremely condescending attitude!
Amateurs have lower standards than professsionals?
Not in our photo club, where most members (myself included) seem to use the same tools that are available to pros.

I for one, am not looking for a "satisfactory result" - I want an excellent (to my eyes) result.
Click to expand...
Lol Brian,sorry if it came across as that,it wasnt meant to be,i was thinking more on the bulk editing that a lot of say wedding photographers need for a quick turnaround,i know personally a pro that uses and needs this aspect of say lightroom as opposed to say dxo pro11 where one has to process each photo and its quite a slow process which i dont mind and like you if i like a photo i want to do the best i can for it nd have a few software options.
Hope this clarifies my point as im quite sure you only want to produce the highest quality product possible
 
Also maybe i should have used the word pro to also mean someone like yourself who maybe doesnt do photography for a living but wants the highest possible result
as opposed to me who whilst at times will spend a lot of time on a photogrpah generally am happy with just a little tweaking
 
It's definitely not a Pro v Hobbyist thing. There's no denying that the latter can be extremely fastidious about their photography, and can produce some fantastic results.

Speaking as a pro, though, the important thing for me is the final image. Some people may enjoy trying out new software and doing comparisons of one versus another. The important thing for me is really knowing the software inside out so that I can quickly get the best out of the image. After ten years using digital I'm still on that learning curve and Lightroom has been an absolute boon for me. So the thought that I might have to re-learn my processing using different software is not a welcome one. In that sense Adobe have me by the short and curlies. Presumably they have taken a decision that people like me are more likely to bite the bullet with the subscription model than not. Hence my bitterness with what they have decided to do.
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
Lol Brian,sorry if it came across as that,it wasnt meant to be,i was thinking more on the bulk editing that a lot of say wedding photographers need for a quick turnaround,i know personally a pro that uses and needs this aspect of say lightroom as opposed to say dxo pro11 where one has to process each photo and its quite a slow process which i dont mind and like you if i like a photo i want to do the best i can for it nd have a few software options.
Hope this clarifies my point as im quite sure you only want to produce the highest quality product possible
Click to expand...
Fair enough. My comments were intended to be a little "tongue in cheek" as well.
I would hope that everyone, pro or amateur, is processing for the best result they can achieve, whatever software they use.
Of course, a professional, who may be working to a deadline, may not have the luxury of time, in the way that an amateur has.

jerry12953 said:
It's definitely not a Pro v Hobbyist thing. There's no denying that the latter can be extremely fastidious about their photography, and can produce some fantastic results.

Speaking as a pro, though, the important thing for me is the final image. Some people may enjoy trying out new software and doing comparisons of one versus another. The important thing for me is really knowing the software inside out so that I can quickly get the best out of the image. After ten years using digital I'm still on that learning curve and Lightroom has been an absolute boon for me. So the thought that I might have to re-learn my processing using different software is not a welcome one. In that sense Adobe have me by the short and curlies. Presumably they have taken a decision that people like me are more likely to bite the bullet with the subscription model than not. Hence my bitterness with what they have decided to do.
Click to expand...
I think Pro or Amateur, the final image is the important thing for everyone.
Having auditioned a couple of the "Lightroom replacement" candidates, it's evident that at least some of the software developers have gone to some lengths to make their product "feel" like Lightroom, to the extent that many of the adjustment menus resemble those in LR, and often the keyboard shortcuts use the same keys.
I don't think that learning a new program would be particularly difficult or daunting, nor require too much "unlearning" of familiar commands.
At least one of the alternatives I've looked at offer different, and to my eyes, improved adjustment tools to those in LR, although the overall results were less impressive, and I still think that Lightroom is the program to beat.
 
If you're a windows user it looks like ACDsee has come a long way. They do have a version for mac, but it doesn't have layers capability like the top level windows version does (yet).
 
Last edited:
Lol talking about this should adobe not make a price for pro usage of the software and a lighter price for amateur usage?
It's like this for a lot of software product.
 
Lemaildetom said:
Lol talking about this should adobe not make a price for pro usage of the software and a lighter price for amateur usage?
It's like this for a lot of software product.
Click to expand...


But who who define or agree on pro/amateur use?

Edit: Sorry for the garbage. What I meant was -

How do you define pro or amateur use? In my opinion there's too much made of the difference between pro and amateur use and there's a huge grey area between them anyway.
 
Last edited:
jerry12953 said:
The important thing for me is really knowing the software inside out so that I can quickly get the best out of the image. After ten years using digital I'm still on that learning curve and Lightroom has been an absolute boon for me.
Click to expand...

Off topic, but do you also use PS and if your knowledge of LR 10 years ago was as good as it is now, would you have processed differently?

As amateur I enjoy using LR but I do not find PS intuitive.
 
Lemaildetom said:
Lol talking about this should adobe not make a price for pro usage of the software and a lighter price for amateur usage?
It's like this for a lot of software product.
Click to expand...
There is a special price for students... but only for the full Creative Cloud. Essentially the ~£10 for Lightroom + Photoshop is already a special price (for any photographer)... a single CC app such as Photoshop is usually ~£20 per month.
 
Nothing definite is known about what Affinity's potential DAM product - they've suggested at various times that it's something they'd like to do, but according to their Twitter account in October, it isn't being worked on at the moment. If it happens, it will be after Publisher has been released, which is apparently what they are prioritising (along with their iPad apps).
 
Last edited:
Archie747 said:
Off topic, but do you also use PS and if your knowledge of LR 10 years ago was as good as it is now, would you have processed differently?

As amateur I enjoy using LR but I do not find PS intuitive.
Click to expand...
Archie747 said:
Off topic, but do you also use PS and if your knowledge of LR 10 years ago was as good as it is now, would you have processed differently?

As amateur I enjoy using LR but I do not find PS intuitive.
Click to expand...

No, I don't use Photoshop. There's a couple of things in it that I probably would use if I had access to it and the knowledge of how to use it. For me anything that can be done in Lightroom is equivalent to what could have been done in a film darkroom and that's as far down the manipulation route as I really want to go.

I did use PS when I first went digital but I found it horrible. As a beginner, the things I wanted to do seemed to be hidden deep in incomprehensible menus. So as soon as i became aware of lightroom I went for it - v2, IIRC. I really don't think it's an amateur v pro issue at all. Some people must thrive in Photoshop whereas others like the more intuitive approach taken by LR.

Lightroom has changed and improved over the years I've been using it. So if I needed to go back to images from the earlier days I would definitely re-process them. And also I've learned more of what is possible as well, so I don't know if that answers your question?
 
Last edited:
Brian G said:
I've been thinking about reasons not to subscribe to the Adobe CC model.

As an existing Photoshop (CS6) and Lightroom (6.13) user, I think the main reason I don't want to pay the monthly hire fee for Photoshop and Lightroom is because I've already bought them.

I object to paying an additional monthly amount for software that I already own.
Maybe if I were starting from nothing it would be a different story.

There's no arguiment that PS and LR are excellent products, and are the 'industry standard' for image editing.

I shall continue to use them as long as my operating system will allow me to run them.
When the time comes that they are no longer supported by Windows, I will then seek an alternative.
Click to expand...
This is my sentiment exactly!
As a user of PS and LR since virtually the beginning I really have an issue with the fact that Adobe built these products, albeit partially, off the back (feedback) of the hundreds of thousands of users over the years. I always purchased the updates and new versions (sucker). Put up with all the bugs and problems over the versions and this is how Adobe (now they have grown into the giant they are) repays you.
Call it sour grapes if you like, I'll be doing the same as @Brian G ! Lets face it basically LR is just a glorified RAW converter (well thats how it started).
Don't get me wrong I like both programs and they are excellent, but i wont be bullied into a subscription by anyone.

I think the Amateur / Pro argument is irrelevant.
I think this will open the doors for a lot of compeditors, and IMHO not Adobe's cleverest move, trying to rely on the fact there considered to be the industry standard software.
 
jerry12953 said:
No, I don't use Photoshop. There's a couple of things in it that I probably would use if I had access to it and the knowledge of how to use it. For me anything that can be done in Lightroom is equivalent to what could have been done in a film darkroom and that's as far down the manipulation route as I really want to go.

I did use PS when I first went digital but I found it horrible. As a beginner, the things I wanted to do seemed to be hidden deep in incomprehensible menus. So as soon as i became aware of lightroom I went for it - v2, IIRC. I really don't think it's an amateur v pro issue at all. Some people must thrive in Photoshop whereas others like the more intuitive approach taken by LR.

Lightroom has changed and improved over the years I've been using it. So if I needed to go back to images from the earlier days I would definitely re-process them. And also I've learned more of what is possible as well, so I don't know if that answers your question?
Click to expand...

Good answer, thanks for taking the time.
 
The one thing about Photoshop is that if you were used to, for instance, version 4, it can still be used in exactly the same way with the same shortcuts. That's why it's the standard amongst graphics professionals; if you don't need all of the new features, it works exactly the same as before therefore the ongoing training costs are kept quite low.
I've spent many years working in the music industry where ProTools used to rule the roost, and still does in many studios. The difference to PS is that there are options available at different prices depending on your requirements, from very cut down ProTools (barely usable) to extremely expensive solutions costing many thousands of pounds. ProTools has also moved to a subscription model but again with very differing prices depending on which version you choose.
Have to say that the more I use CaptureOne the more I like it. Luckily I've been able to buy the Sony version for £50.
 
LancsLee said:
The one thing about Photoshop is that if you were used to, for instance, version 4, it can still be used in exactly the same way with the same shortcuts. That's why it's the standard amongst graphics professionals; if you don't need all of the new features, it works exactly the same as before therefore the ongoing training costs are kept quite low.
I've spent many years working in the music industry where ProTools used to rule the roost, and still does in many studios. The difference to PS is that there are options available at different prices depending on your requirements, from very cut down ProTools (barely usable) to extremely expensive solutions costing many thousands of pounds. ProTools has also moved to a subscription model but again with very differing prices depending on which version you choose.
Have to say that the more I use CaptureOne the more I like it. Luckily I've been able to buy the Sony version for £50.
Click to expand...

Yes thats very true, if you have used PS from the earlier version the shortcuts all work the same, it also gives you a fighting chance to learn some of the new tools while still using a new version with what you already know. This is of course is one of the banes of moving to a completely different package having to learn a new software package all over again.
I really think that Adobe could have found a better way and I always thought that they would go a similar route with for example Photoshop Elements and then Increments upward. Lets face it today Photoshop is not just used by photographers as it once was. I'm sure there are many tools that most of us never use.

Having the last stand alone versons of both LR and PS these will do more than what I need. For those in the same situation its worth noting that there are many 3rd party plug ins that will replicate the tools available in newer versions. For example Dehaze tool in Lightroom, this is available as a free plug in, (just google it) ok it might not be as slick and the intergrated version but it works! Also excellent range from the Google Nik collection now a free download (I would recommend you download them now incase someone buys them up, download and keep even if you don't install).
OK it is a pain having to faff around a bit, and if this isnt your cup of tea then at least it may be a stop gap until there is a good replacement, which I'm sure with the decision that Adobe have taken will spur other companies to produce an alternative. Topaz stuff is nice but can be expensive, but with it you do get updates for life.
 
I agree that Photoshop is catering to all sectors of the graphics market. Adobe now spends a lot of time on developments for other graphic applications, e.g. some of the 3D options, that I never touch and probably never will. It also offers integration with other Adobe programs such as InDesign that not many photographers are going to utilise. Not only does this lead to menu clutter but it also bloats the application. Thinking back to Photoshop 6, it pretty much had everything in there that I could want in a photo editing package. Add in some the the newer RAW capabilities and you've got photography covered. However, different versions requires bigger development and support teams which unfortunately isn't going to happen anytime soon.
 
I've just been through trials of ACDsee and Capture one, they didn't do it for me so I have begrudgingly, finally given in and gone to LR classic CC. I have always used LR, I originally bought 4 then upgraded to 5 and have been using 5.7 happily enough for the past few years. I just got a Panasonic G80 however and it is not supported, great. Only choice seemed to be upgrade to Classic, or get another program. Any time I try one of the others they always seem to lack something, or they're too confusing for my little brain. LR have it nailed, I just don't like being tied to a sub.

Capture one seemed like it could grow on me, but it's expensive and I couldn't see any specific reason to opt for that over CC. You can do a sub, it's €20 p.m Vs LR CC €12
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I've just been through trials of ACDsee and Capture one, they didn't do it for me so I have begrudgingly, finally given in and gone to LR classic CC. I have always used LR, I originally bought 4 then upgraded to 5 and have been using 5.7 happily enough for the past few years. I just got a Panasonic G80 however and it is not supported, great. Only choice seemed to be upgrade to Classic, or get another program. Any time I try one of the others they always seem to lack something, or they're too confusing for my little brain. LR have it nailed, I just don't like being tied to a sub.

Capture one seemed like it could grow on me, but it's expensive and I couldn't see any specific reason to opt for that over CC. You can do a sub, it's €20 p.m Vs LR CC €12
Click to expand...
After trying all the packages I could for free, I have just purchased DXO photo lab elite. The Prime noise reduction is amazing. I too have the G80, and last weekend I took some photos in poor light of Otters inside a fallen tree trunk so even less light. The noise from using high ISO made the shots very poor, but Prime made them into something very usable. I now just have to learn the rest of DXO, but for mirrorless at high ISO's like with the G80, I think it was a good move!!
 
wellyboot said:
After trying all the packages I could for free, I have just purchased DXO photo lab elite. The Prime noise reduction is amazing. I too have the G80, and last weekend I took some photos in poor light of Otters inside a fallen tree trunk so even less light. The noise from using high ISO made the shots very poor, but Prime made them into something very usable. I now just have to learn the rest of DXO, but for mirrorless at high ISO's like with the G80, I think it was a good move!!
Click to expand...

That is one I haven't tried, must give it a trial. I found some tips for LR that do a decent job on noise at higher ISO, it's for the Em1 but it works fine for G80 files too with a little personal tweaking. I just followed his suggestions and made a preset.

https://www.mu-43.com/threads/how-t...h-iso-and-color-rendition-from-our-omd.76508/
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I've just been through trials of ACDsee and Capture one, they didn't do it for me so I have begrudgingly, finally given in and gone to LR classic CC. I have always used LR, I originally bought 4 then upgraded to 5 and have been using 5.7 happily enough for the past few years. I just got a Panasonic G80 however and it is not supported, great. Only choice seemed to be upgrade to Classic, or get another program. Any time I try one of the others they always seem to lack something, or they're too confusing for my little brain. LR have it nailed, I just don't like being tied to a sub.

Capture one seemed like it could grow on me, but it's expensive and I couldn't see any specific reason to opt for that over CC. You can do a sub, it's €20 p.m Vs LR CC €12
Click to expand...

You could do the basic image correction in DXO Optics Pro, then export as a .tif to lightroom with the corrections in place.
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
Keith are you on pc or mac?
Click to expand...
ancient_mariner said:
You could do the basic image correction in DXO Optics Pro, then export as a .tif to lightroom with the corrections in place.
Click to expand...


I'm on windows [10] I'm going to give DXO trial a go along side LR for the 30 days and see how it goes :) I don't know if I would buy it as well as paying the LR sub, one or the other more likely.
 
Cagey75 said:
I'm on windows [10] I'm going to give DXO trial a go along side LR for the 30 days and see how it goes :) I don't know if I would buy it as well as paying the LR sub, one or the other more likely.
Click to expand...
Has the free dxo11 pro expired?
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
Has the free dxo11 pro expired?
Click to expand...

I didn't know there was different versions, I just grabbed the 30-day trial of DXO Photolab here: https://www.dxo.com/us/download/dxo-photolab

So far just messed about with a few random RAW files, it's easy to get the hang of the layout - unlike some of the others. I seem to have lost the sharpening panel though, I swear it was there at start :LOL:

[edit] I see now what you're referring to, it says the promo was finished on Nov 30th, but I stuck my email in anyway and it's sent me a code, fingers crossed
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top