Converting from Lightroom to Aftershot

[gotchi]

Hi together,

I am at the moment evaluating which road I should take when moving away from Lightroom.
I used it since version 2 and never thought about moving away from it, but the politics of Adobe and its cloud subscription and the switch to Linux more or less forces me to do so.

I am not a professional photographer, but I like to take pictures in RAW, play around and have them nicely organized. Which Lightroom did and does well but for the reasons above I have to move on. Now, how can this be done ? I tested darktable and rawtherapee besides Aftershot and liked them all, but Aftershot stood out for various small reasons.
The only think which I am stuck now is with my lightroom DNG. Darktable and rawtherapee are able to read them (not talking about the modifications but that is fine), in Aftershot 2 I am not seeing them at all within the program.
What did I wrong?

And please, keep the talking about DNG and propriotary and I told you whatsoever to yourself (I read a few of those comments in some posts from 2012). Afterwards everybody is a genius. For me, at the time Adobe introduced DNG I thought it was the best move and a great idea (for several reasons), now I have to deal with it and asking how I can deal with it in aftershot. The other tools can already read the data, but I am not satisfied with darktable and rawtherapee.

Thanks for any help

[afx]

The only think which I am stuck now is with my lightroom DNG. Darktable and rawtherapee are able to read them (not talking about the modifications but that is fine), in Aftershot 2 I am not seeing them at all within the program.
What did I wrong?

AS does not support converted DNGs, only camera generated DNGs.
If you do not have your originals anymore, you are out of luck.

cheers
afx

[ferdinand-paris]

I understand your views about Adobe, but personally I think it would be a brave person to migrate in the direction you're proposing. There are other converters that I'd look at first. However C1 isn't cheap, and it's not clear what's happening to PN. I've never tried DxO, and not being on a Mac I've not tried IDI either. The others are a bit fringe for my tastes.

We all have to live with the consequences of our decisions and I hope you find a solution for yours. DNG was a good idea, but it hasn't worked out the way we all hoped. Like XMP, I think part of the reason for this is how Adobe managed it, although the big camera makers are also notoriously conservative.

[gotchi]

I understand your views about Adobe, but personally I think it would be a brave person to migrate in the direction you're proposing. There are other converters that I'd look at first. However C1 isn't cheap, and it's not clear what's happening to PN. I've never tried DxO, and not being on a Mac I've not tried IDI either. The others are a bit fringe for my tastes.

We all have to live with the consequences of our decisions and I hope you find a solution for yours. DNG was a good idea, but it hasn't worked out the way we all hoped. Like XMP, I think part of the reason for this is how Adobe managed it, although the big camera makers are also notoriously conservative.

Thanks for the feedback, but sorry I have to ask what C1, PN and IDI is never heard those.

Also the need to convert away from Lightroom is not made because I am so bored, more it is the reason of how Adobe is evolving their product portfolio into a cloud based and subsciption based model. I still have time, because I do have Lightroom 5 already but I have to look into alternatives. Also dual boot is a little anyoing because also Windows is not a OS I wanna use any more, because of how they evolved as well.

Nevertheless, you are right about decisions made and DNG, could have worked as well

What would you recommend in my situation as a better option, or idea?

[afx]

Thanks for the feedback, but sorry I have to ask what C1, PN and IDI is never heard those.

C1: Capture One, the second oldest independent raw converter (the oldest being Bibble, the predecessor of AfterShot).
PN: Picture Ninja, currently the best raw converter on the market, but with severe workflow deficiencies. From the company that used to supply Noise Ninja for Bibble/AfterShot.
IDI: A very nice raw converter that is MacOS only.

While none of the above can hold a candle against AfterShot from a workflow perspective, they can deliver better IQ depending on the files and the types of adjustment needed.

All the open Source converters on Linux tend to annoy me much more than various issues with AS, so I stay away from them.

I currently download, cull and tag in AS and then depending on image content continue with AS, Lightroom or C1.

cheers
afx

[lathspell]

PN: Picture Ninja

Actually it's "Photo Ninja" (from the PictureCode company).

[afx]

Duhh...
afx

[jknights]

There is a different (free) software available for Mac, Windows and Linux called LightZone.
It produces very good results from Fuji X Trans files and Nikon RAW files. It's controls are not standard as it uses Zones rather than Level/Curves.


If you have converted your RAW files to DNG files then I hope you have used the full method (DNG+RAW contained in the DNG file) but I suspect that you like many others have believed the Adobe BS and converted the RAW to simple DNGs (no RAW in DNG but only a half-processed DNG). If this is the case then I fear that you are stuck in a bad place. The best you can do is to convert all the DNG files to TIFFs and use these instead.

If you decide to make the change from Adobe you wont be the first or the last. Many people are getting completely pissed off by the attitude of Adobe wrt the subscription model and also the handling of issues around Fuji X Trans RAW files. I have but I prefer to use LR for my catalogs and either Capture1 or AfterShot Pro (ASP) for my RAW processing.
The new version of ASP v2.1.2.10 is a huge improvement over previous versions of ASP.

[gareth]

FWIW
As an amateur user since Bibble4, I now use C1 for most images as the IQ is better - particularly for such things as skies highlight recovery which they refer to as HDR
I use ASP for manipulation ( curves / cloning / perspective / adding text or frames ) that is enough so I rarely use a photo editor.

I much prefer the ASP sidecar way of working
If ASP had the IQ and highlights, I would be back tomorrow.

C1 is more expensive but 220 euro (1 user 2 seat) compared to say 1000+ for a camera seems ok as one gets good results easily.
( also you can get it for 8 per month subscription if that doesn't offend )

[ferdinand-paris]

A couple of further comments. I thought Adobe had said that LR6 would be available as a stand-alone product. It's good to look at alternatives, but I have a feeling that you're jumping the gun.

IDI is Irident Developer - Mac only. From what I've seen, it's not a converter for bulk images as it's too slow. A bit like Photo Ninja. Good for getting the detail out of one or two landscapes at a time, but a wedding photographer for example would go crazy.

C1 is expensive, but is usually on sale a couple of times a year for 30% off, but typically only for 4-5 days, so you have to watch out and be quick. It's a good alternative to LR, although I hate what it does to the file system, littering each folder it peruses with multiple tiers of its sidecars and cache.

When AFX said "All the open Source converters on Linux tend to annoy me much more than various issues with AS, so I stay away from them" he was referring to Lightzone and Raw Therapee. I agree with him, although has you see from jknights' comments, they have their devotees.

To be complete, the other converters of note are Silkypix and DxO. I have limited experience with Silkypix, which is quirky in the extreme, but produces good results if you have the patience to learn it and work with it. There's a free version for Fuji cameras, but it's usually 2-3 major versions behind the current paid version. Someone else will have comment on DxO

[Dutchmm]

Ferdinand wrote:

Someone else will have comment on DxO

ATM, you cannot run DxO under WINE. It needs a 64-bit windows or Mac environment, and neither WINE nor Crossover were there yet the last time I tried - about 3 months ago, IIRC. I don't remember (from the trial I conducted 4 years ago) whether or not it has a usable batch facility, either.

[afx]

When AFX said "All the open Source converters on Linux tend to annoy me much more than various issues with AS, so I stay away from them" he was referring to Lightzone and Raw Therapee.

Well, the most horrendous one is Darktable....

cheers
afx

[ferdinand-paris]

Yes, forgot about DT.

[gotchi]

Thanks for all the replies.

If LR6 is staying a stand alone app or not, pfff, I do not trust Adobe in this area. Nevertheless, I wanna be prepared, better earlier or later.

What I figured out now, I did more or less everything or huge parts wrong in my photo management and processing workflow. I locked me into Lightroom completely by using their format and deleting the original ones. I also naively believed that XMP and DNG formats, changes and so on are interchangeable. Nevertheless which program I use, they can read the changes I did within the XMP or DNG changes. This is not working for most of the information I add via a lossless process of adjusting my pictures (nor DNG nor XMP).

This means I have to recreate my workflow completely, storing originals for later usage, and every adjustment I do, is done via a RAW processor of my choice, it doesn't matter if I am right. Because at the end the XMP generated by Darktable can not be read be Rawtherapee or any other vica versa (except small parts). After processing I have to export the picture as JPG or TIFF and store it alongside with the original, the XMP and the processed and exported picture. That is, as it seems, the only way to stay kind of independent for the years coming. Without loosing data on the way (special original data).

Please correct me if I am wrong at some points.

Thanks

[afx]

This means I have to recreate my workflow completely, storing originals for later usage, and every adjustment I do, is done via a RAW processor of my choice, it doesn't matter if I am right. Because at the end the XMP generated by Darktable can not be read be Rawtherapee or any other vica versa (except small parts). After processing I have to export the picture as JPG or TIFF and store it alongside with the original, the XMP and the processed and exported picture. That is, as it seems, the only way to stay kind of independent for the years coming. Without loosing data on the way (special original data).

That about sums it up.

If you are really paranoid, start snapshoting your tools in a virtual machine.
(I do have an XP machine still running for an old game

As even the old Bibble 4 is still running on my current W7 64 box, I have not had to resort to putting that into a VM.

Another thing to think about: Newer converters often can do better with old files. So while I think storing the final JPG has its merits, using fat TIFFs from intermediary steps is probably overkill.

cheers
afx