Lightroom 4 - Capture One Pro 7 comparison

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

If you click on the images, the full resolution version should come up.

I did my best to make the two "developments" equivalent, not for colours (did not mind correcting colours),
but for detail appearance.
Specifically, I tried to apply the (visually) same amount of sharpening in both programs.
Capture One Pro 7 claims to have implemented a new system of interpolation of RAW data that gives them
a sharpness perception advantage equivalent to about double the actual resolvance of the image.
I would hesitate on the definition of the actual amount, but I have to admit that the images converted with COP7
do indeed show a micro-contrast that is superior to the images generated by LR4.
It is clear that the resolvance itself can not be changed (it is limited by the camera hardware), but indeed the images
of COP7 appear distinctly neater while not showing any of the typical side effects of excessing sharpening such as
staired curves and halos.
I let you see for yourself and form your own opinion:

#1

#2

fuzzywuzzy · Expire: 2013-11-30

I must say that's the most interesting subject I've seen for a sharpness test.

And I can see a tiny difference even at 1024 pixels, in the mesh around the bell.

rbelyell · Expire: 2014-01-31

the difference is frankly astonishing.
tony

patrickh · Expire: 2011-11-18

Ouch, back to the drawing board....

Quite a difference indeed.

patrickh

Jesito · Expire: 2015-01-07

Yes, but I won't say "tiny", there is a notable difference at full size...

martinsmith99 · Expire: 2013-11-18

There is quite a difference in sharpness. What is Capture One like in other areas though?

std · Joined: 09 Feb 2010 Posts: 1826 Location: Bulgaria

I don't see much difference myself - except that on the first the sharpening and contrast looks more aggressive.

ForenSeil · Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.

White looks much better in the first pic
Colors of the stonework are looking better in the first pic
Clarity, sharpness, dark areas and fine details are also looking better in the first pic
Only the blue of the sky looks better in the second pic imho.

Overall I would clearly prefer the first one
But second would look much better after adding some sharpness, contrast, clarity and a tack dynamik range in the dark areas manually.
I'm a big LR4 fan but I should clearly give the other software a try.

A question would be if both RAW engines are working equally good with the RAW-Formats of the different cameras

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Let's be clear, the COP7 image is the result of some trick, there is obviously not more resolution than the LR4 image.
So I agree with those that say that the image looks sharper because of a more "aggressive" treatment.
The point is that I am not able to replicate that aggressive look with LR4 without producing some sharpening or clarity artifacts.
The COP7 image instead looks clear of artifacts. That is remarkable IMHO. And a proof that whatever they do, they do it before
the image gets post-processed.

Having that said, it remains entirely subjective what to prefer. Some may prefer the softer look of the LR4 even with a perception
of inferior sharpness, because indeed the COP7 image looks hard-edged somehow.
My personal stance is that I would decide based on the image. There are some images that would benefit from the COP7 treatment.
Other images that would look better the way LR4 handles it.

P.S. do not judge on the colours. I did not process the colours.

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

By the way: you can try COP7 for 60 days, works fully without limitations. I am on trial, too.

twinquartz · Expire: 2013-10-29

Interesting!
They are very much alike -- but at the same time not Smile

To me, the biggest difference is in what is visible in the
shadow parts (where LR4 seemed to be not so good; however
I brought that photo into Photoshop CS6, and it was very
easy to lift the shadow parts to equal the competing software).

patrickh · Expire: 2011-11-18

Whatever the differences may be, the fact is that when one company produces a noticeably better product they raise the bar for everyone else. LR4 was Adobe's response to competition from several sources - as a result of which they improved almost every aspect of the product and reduced the cost in order to compete more effectively. C1Pro is very expensive in the world of raw processors and they have to keep improving to maintain a semblance of market share by offering more than everyone else. This is the nature of real competition.

and to keep them all honest we have the enthusiasts who provide their skills for free - GIMP and darktable are very competitive both in features and price!

patrickh

std · Joined: 09 Feb 2010 Posts: 1826 Location: Bulgaria

You can lift the shadows in LR4 very easy too.
I'm amazed how good is the dynamic range my old 20D when tweaking raw files in LR.
much better than the old DPP software i was using few years ago.

patrickh · Expire: 2011-11-18

DP Review has compared these two and DXOPro

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8219582047/raw-converter-showdown-capture-one-pro-7-dxo-optics-pro-8-and-lightroom-4/3

patrickh

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

patrickh · Expire: 2011-11-18

I have my organization through Media Pro, which I have used for several years. They are now owned by Capture One nd I think the main processing software may have absorbed much of those features. Personally I love the way it renders jpegs produced by LR and ASP.

patrickh

PS I am following the NN processor with interst, as I think it has the capacity to be the best of them all.