DxO or Adobe or both or neither?
Kevin
Armstrong Grey Photography
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
|
-
#1. "RE: DxO or Adobe or both or neither? " | In response to Reply # 0
walkerr Registered since 05th May 2002Sun 16-Oct-16 09:32 AM | edited Sun 16-Oct-16 09:57 AM by walkerrPersonally, I'd do what I do and get the LR/Photoshop subscription. I'd then supplement those products with the free Google/Nik collection of plug-ins. Those will likely handle all your needs for years. I wouldn't mess around with DxO - I'd just learn how to use the other products. BTW, I'd be careful of anything out there on the internet that simply compares "default" processing parameters and draws conclusions. It's a good sign that they have limited knowledge of how to use the products. A few hours investment in learning will enable you to go far beyond the defaults (which are easily changed in most any product). I wouldn't bother with Elements given the really good deal on the subscription for LR/PS.
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by DVDs. Do you mean training videos or DVDs for installing the software? Either way, I'd skip them for now. There is a lot of good LR and Photoshop training for free on the internet, coupled with some paid sites (Lynda.com and KelbyOne) that have good training. You definitely don't need it for installing the software - just download it. Those DVDs will become obsolete as soon you update the software once.Rick Walker
My photos:
GeoVista Photography -
#2. "RE: DxO or Adobe or both or neither? " | In response to Reply # 0
William Rounds Nikonian since 25th Mar 2011Sun 16-Oct-16 10:00 AM | edited Sun 16-Oct-16 10:48 AM by William RoundsThere's a lot to be confused about; I'm on a perpetual learning curve. Even when I think I've finally got a handle on one of the RAW convertors I already use, I discover that there is a better or faster or more elegant way to get where I want to go. And then there's human nature: once I like to think I've finally become comfortable with one they change the ground rules on you. Capture NX2 being the biggest let down for the greatest number I suppose.
But here's the thing, some do certain things better than the others, so every product out there has something it can rightly crow about. I use DxO, I use Capture NX2, I have the Lightroom/Photoshop CC subscription and I have an older version of Capture One. I have several times taken a NEF file and used each to come up with a final jpeg file for the web. Honestly, someone proficient with any single one of these can produce stunningly beautiful images. The question is not really "Will one produce better images?" but more "Which work flow do I want to learn to live with?".
Most of them will allow you to download a trial period version. Take advantage of that.
I'm a rank amateur, but that doesn't stop me from coming to my own conclusions, which are:
1) If I were a dedicated landscape photographer or studio photographer using tethered support, Capture One, if I could only have one, would be what I would use. The color control is about as good as it gets, but it doesn't support as many cameras and lenses as either DxO or Lightroom/Photoshop CC (for automatic lens corrections for instance), since it is really destined to high end users. Still, my landscape photos seem to have just a little bit more when using Capture One. This may because I don't know how to use the others to their full capabilities.
2) I tend to use DxO as my RAW convertor for anything involving urban or architectural subjects, which is more often than one would think especially in travel photography. It's lens corrections and perspective corrections are the easiest to use and I'm now pretty familiar with the interface. I don't think any others have an easier to use Noise Reduction module that works so well. Mostly I create a TIF file which I later finish with Capture NX2 but often I export a DNG file to Lightroom. For that, DxO has a certain appeal since it doesn't try to be everything, just a very easy to use RAW convertor that, because of all the automatic settings (which are easily adjustable to suit your own needs) makes it pretty darn fast. I have found that both Capture One and DxO make it very easy to obtain a proper White Balance and color profile with a simple WhiBal card in a reference shot.
3) Lightroom/Photoshop can do it all, but I tend to only use Lightroom since I started with Capture NX2 and then moved to DxO and had no background or understanding of Photoshop. This is surely a shortcoming on my part, not in any way a negative opinion of Photoshop. Those who grew up with Photoshop can surely get so much out of it that they have no reason to use anything else. But it is so vast in its capabilities, and my reflexes are elsewhere, that I just haven't had the desire and the time to learn another language.
I suspect I'm not alone.Visit my Nikonians gallery.
-
#3. "RE: DxO or Adobe or both or neither? " | In response to Reply # 0
pipco Nikonian since 02nd May 2007Sun 16-Oct-16 10:33 AMThere will be a new game in town in a few weeks that looks like it will give LR a run for the money. And it claims to be fast very fast. ON1 software. Have used there suite for years. Now they will have a Raw editor soon.
https://www.on1.com/
My Site and BlogVisit my Nikonians gallery
-
#5. "RE: DxO or Adobe or both or neither? " | In response to Reply # 0
Tristan
Visit my Nikonians gallery
#6. "RE: DxO or Adobe or both or neither? " | In response to Reply # 0
I see from your profile that you are already using Photoshop CS4. I agree with others that the best option is the Adobe CC Photographers Subscription. The subscription is your only option for Photoshop since Adobe no longer has a standalone option. You also get Lightroom to work with.
Have fun,
Pat
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#7. "RE: DxO or Adobe or both or neither? " | In response to Reply # 0
I have the Adobe CC subscription, works a treat!
Started out with Nikon software, just loved Nikon Capture NX2.....then Nikon abandoned it, they still have editing software, which for some, most probably all they need but no where near the processing power of Adobe software
FWIW, I actually started out with PSP many years ago, used to be called the "poor mans PS", I then moved my OS to Mac and Apple Aperture, when Apple abandoned that software, after a ton of advice here, I decided to go the Adobe CC direction.
As you would be aware, each time a change is made to new software, unless the files are tiffs, they all need to be re-edited
I have found LR most intuitive and regret not making the change earlier, I guess that reason had to do with the expensive initial purchase and the cost of on going upgrades, now that Adobe has the CC option, IMHO, its a no brainer, at $10 a month, and updates are free
As Rick mentioned, lots of training out there, paid or even YouTube
Just my handle on it,
Lastly, I think Adobe will be there for the long haul
.......Gary
My Nikonians Gallery
I used to have a photographic memory but never got it developed
#8. "RE: DxO or Adobe or both or neither? " | In response to Reply # 0
Ernesto Santos
esartprints.com Ernesto Santos Photography
Get my new e-Book "Churches of Texas"
See my portfolio.
#9. "RE: DxO or Adobe or both or neither? " | In response to Reply # 0
_____
Brian...
-
#10. "RE: DxO or Adobe or both or neither? " | In response to Reply # 9
aolander Nikonian since 15th Sep 2006Sat 29-Oct-16 06:47 AM"I will continue to upgrade the LR6"
There is no guarantee that LR6 will continue to be given upgrades without going to CC. I know a lot of people have been unhappy with Adobe's direction, but I see no reason to fight it or be stubborn about it. The CC plan has been great for me as I had never had Photoshop prior to the CC plan, only LR. The continuous updates and upgrades are nice. I see DXO has a subscription option for their software, also. Who knows how long it will be until they go completely that way, too.Alan
G
1). Will buying one "suite" handle all a photographers needs?
2). Should I go Adobe and supplement with a DxO product?
3). What about buying Lightroom and Elements DVD's?
4). Anything else I should be confused about?
Kevin