On1 10.5 or lightroom? - Newbie.

[Mintybaby]

Hi,

I am relatively new to photography , and have recently bought my first slr (D3300).

What I would like to ask is which post-production programme might be the most user-friendly for my skill level.

I have sampled Lightroom and found it very impressive but understand there is a steep learning curve involved were I do make it my tool of choice.

I have also just received an offer for On1 10.5 plus the next upgrade. This is considerably cheaper than the Adobe, but will it do what I want? I wou7ld be using it as a standalone, not as a LR plug in.

I suppose I am asking which will be easier for me, but also how much bang for my buck??

Mints

[Shadowman]

Every program (supposedly except Photoshop) has their limitations, for the most part LR handles most edits flawlessly; the only weakness to me is the noise reduction module. If it's available in your location consider Gimp also, has its limitations as well but is free. For instance, the noise reduction module isn't really a noise reducer, it actually increases grain. There is another tool, I believe it's the blur tool; that reduces noise but it also decreases detail.

[davidedric]

Hi Ginny,

I have both products, so here is my fairly lengthy take on it.

Though both products appear to have overlapping capabilities, they are very different in practice.

There are two major areas where On1 is lacking: RAW processing, and photo management (sometimes called Digital Asset Management or DAM). On1 can read and then process RAW files, but it has to convert them first into a jpeg (or TIFF). That is due to change in October, as your email probably tells you, but how good On1's RAW processor will be is anyone's guess. It would be surprising is the got it bang on in the first release, but only time will tell.

The reason they are very different is that all Lightroom's processing is non-destructive - it's a so called parametric editor. That means that some complex changes that require pixel based editing are simply not possible, but you never damage your original file. Another plus is that the controls for editing RAW and jpeg are exactly the same, so there is no new learning if you move between them.

I can do at least 95% of my editing in Lightroom, but I have On1 for that small % that I can't. As a simple example, On1's Perfect Eraser does a much better job than Lightroom's spot remover for getting rid of unwanted objects. If you want to add different effects to your images, beyond simply adjusting them, then again On1 is the way to go. I regard On1 as being more capable than Elements (though without the RAW processing), but less so, of course, than full Photoshop.

You comment about the challenge of learning Lightroom, but I don't think so. So long as you first make sure you understand how Lightroom operates, I think it has the easiest learning curve of any image editor I know. Yes, there is a lot of depth to it, but just getting in and improving the way you pictures look is dead easy.

How useful its DAM capabilities are depends on you, but I would now hate to be without them. On1 has Perfect Browse. It's good at what it does, but it is just a browser, like Bridge.

If I could only have one of them, it would be Lightroom without a second's thought.

If you want more information, happy to help.

Dave

[Mintybaby]

Thank you both for these replies.

I wasn't aware that On! didn't have native RAW conversion (yet), and this is something I would hope to incorporate when I have more experience. So it seems that any file put into On! then will lose much of the information contained. So no matter how 'good' the editing it can never be as 'flexible' as LR.

Am I understanding this correctly?

Hi Ginny,

I have both products, so here is my fairly lengthy take on it.

Though both products appear to have overlapping capabilities, they are very different in practice.

There are two major areas where On1 is lacking: RAW processing, and photo management (sometimes called Digital Asset Management or DAM). On1 can read and then process RAW files, but it has to convert them first into a jpeg (or TIFF). That is due to change in October, as your email probably tells you, but how good On1's RAW processor will be is anyone's guess. It would be surprising is the got it bang on in the first release, but only time will tell.

The reason they are very different is that all Lightroom's processing is non-destructive - it's a so called parametric editor. That means that some complex changes that require pixel based editing are simply not possible, but you never damage your original file. Another plus is that the controls for editing RAW and jpeg are exactly the same, so there is no new learning if you move between them.

I can do at least 95% of my editing in Lightroom, but I have On1 for that small % that I can't. As a simple example, On1's Perfect Eraser does a much better job than Lightroom's spot remover for getting rid of unwanted objects. If you want to add different effects to your images, beyond simply adjusting them, then again On1 is the way to go. I regard On1 as being more capable than Elements (though without the RAW processing), but less so, of course, than full Photoshop.

You comment about the challenge of learning Lightroom, but I don't think so. So long as you first make sure you understand how Lightroom operates, I think it has the easiest learning curve of any image editor I know. Yes, there is a lot of depth to it, but just getting in and improving the way you pictures look is dead easy.

How useful its DAM capabilities are depends on you, but I would now hate to be without them. On1 has Perfect Browse. It's good at what it does, but it is just a browser, like Bridge.

If I could only have one of them, it would be Lightroom without a second's thought.

If you want more information, happy to help.

Dave

[Mike Buckley]

On1 is advertising that their raw converter will be available this fall and will be faster than any other photo editor. See this.

[ionian]

I haven't tried on1 but I use Lightroom as a first port of call for every single photo I take. It's one of the easiest editors out there but has plenty of depth; for those pictures that require more complex edits, I use photoshop. Of course if you get the Adobe cc package, you get both, plus you can now get nik for free as an add-in to both programmes - you may never need another editor ever again.

As you are starting out, why not wait until you have a little some free time and have a hunt for the free trials. Watch some YouTube videos and see how you get on with them, doing basic edits.

[rpcrowe]

I am one of the few (at least I think few) photographers who doesn't like Lightroom. I tried Lightroom years ago and did not like the way it filed my images. I was lucky to obtain one of the last boxed sets of Adobe CS6 before Photoshop became a subscription package. and I am very happy with Adobe Bridge for opening my RAW files and for managing my images...

BTW: I also tried Photoshop Elements and did not like the way this program handled my images.

I have been using NIK Software as a Photoshop CS6 Plug-In for years and think that it really adds to the capabilities of Photoshop. NIK is now free of charge.

Perhaps you might look into the subscription plan of Photoshop CC and supplement that with the free NIK Software. BTW: Adobe Bridge is an integral part of Photoshop and comes as no extra cost...

Since I deal with hundreds or thousands of photos, not with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of images, Bridge is just fine for me...

Many folks tout Lightroom for non-destructive editing. However when I download my RAW images in Bridge and open them in Adobe Camera RAW then edit in Photoshop, I will save them as a non-edited RAW image as well as save a Master File as a partially edited (no cropping, resizing or output sharpening) Photoshop Document PSD. This allows me to keep the RAW file undisturbed and to also have the Master File ready for whatever use I need for it. I often need my images for multiple uses and in multiple sizes. With a PSD Master File, I don't have to reinvent the wheel in order to make variously cropped, sized and sharpened images. I will also be able to keep those PSD files un-molested for any future uses...

[davidedric]

I wasn't aware that On! didn't have native RAW conversion (yet), and this is something I would hope to incorporate when I have more experience. So it seems that any file put into On! then will lose much of the information contained. So no matter how 'good' the editing it can never be as 'flexible' as LR.

Am I understanding this correctly?

Not quite. You can open a RAW file either as .tiff or a .psd (if you want to use layers), which as I understand it will not lose data. You normally work on a copy, as you would in Photoshop.

Dave

[davidedric]

I often need my images for multiple uses and in multiple sizes. With a PSD Master File, I don't have to reinvent the wheel in order to make variously cropped, sized and sharpened images.

And if you are using Lightroom that's what Virtual Copies or Export are for (with no need for additional storage for Virtual Copies)

Basically, these are all great products. If you can embrace Lightroom's Catalogue it will work well for you, if not my strong advice is to stay away!

[russellsnr]

Hi, I use both L/R, CS 6 and On1 Photo suite ( but only because I am a mug for a bargain)
What I do like about On1 software is not so much the "What it can or cannot do over Adobe' is the customer support. OK I no it has nothing to do with editing per-se but!! and only my opinion if you have a problem On1 support seem more happy to assist you than some of the Adobe people who seem on ocassion like robots following computerised orders.
I also Like the fact that once paid On1 is yours and they are or seem to be trying to improve the overall product on every release and not just adding on little exras.
Russ

[Brev00]

I expect great things from the on1 raw processor since I greatly enjoy their suite of Plug-ins now. I use Elements which I found user friendly five years ago and continue to use it. I tried Lightroom and others but find Elements suits my style. Give it a free trial. Over time, I have added several plug-ins including Perfect Photo Suite, Nik, Topaz, and DxO Filmpack. Elements has a powerful Adobe Camera Raw plug-in and all the other software works seamlessly. Adobe seems to downplay Elements since it is not part of its subscription service. That is what I like.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Jeff S]

I use LR, On1, NIK, and Photoshop. I start with LR, move into Photoshop, then occasionally pick and choose a module or two from On1 and/or NIK if I want to tweak the photo with a module that I happen to favor. For me, On1 and NIK are probably overkill as I love LR and Photoshop and use them heavily. I only have the other two because I like "toys." By the way, NIK is free to download (or was the last time I checked about a month ago).

As for the learning curve, I don't think LR is very hard to learn and there are plenty of good tutorials online. Photoshop cc, on the other hand is so versatile I don't think I'll ever stop learning something new with that one.

[Oldfart]

Like Mintybaby, I am new to post production in the digital world so the remarks about Lightroom and ON1 are very useful. I know I am going to have to bit the bullet and go for it. The camera club that I attend use Lightroom so I am getting used to seeing what they do with it. Thanks for the helpful advice

[TheBigE]

I think it is clear from the above, that there are several ways to approach this and each has its merits and limitations. For me, I started with LR and then (6 months later) added PS. Just recently I started to dabble with the NIK collections as they were free.

The only real major variable at this moment is the ON1 Raw Processing Software. From what has been promised this looks like it could be a good option, but we do not know if they will hit the release date and even more important how much "development" will be required after release.

I guess my only recommendation is to pick something and stick with it and learn it. Whether that be LR, ON1, PS, etc. It has been my experience that over time if I start to need something that is not offered in the particular program, that gives me the incentive to go out and learn something new on a small scale basis. Most recently it was luminosity masking in PS, this also led me into the NIK collection to see if this was an option. Good luck on whatever you choose.

[chauncey]

I'm thinking that you should ask yourself about the seriousness of this recently acquired hobby...
where do ya wanna be in 5-10 years. For most of us, it's a time intensive, learned, skill.

If your crystal ball is broken, as was mine..."bang for the buck" works in the short term
but will cost more in the long haul. I would be embarrassed to add up the monies in
camera/lenses/computer stuff/lighting/etc.

But, as hindsight, my wisest time/money investment was to jump into LR/PS in the beginning.
It has continued to give me satisfaction...despite the obscene learning curve in PS.