Photoshop CS2 Camera RAW or CaptureOne Pro

Deleted

I think for most users C1LE is more then enough. Comes free with Sandisk Ultra III CF cards. (while the promo runs, dunno for how long).
I recommend etcetera profiles for C1 by the way. With these profiles, C1 comes very, very close to the results DPP produces. Way better then C1 with the regular profiles or ACR color wise.

Hmmm, to my poor eyes the ACR images have much better skin tones and the C1 images appear to have a green cast to the skin. The C1 images seem a bit more saturated. I'm not sure I see a significant enough difference to warrant $400+ (for the pro version) over free with PS. Especially since the ACR images seem a tad better to me.

I use C1 exclusively.. I was able to integrate it into my workflow very easily. I love the results.. I've use aperture and the PSCS2 RAW converter, and I still prefer C1 for RAW conversion.. (though I love aperture for it's archiving capabilities!)

Join the crowd - thought I had it figured out too, until they announced Lightroom.

Jonathan Consiglio wrote in post #2495825
......I'm leaning towards going with C1 for RAW, and CS2 for selective editing, and things like that... So many options! I hate this!

Now that Michael Jonsson is working for Adobe, I believe that the RAW capabilities, performance, and workflow advantages will swing to ACR/PSCS3 and/or Lightroom. Time will tell, but I'd be very cautious about going with any iteration of C1 until PSCS3 goes gold and evaluations can be made.

What did they say in the magazine about DPP 2.2 ?
I Suggest you give it a try. It's free and produces excellent results.

I can't remember.. I'll need to find it and read it again.. Actually, I think it's a PDF file that I have on my computer.. I'll post back after I read it again..

Why don't more people just stick with using Canon's DPP? Is third party RAW workflow software that much better? I seem to be getting excellent results using DPP with Adobe CS2, though my knowledge of digital imaging software is limited to basic functions. Help me understand.

DPP isn't bad really.... there is nothing wrong with it. I have the app but just wanted a little more of the "seamless" integration of ACR, Bridge and CS2 all linked together. I tend to be a minimalist with my s/w, installing only what I really use, and then trying to get good with that. I still keep DPP on my machine but for the time being use the other.

Lord, you seem to be getting a lot out of DPP and that's what really matters in the end. If you are happy with it, productive and getting good results, then that's the most important thing.

Lord_Malone wrote in post #2544635
Why don't more people just stick with using Canon's DPP? Is third party RAW workflow software that much better? I seem to be getting excellent results using DPP with Adobe CS2, though my knowledge of digital imaging software is limited to basic functions. Help me understand.

sapearl wrote in post #2544718
DPP isn't bad really.... there is nothing wrong with it. I have the app but just wanted a little more of the "seamless" integration of ACR, Bridge and CS2 all linked together. I tend to be a minimalist with my s/w, installing only what I really use, and then trying to get good with that. I still keep DPP on my machine but for the time being use the other.

Lord, you seem to be getting a lot out of DPP and that's what really matters in the end. If you are happy with it, productive and getting good results, then that's the most important thing.

Yeah, but I'm always open to new things. I'm going to see if I can't download a trial version of the software and see what it can offer me over DPP. However, I'm done plunking down cash for software that I really only use minimally. I've had CS/CS2 for a while now, but find myself not really using it to it's full potential. Part of it is not having the time to really digest and learn the program.

sapearl wrote in post #2544718
DPP isn't bad really.... there is nothing wrong with it. I have the app but just wanted a little more of the "seamless" integration of ACR, Bridge and CS2 all linked together. I tend to be a minimalist with my s/w, installing only what I really use, and then trying to get good with that. I still keep DPP on my machine but for the time being use the other.

Lord, you seem to be getting a lot out of DPP and that's what really matters in the end. If you are happy with it, productive and getting good results, then that's the most important thing.

Totally agree, if you are happy using it and get good results why change? - I personally get on better with C1 (LE version) but maybe it's just me...

DPP is very capable software and gives excellent conversions, one of the best out there IMO, but some people just don't like the interface (me included).

Since the output of RAW converters is based to a large extent on user input, I really don't see how you can compare two and say the output of one is better. Theoretically at least they should all be capable of creating the exact same image. The difference is in the user interface, and what you are used to. I have used C1 for several years and really like the interface. I've also used ACR, DPP, Lightroom, SilkyPix, RAW Therapee and probably several others that I've forgotten. I keep going back to C1, not because I get better images, but because getting the image I want is just easier, since I'm so used to the interface. I really like Lightroom because it is very powerful and there are several things it can do that C1 cannot. Since it is free right now, I can switch back and forth, depending on what I am trying to to. Once I have to pay for it, then I'll have to decide if the added features are worth whatever Adobe decides to charge. Also SilkyPix is a great app and probably the equal of any of the main line converters. It's the only one that I know of that can white balance off skin tones, which is pretty cool. Again the interface is not the one I'm used to, so after the trial period I'm back to C1. It's just easier (for me).

Bodog wrote in post #2545131
Since the output of RAW converters is based to a large extent on user input, I really don't see how you can compare two and say the output of one is better. Theoretically at least they should all be capable of creating the exact same image.

Depends. I've tried DPP, RIT, ACR, Lightroom, C1Pro, C1LE and silkypix. And a few more I think.
There are (more or less) subtle differences. Most noticable in the way a highlight transitions to 'white'. For instance a spotlight with a colored gel can give quite some differences. Have a look.
C1 comes close when using ETCetera profiles, otherwise it's way behind DPP IMO.
ACR is worse IMO with skin colors.
Then again, I'm mostly in a low light environment with tungsten lighting, which seems to be more difficult for a raw converter then the avarage daylight shots...

I mostly use DPP, and use ACR, sometimes EVU, to do highlight recovery, which DPP doesn't do.

Understandable Lord . Everything does take lots and lots of time....

Working the wedding circuit, albeit part time, and processing quantities of wedding proofs has forced me to learn some of the techniques just to survive. There's still PLENTY more for me to learn. - Stu

Lord_Malone wrote in post #2544741
.......I'm done plunking down cash for software that I really only use minimally. I've had CS/CS2 for a while now, but find myself not really using it to it's full potential. Part of it is not having the time to really digest and learn the program.