# Need a RAW Editor Recommendation



## Durf (Jul 1, 2018)

Looking for a recommendation other than Lightroom and ON1.

I have Lightroom Classic but the subscription is about up for renewal and I'm trying to find something I can buy outright.

I also have ON1 Photo Raw 2018 and have been having a lot of issues with it's performance and am at the point with it that I am ready to look for alternatives. (I love ON1 and wish it worked right!!!!!!)

I don't want to spend several hundred on Capture One.

Basically I am looking for something similar to the interface of Lightroom and or ON1, any suggestions?????


----------



## fentiger (Jul 1, 2018)

have you tried DXO Photolab


----------



## Durf (Jul 1, 2018)

fentiger said:


> have you tried DXO Photolab



No, I haven't looked at that one closely...


----------



## benique (Jul 1, 2018)

Have you looked at Affinity Photo already? It's probably the best photoshop alternative.


----------



## Zeidora (Jul 1, 2018)

Depending on what you need, DxO and/or AffinityPhoto may be suitable. I have both, and use DxO for batch processing, while AP is for more "traditional" photo editing.


----------



## Valvebounce (Jul 1, 2018)

Hi Durf, fentiger. 
I really like DxO, great for high ISO shots, but it has no D.A.M. You have to organise the files yourself. 

Cheers, Graham. 



fentiger said:


> have you tried DXO Photolab


----------



## Durf (Jul 1, 2018)

Thanks you all, I'm researching a few of them. I really don't get into photoshop much but I do like to mask and do basic brushwork, ON1 has some pretty good masking and effects to brush in and out when it works correctly.

I'm not a "heavy editor" as such as I would need the power of photoshop, but basic masking, layers, and brushwork is a plus for an editor. Plus some type of importing would be nice. 

Affinity looks promising....has anyone tried ACDSee? 

If all else fails I may just renew my Lightroom soon but really would like to just purchase something instead. My hope is for ON1 to get things in order, that was working great for the most part but lately I can't get it to function right half the time.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 1, 2018)

I am another fan of DxO PL - it squeezes out more detail and removes more noise than any other I have tried.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 1, 2018)

Isn’t the Photoshop and Lightroom subscription something like $10 a month? If the full plan ever gets beyond my means, I’ll switch to that. I still use some of the other apps a lot and several occasionally, so that would be unhandy. 

I am not wild about the subscription model, and refuse to do it for other software. But I was paying Adobe $600 a year or so for upgrades anyway, and get access to more apps, that I admittedly mostly don’t use but can in a pinch, this way.


----------



## Durf (Jul 1, 2018)

many are mentioning DXO, I'm gonna look at that....


----------



## zim (Jul 1, 2018)

Durf said:


> Looking for a recommendation other than Lightroom and ON1.
> 
> I have Lightroom Classic but the subscription is about up for renewal and I'm trying to find something I can buy outright.
> 
> ...



Depends on what you're main interests /subjects are. 
If you photograph people, particularly portraits sorry, but c1 is sublime. DxO is fantastic though and my usual go to raw editor. I love Affinity photo but I really disagree about it being a good raw editor, it sadly falls short on a number of levels, they have just got it wrong and it saddens me to say that. It is a great PS replacement though!


----------



## Durf (Jul 1, 2018)

zim said:


> Durf said:
> 
> 
> > Looking for a recommendation other than Lightroom and ON1.
> ...



I'm mostly doing landscapes and nature/stills of plant life, insects/macro, animals, waterfalls, old cars and antiques, etc., some home interior shots. I very seldom take photos of people. Lately I've been taking many flower and plant photos.

More people are mentioning dxo, I wish it had some type of file explorer/import option, but it does look nice, I'm studying it a bit right now.


----------



## pj1974 (Jul 2, 2018)

I can vouch for *DxO* (Optics Pro or Photo Lab) being great raw editors... they handle noise very well.
Fantastic for batch processing, and works efficiently with my multi-core Ryzen 5/1600 AMD processor.

For individual images and special purposes (e.g. stitched panoramas, etc), I use *Affinity Photo*.
RAW processing is not its greatest strength, but it is powerful & does very well as a Photoshop replacement.

*ACDSee* is my digital asset management (DAM) software. I like the layout and viewing options.
The recent versions also have a half decent 'quick' editor mode, e.g. when needing to do a 60 second edit.

Cheers! 8)


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 3, 2018)

Durf said:


> Affinity looks promising....has anyone tried ACDSee?


I've used ACDsee since the days of Unix commands for the internet. I currently have Ultimate 10.

Forget it for RAW. Its just too slow, and even worse, it takes them forever to update it for new camera models, so long that you might have to first buy next years version to get the update. For jpeg images, its great, as well as for converting to different formats. Printing is also a strong point. It does not support PDF.


----------



## PavelR (Jul 3, 2018)

Luminar is woth looking at...
Following video shows the basic operations in four raw processors. The question from video name is not answered, because sharpness is not tuned - is used only defaults... But for overview of the user interface the video is quite good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvHGFOwFcxM


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 5, 2018)

Durf said:


> many are mentioning DXO, I'm gonna look at that...



Then, when you've done that, do yourself a favour and settle on Photo Ninja: better detail rendition; better NR (yes, really); _way_ better highlights management.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 5, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Forget it for RAW.



ACDSee Photo Editor 10 is great - it's a proper "one stop" workflow solution (apart from DAM) from Raw to finished image (including Adobe plugin support) - and _quick_, especially if you use keystroke combos to access the main functions. 

I'm perfectly happy to use it instead of Photo Ninja unless the image has some particularly problematic highlights; or a lot of noise.

And look at the frickin' price!

https://www.acdsee.com/en/products/acdsee-photo-editor

I also have Photo Studio Professional 2018 if I'm doing bulk work - just as good, and with some useful additions like content-aware fill.

https://www.acdsee.com/en/products/photo-studio-professional


----------



## Durf (Jul 5, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Forget it for RAW.
> ...



ACDSee Photo Studio Professional 2018 looks like a half way decent program for 55 bucks!


----------



## JBSF (Jul 6, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Then, when you've done that, do yourself a favour and settle on Photo Ninja: better detail rendition; better NR (yes, really); _way_ better highlights management.



I agree on PN’s detail, and especially it’s NR. Highlight mgmt is very good. But some color rendition sucks. I shoot insects in RAW with 7D and 7D2. I get superb color fidelity if the files need no adjustment or only slight work in DPP. If I need better highlight control and/or NR, I often use PN with good results. However, especially with blue reflective surfaces (common on damselflies), PN renders them with a horrible dense, flat blue that cannot be made to resemble Canon’s color. I can overcome this somewhat by starting in DPP with slight NR, using PN for the little additional NR I can squeeze from the TIFF exported from DPP, and finishing up in Affinity. Bottom line: on those challenging files I settle either for lesser NR or lesser color fidelity.

Affinity is also unable to process a RAW file and render Canon’s subtle blues accurately, and its NR is not as good as PN’s.

If anybody out there is using C1 or DXO for insects and can preserve the types of blue I describe, I’d like to know.


----------



## scottkinfw (Jul 6, 2018)

Durf said:


> Looking for a recommendation other than Lightroom and ON1.
> 
> I have Lightroom Classic but the subscription is about up for renewal and I'm trying to find something I can buy outright.
> 
> ...



Why don't you try to delete and reload On1?
I am using it and loving it.

sek


----------



## Aglet (Jul 6, 2018)

give IRIDIENT DEVELOPER a look too.
I use it for Fuji raw to extra more detail than the old cameras jpg engines

I can extract pretty good luminance detail/sharpness from most raw files.

low cost, works well, regularly updated for new bodies and bugs
I think there's a free demo download


http://iridientdigital.com/


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 6, 2018)

JBSF said:


> I agree on PN’s detail, and especially it’s NR. Highlight mgmt is very good. But some color rendition sucks.



Yeah, I agree that PN "goes its own way", colour-wise, compared to DPP; but I don't consider DPP's colour rendering to be "definitive", and - not shooting blue insects - it never presents a problem for me.

But I'd interested to know, JBSF - which colour "Base Style" do you use? Do you employ the "Colo(u)r Enhancement" function? 

The colour tools in PN are surprisingly adaptable, so I'd be surprised if your files were beyond its capabilities.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 6, 2018)

scottkinfw said:


> Why don't you try to delete and reload On1?
> I am using it and loving it.



I'm _very_ disappointed with On1's detail rendering - I think it's using a pretty basic, old demosaicing algorithm.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 6, 2018)

Durf said:


> ACDSee Photo Studio Professional 2018 looks like a half way decent program for 55 bucks!



Oh, better than "half way"..!

8)







Not my best image from last weekend, but challenging, as it was shot in _intense_ light, so the shadows and darks were really dark; the highlights and lights _really_ light. 

I've just turned it out from Raw, in less than 5 mins.

I've converted; resized; added a signature; "Light EQd" the shadows and highlights; "healed" some distracting background stuff; and sharpened by selectively applying a "Deblur" at a strength of 17, in Topaz Detail (called from within Photo Studio). 

You can brush native ACDSee sharpening on without using the plugin, incidentally - I'm just comfortable with Topaz Detail's results, but if I decide that I can get similar results from within ACDSee, Detail will get less use. 

It's a good indication of how capable ACDSee is, I reckon. Colour is spot-on; Highlights and shadows managed very well (the head was _black_, with no visible detail, in the Raw preview); and plenty of of fine detail/texture in the plumage and beak.

It's just "right".

Note that I've been a beta tester for both DxO and Phase One (Capture One Pro); and was on the path to Adobe Certified Professional (LightRoom). I was also part of Raw Therapee's development team back in the day, so I think I can lay some claim to an "informed perspective" when it comes to raw converters.

I recommend Photo Ninja and ACDSee products purely because they're better than the rest in any test/evaluation that I've undertaken, for the things I need from a converter - detail/acuity, highlight/shadow handling, clean detailed demosaicing.

Photo Ninja will still get the "heavy lifting" if I've been shooting very high ISOs or in "impossible" light; but I'm more and more impressed by the end-to-end capabilities of ADCsee's offerings. 

Remember that I could have achieved exactly the same end-result from Photo Editor. 

_*$25..!*_


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 6, 2018)

Aglet said:


> give IRIDIENT DEVELOPER a look too.



MAC only?


----------



## MartinF. (Jul 6, 2018)

How about Canon DPP - Digital Photo Professional - version 4.x.
It is a under-rated but very capable Canon RAW converter, and it is free for Canon EOS users to download from Canon websites. (You have to type camera serialnumber to activate software).
Besides being a powerfull rawconverter, it is actually a great photo editor, a bit like Lightroom, Capture One and so.
And it is fast, does not run a "customer lock-in" database, and support of course Canon RAW files, Camera settings, Canon Lens corrections, picture styles and so.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 6, 2018)

MartinF. said:


> How about Canon DPP - Digital Photo Professional - version 4.x.



Noisier conversions than some; renders less detail; less effective shadow/highlight handling; comparatively slow; locked in to Canon's idea of what a file should look like, colour-wise.

That's why _I_ don't use it...

OK for the price you pay, though.


----------



## Durf (Jul 6, 2018)

scottkinfw said:


> Durf said:
> 
> 
> > Looking for a recommendation other than Lightroom and ON1.
> ...



I have re-installed it a few times and finally got it working again and am using it right now, but there are still a few ongoing bug issues. I totally prefer using ON1 over about anything else but need a back up editor. 
For 55 bucks ACDSee looks like it may do the trick.


----------



## Durf (Jul 6, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> scottkinfw said:
> 
> 
> > Why don't you try to delete and reload On1?
> ...



I've really never had an issue with ON1's detail rendering other with using a couple certain filters being masked, just a few bugs and glitches.


----------



## kiwiengr (Jul 6, 2018)

zim said:


> Depends on what you're main interests /subjects are.
> If you photograph people, particularly portraits sorry, but c1 is sublime. .....!



Agree completely... C1


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 6, 2018)

kiwiengr said:


> Agree completely... C1



From Durf's first post:



> I don't want to spend several hundred on Capture One.



Capture One _is_ very good, but it's way overpriced. The ACDSee program I recommend above can do everything Capture One does, at least as well as Capture One does it, for a fraction of the money. Capture One isn't Adobe plugin compatible, either.

For all that, I'd probably still be using it, but some of us have long had major issues with its colour rendition - check the Phase One forums.

Especially with more recent Canons, the "Capture One Look" - of which I was as big a fan as any - turned into a really over-the-top overly warm orange bias that was a royal pain to fix. OK for landscapes, horrible for wildlife/nature photography.

It was enough, eventually, to push me away from Capture One.


----------



## Durf (Jul 6, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> kiwiengr said:
> 
> 
> > Agree completely... C1
> ...



Yeah, Capture One isn't really on my radar at all at this point.

I'm gonna load the trial version of ACDSee pro 2018 this weekend and play around with it when I get time. I have until July 18th before their special of 55 bucks expires and then I think its back up to around 100 bucks to buy it.

I don't do hardly any really heavy editing but I do like or need to occasionally do local adjustments with brushes, use filters etc. ON1 is really easy for this and that's why I like it so much. I've learned the programs strengths and weaknesses over the last 9 months and can really get some great results with it.

This latest ON1 upgrade played havoc on my computer and was also pretty much unusable for over a week and I had a bunch of images to edit, that's when I knew I needed a backup (other that lightroom). ON1's working now for me pretty decently for the most part but for 55 bucks I think ACDSee might be a great back up to have loaded on my computer in case SHTF again. Never know I may just use it more once I get to looking more deeply in to it


----------



## JBSF (Jul 6, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> JBSF said:
> 
> 
> > I agree on PN’s detail, and especially it’s NR. Highlight mgmt is very good. But some color rendition sucks.
> ...



I use "Plain" (same as Neutral) base style and adjust in Color enhancement. This requires a negative hue shift, negative saturation, and positive lightness. I can get reasonably close, and I often fine-tune in Affinity. However the blue of a thorax on many species is never as accurate as an OOC jpeg, subtle gradations of pale greens and greenish blues are rendered inaccurately, and at times PN introduces highlights that are not apparent in the OOC file. I find this a problem mostly with blues and not with other colors, and I prefer to open a RAW file in PN. 

BTW, I have followed your website for several years, and you are one of the people whose comments led me to try PN and Affinity in the first place. For the most part I have been quite happy with them. I'd still like to hear from anybody using DXO or Capture 1 for similar subjects.


----------



## Aglet (Jul 7, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Aglet said:
> 
> 
> > give IRIDIENT DEVELOPER a look too.
> ...



Yes. Unfortunately.
I still run it on my old mac editing stations but would welcome a version to run on Windows or Linux.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 8, 2019)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Then, when you've done that, do yourself a favour and settle on Photo Ninja: better detail rendition; better NR (yes, really); _way_ better highlights management.


I downloaded Photo Ninja, and it does look good. But, they won't send a keycode for a 2-week trial so I can't save the jpeg output and see if it is better than DxO. It's very fast which is a real plus.

Edit: code eventually arrived so I'll give it a serious try.


----------

