AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

From RAW conversion to image editing and printing
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by bakubo »

There is another thread about Corel buying Bibble Labs where I have some posts about AfterShot Pro and Lightroom. I have installed the trial versions of ASP 1 (update based on Bibble Pro 5.2.3) and LR 3.2 and have been playing around with them. These programs are very similar and so far I have found advantages and disadvantages to each one -- as one would certainly expect. These programs combine 3 functions into one program:

1. Raw developer
2. Non-destructive editor
3. Photo database/management

So far, I haven't spent much time looking at the quality of the raw development, but will later. I have mostly been comparing their non-destructive editing ability, the interface, and the photo database/management aspects.

I have PS CS2, but don't use it anymore since the ACR for it can't handle my newer cameras and also it is the old ACR that has a very small preview window and doesn't produce as good a result as the current ACR. These days I use PSE 9/ACR 6.5 and I like it. ACR saves my raw development settings in an XMP sidecar file which for that part of the photo preparation gives you non-destructive editing. Then I always need to do further work in PSE and that part actually changes the image file, i.e., destructive editing. I have found it to be a major chore to need to go back to an image that I had prepared for the web and try to duplicate what I had done before to get a larger version. In the past I tried to keep unsharpened full-size TIFF files of all my post-processed images, but they are huge compared to the raw file and later I am often not as satisfied with the results as I was when I first created it so end up starting from scratch again anyway. Also, later ACR versions often produce better results so I may want to reprocess the raw file. Non-destructive editing all the way through is very attractive -- if it can actually be achieved. That is one of the things I am looking at.

I am also looking at how well these two programs work for me with regards to their file management. I keep the most recent two years of original photo files on my computer's hd and keep three 1tb external hds that have all my original photo files going back for years. The three external hds have the same stuff on them and are just redundant backups. They are not connected to my computer unless I need to backup or retrieve something. I keep one near the computer (but disconnected) and the two others are kept away from it except when I do backups. I don't live in one place permanently anymore so I have to keep things relatively mobile, portable, and as safe as I can manage. I am looking at how well these two programs work when most of the photos are not on the computer's hd, but are on an external hd that is not connected all the time.

As I discover things I will try to post in this thread.

Of course, LR is the one most people think of and I did too. The following post about ASP from someone who knows Aperture and Lightroom convinced me to spend a bit more time looking at ASP though:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read. ... e=40341639

And this got me to thinking too:

http://www.photographybay.com/2012/01/1 ... its-money/

I am making a list of differences of the two as I am using them both. Right now there is no clear winner, but I still have more to look at. Both seem pretty good though in the areas I have looked at.

Everyone is welcome to post their opinions and experiences here and I would be happy to read them.
Last edited by bakubo on Tue Jan 24, 2012 10:22 am, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by bakubo »

With PSE 9/ACR this is what I typically do after doing the raw conversion in more or less the following order to prepare a photo for my website. Of course, I don't do all of these for each image. For example, I don't use PTLens to do lens distortion correction for every image. Steps 1-6 are only done if desired/necessary.

1. PTLens
2. Straighten
3. Crop
4. Adjust levels, shadows/highlights, etc.
5. Adjust saturation (sometimes different amounts for each individual channel)
6. Local area contrast enhancement (high radius, low strength/amount usm)
7. Resize for web
8. Sharpen
9. Save jpeg for web

I may convert to B&W using the channel mixer. Occasionally I do some minor cloning, dodge/burn, red eye correction, etc. also somewhere along the way before step 7. The website is here:

http://www.bakubo.com

I try to get a result as close as possible to what I want from ACR which is non-destructive since the corrections are saved in the XMP sidecar, but the above steps done in PSE are all destructive. Ideally I would like everything to be non-destructive so that I can easily reopen a raw file and get all the earlier changes reapplied and allowing for them to be tweaked. This would make it much easier to make minor changes to an image that is mostly right already and also to get the same result for different size files that I may want later for prints, etc.
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by bakubo »

The non-destructive editing has many advantages but, I think, that if I still have to do further editing for most of my photos in PSE then it would not be all that useful and would just make things more complicated rather than less complicated. If it could be used for a large percentage of images though that would not need further destructive editing then it would be worthwhile. The jury is still out on that.

Here are a few general observations so far:

- LR 3 download is 234mb. LR 4 beta download is 411mb. ASP download is 33mb.

- When running LR uses a lot more memory than ASP.

- LR help documentation uses about the smallest font possible (it is tiny!) and it can't be enlarged. I find it very uncomfortable. ASP allows the font size to be changed.

- ASP image preview is larger than LR preview. Both ASP and LR allow many panels to be hidden so that the preview can get even larger, but ASP allows the preview to get larger than LR.

I am keeping notes on what I discover and I will keep reporting back. The DAM aspects need some looking at too and I will be doing that. On the surface they appear fairly similar in this regard, but ASP also allows you to not import images so that you can just use the file system view to open and work on images with all the changes recorded in an XMP sidecar. For some people this is an advantage. I would like to use the catalog/db if it can work considering my hd situation. I will find out.
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by bakubo »

ASP has lens profiles for 6/6 of my Canon mount lenses, but 0/4 of my Sony mount lenses that I use. LR has profiles for 4/6 of my Canon mount lenses, but 0/4 of my Sony mount lenses. ASP has a profile for my Canon S95, but LR doesn't. Neither one has profiles for my Minolta D7i, Canon A590IS, A540, and A70. PTLens has a profile for 6/6 of my Canon mount lenses and 4/4 of my Sony mount lenses. PTLens also has a profile for my Minolta D7i, Canon S95, A590IS, A540, and A70 cameras.

LR auto lens correction fixes distortion, vignetting, and CA. ASP auto lens correction fixes only distortion -- vignetting and CA are manual fixes. Of course, if the lens isn't profiled then both programs allow you to manually correct distortion, vignetting, and CA. PTLens auto lens correction fixes only distortion -- vignetting and CA are manual fixes.
Last edited by bakubo on Sun Jan 22, 2012 9:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by bakubo »

With ASP I like the previews better if I select Preferences|Display|Show only high quality previews. If I do not select that then there is a shimmer of the image when I move a slider. Of course, after you stop moving the slider then the image stops shimmering. If I select Show only high quality previews it doesn't do that though. I haven't really noticed a speed difference of any significance.
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by bakubo »

I am still mostly looking at the editing functions of these 2 programs. They provide almost the identical global editing capability. The only things I have found different are:

- ASP licenses Perfectly Clear so it is built into ASP and you can optionally select it. It produces a quick and often pretty good result. I have tried it a few times and sometimes I liked it a lot and sometimes didn't. Here is some info about it:

http://www.athentech.com/

- LR has the Clarity function. I think it is similar to using usm with a high radius and low strength/amount for local area contrast enhancement, but Clarity may do something different. I can't find this in ASP, but the free Wavelet Sharpen 3 plugin has a similar function you can use.

- LR/ACR noise reduction has become quite good in the last year or two. ASP has a raw noise reduction function and also has basic Noise Ninja included (you can buy a NN license and it will turn on advanced mode). I haven't compared LR and ASP to see how well each works in this regard yet.

- LR has split toning and I can't find anything in ASP that is the same.

- LR allows certain limited non-destructive local editing. ASP allows pretty extensive and flexible non-destructive local editing along with layers.

Here are some free ASP plugins:

http://aftershotpro.com/plugins/

Here are some free LR plugins:

http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop ... m/plugins/
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by bakubo »

There is something I am a bit confused about with both programs. They both have a non-destructive sharpening function that you can adjust. With destructive editing in PS/PSE or some other program one normally only sharpen at the end after you have done any resizing you want to do and also depending on what the purpose of output is. For example, is it just a small image for the web or a full-size file for printing? The sharpening parameters depended on the size and purpose of the image. With ASP and LR though the sharpening parameters seem to be meant to be set just like all the other non-destructive editing parameters and used for any size or purpose of the final image. This is so different from what I have been accustomed to in the past. Have I missed something?
User avatar
Winston
Grand Caliph
Posts: 467
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:29 pm

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by Winston »

The sharpening sliders/noise sliders in LR are for capture sharpening. The export function has settings for output sharpening that match the intended use (web, print, etc.) The web is full of info on this. It isn't just an LR thing.

Two or three step sharpening is basic digital image processing technique.

Two step: Capture, Output
Three step: Capture Creative (selective, i.e. sharp eyes, soft skin), Output

HTH
Winston Mitchell
KM7D, A700, A77, A77M2, A7M3
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by bakubo »

Thanks, Winston. I do know about capture and output sharpening. With ACR I typically just use the default sharpening amount of 25 for the capture sharpening and then after processing a photo and possibly resizing it I then do the output sharpening with varying parameters depending on the photo, the size of the photo, the purpose (web or print). I carefully look at the image in PSE to decide what sharpening parameters to use before saving the file. I was unclear in what I was asking earlier so I will try again.

With both LR and ASP you can set the sharpening parameters in the non-destructive editing and you can see the results in the preview. Both LR and ASP then allow you to save/export the file and a window comes up with many options. In this window 2 of the things you can do is resize and sharpen. Neither program shows you the result of the resize or sharpen so you can't see if it looks like you want it to. The LR output window just has a very simple sharpening section where you tell it whether the output is for screen, matte paper, or glossy paper and then select low, standard, and high for the sharpening amount. The ASP output window allows you to select amount, radius, and threshold for usm. In both cases all you can do is have the program save the file and then you can go look at the resulting file to see how it looks and then return to LR/ASP and change it if necessary and repeat. In PS/PSE/PSP and every other program I have used you can preview the sharpening result in the window before saving. I vary my sharpening depending on the image so I don't sharpen all of them the same.
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by bakubo »

I have been documenting in this thread what I have discovered as I evaluate these 2 programs for my use. I suspect that it isn't interesting to anyone else though so I am thinking of not updating this thread anymore as I learn and discover more about these programs.

As it stands now I am undecided about which one I might choose and am not even sure I want either one of them. They both look pretty good for what they do, but it is still not clear to me if I gain more than I lose. I am not looking for something to make things harder and more complicated, quite the contrary. One advantage and disadvantage of these 2 programs is that they try to consolidate 3 major functions into one program. The advantage is that it can simplify things to have that. The disadvantage is that the likelihood of all 3 of those functions to meet with your approval is smaller. You may really like 1 or 2 of the functions of a program, but the other one(s) you don't like so much. For some photos you still will need a 4th function: a true destructive photo editor such as PS, PSE, or PSP. It appears that with ASP and its ability to do many kinds of local non-destructive editing with layers you might be able to avoid using a traditional photo editor more often than with LR, but I have not yet started to experiment with that ASP ability. So, with LR you often want to match it with a photo editor also for things that LR can't do. The same for ASP.

Another possibility is to have separate programs that do 1 or 2 functions the way you like. For example, a raw processor/non-destructive editor that works well and a separate photo management db program. It seems that to have a non-destructive editor that can handle most photos it pretty much has to be part of the raw processor (assuming you shoot raw) so I don't think it makes much sense to separate those 2 functions. ACR is pretty much like this and the workflow for me is good since the image is then in PSE where I can, if necessary, make additional changes. I wish that much more often though that no changes were needed beyond what can be done in ACR. The really good thing is that the ACR changes are non-destructive and saved in the XMP sidecar file. I think David has mentioned that he uses PS/ACR + a photo db and maybe it is for the reasons I have mentioned here. Other raw processors/non-destructive editors are out there. I often see people mention RawTherapee so I may look at it too. Not sure about what photo db software is out there, but I may search around to see. Anyway, as I have been looking at LR and ASP I have started thinking along these lines also and may do some investigation into it too.
twm47099
Oligarch
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:20 am
Location: Maryland, USA

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by twm47099 »

I find your comments regarding your experience with the two programs very interesting. I currently use LR3 for raw conversion an much of my editing. However, for certain things such as color swapping for IR photography and anything where I need to use layers, I have to export a Tiff (16 bit) to Paintshop Pro X2. I also use PSP for finalizing images to print, primarily because I want to see the effect of the final sharpening (and I normally use a combination of sharpening tools in PSP.)

Since I don't have a Windows Vista or 7 computer, it appears that I may be in the market for a LR replacement (someday). ASP sounds interesting.

One other thing I don't like about LR is that it leaves a blocky sub pattern to my KM7D and Sony A700 images, which can cause difficulties when output sharpening.

I'd like to read your impressions of how each program behaves.

tom
User avatar
artington
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 553
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by artington »

Like you, Henry, I use LR3 and PSE9. The layer functions of the latter do most of what CS5 offers for my purposes. I have heard of ASP but am now wedded to LR, particularly as I have recently acquired the complete Nik collection as a LR plugin. Tbe great beauty about this suite is its local editing facility, which uses a proprietary technology called U-Point. Tbis is well documented on the web, with some excellent videos fron Nik, so there is no point in elaborating further here except to note that it allows a greater degree of control than can be achieved with tbe brush function in LR. I bought the program mainly for SilverFX Pro, which is amazing for monochrome conversions and manipulations but i have found Viveza to be particularly handy in tarting up pictures (like a more fully featured clarity slider) and DFine seems to be a better NR program than that in LR3. Also included is Sharpener Pro gives vastly more export sharpening control than that of LR. This programme also has a Raw sharpener module, but I find LR's very good, particularly when used with the Alt- key to allow greater on-screen visualisation. The downside of tbe Nik software, at least when used as a LR plug-in, is that all of its modules operate destructively, so it is better to retain the original LR modified files in case of error.

Martin
User avatar
Birma
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6585
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:10 pm

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by Birma »

Hi Henry - a very useful review and comparison so far :) .

I had been using PSE (up to 7) and very much liked using ACR as part of this for RAWs. When I got the Nex 5 I needed to upgrade my software and after using a demo of LR 3 I decided to upgrade to LR. I really liked that LR covered 99% of my editing needs in the one work-flow, and the really good noise reduction. The database function is good as it uses the 'real' file directories and is very flexible. I'm not yet sure when / if I'll go to LR 4 as my main PP machine is XP and I don't expect to to go to Windows 7 on this machine. If I don't buy any more camera bodies this year then expect that I'll be ok on LR 3.6. I think I'm moving to OS in the medium term so will probably go to LR 4 at the same time. (I think that a LR license entitles you to use it on two machines and you can mix Win and OS.)
Nex 5, Nex 6 (IR), A7M2, A99 and a bunch of lenses.
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by bakubo »

bakubo wrote:- LR help documentation uses about the smallest font possible (it is tiny!) and it can't be enlarged. I find it very uncomfortable. ASP allows the font size to be changed.
Good news! The LR help documentation that you look at when you select it in the LR Help menu has a super tiny font, but I found the same documentation on the Adobe website so I can adjust the font size in my browser:

http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Lightroom/3 ... index.html
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: AfterShot Pro and Lightroom

Unread post by bakubo »

twm47099 wrote:I find your comments regarding your experience with the two programs very interesting. I currently use LR3 for raw conversion an much of my editing. However, for certain things such as color swapping for IR photography and anything where I need to use layers, I have to export a Tiff (16 bit) to Paintshop Pro X2. I also use PSP for finalizing images to print, primarily because I want to see the effect of the final sharpening (and I normally use a combination of sharpening tools in PSP.)
For some things you just need a real photo editor and those are some good examples. I think that for probably 85-90% of my photos I just make global adjustments that can be done in a non-destructive editor that then keeps a record of those changes so that I can reopen the raw file (or OOC jpeg or film scan tiff) and get all those adjustments automatically made to it again, but still allow the settings to be tweaked. For the other 10-15% of the photos though that require changes that a non-destructive editor can't handle then I would have to transfer it to a regular photo editor.
twm47099 wrote: Since I don't have a Windows Vista or 7 computer, it appears that I may be in the market for a LR replacement (someday). ASP sounds interesting.
LR is available for Windows and Macs, but LR 4 will stop supporting WinXP. ASP is available for Windows (XP, Vista, 7), Macs, and Linux.
twm47099 wrote: One other thing I don't like about LR is that it leaves a blocky sub pattern to my KM7D and Sony A700 images, which can cause difficulties when output sharpening.
I have converted a few A700, Canon 60D, and Canon S95 raw files with both LR and ASP, but I haven't spent time pixel peeping them so I haven't seen anything strange with either one. I have also not yet looked carefully at more difficult files such as high ISO, blown highlights, etc.
twm47099 wrote: I'd like to read your impressions of how each program behaves.
Okay, I will try to keep updating this thread as I uncover things.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests