- #ADOBE LIGHTROOM CC VS LIGHTROOM CLASSIC CC SKIN#
- #ADOBE LIGHTROOM CC VS LIGHTROOM CLASSIC CC SOFTWARE#
Shot at 16 mm, notice how the image on the left produced by Lightroom has been automatically cropped to remove vignetting that is only there at 15 mm.
The lens profiles apply sharpening corrections only where needed and not across the entire image. The following example, courtesy of DxO, shows the same image file with Lightroom on the left and Photolab on the right. So, from 16-30 mm, the 15mm vignette crop correction is applied, even though it is unnecessary.
#ADOBE LIGHTROOM CC VS LIGHTROOM CLASSIC CC SOFTWARE#
Other software applies the same crop to remove that, not just at 15mm but across the entire range of focal lengths. Why does this matter? If you take, for example, the newly released Canon 15-30mm STM, it has a heavy vignette at 15mm. They claim: “DxO’s corrections are unique and bespoke to each camera and lens combination.” This is because they have “analyzed hundreds of cameras and thousands of lenses, across tens of thousands of combinations, all using the most extensive testing protocols in the industry.” In comparison, other software uses generic data. This makes a significant difference to the way profiles are applied for cameras and different lenses. Photolab 6 has access to DxO’s extensive lens test data. The shadows slider could be pushed further than in Lightroom, giving more scope for correction before resorting to adjusting the tone curve. When developing raw files, the adjustment sliders were the most precise I have tried.
#ADOBE LIGHTROOM CC VS LIGHTROOM CLASSIC CC SKIN#
Colors were more vibrant, skin tones looked healthier, and the images were cleaner. It was hard to put my finger on why, but they jumped out more. The photos seemed to have more presence than those produced by Adobe’s raw engine. The developed images were also far better than anything I could achieve in Lightroom Classic. The straight-out-of-camera results were impressive across the range of camera raw files I tested. However, I am also lightly testing the ability to recover shadows and highlight details and how accurate the adjustment sliders are. However, the purpose of these articles is to look solely at the unchanged raw conversions for the different camera brands. I found the catalog feature simpler to use than Capture One’s but not as intuitive as Lightroom, and it hasn’t the same digital asset management (DAM) functionality.
It also has its highly regarded built-in Deep Prime noise reduction.Īlso, like Capture One, which I compared with Lightroom last time, I’m new to PhotoLab 6. But when it comes to bang for your buck, Photolab 6 also includes the excellent Nik Collection. That’s $80 less than the purchase price of Capture One and slightly less than double the price of the Adobe Photographer Plan. There is no subscription, but it has a purchase price of $219. How does it compare to Lightroom Classic? It rides high on its ability to produce superior picture quality, with extra strength coming from its lens profiles. DxO Photolab 6 is an entirely different program from the others I have tested before.
0 kommentar(er)
