Which do you prefer....

[LennyBloke]

I've been experimenting with Corel AfterShot 2/PSP X8 against Lightroom 4 to see which one really suits me better. The intention was to reach a similar result, but due to a Picnic situation one input file was RAW and the other JPEG so the final result isn't equal - but as an early pair of outputs, Which of these do you prefer?
1. LR4

2. AS2 & PSP X8

[Percy]

1. LR4 for me.

The sky looks blown out on 2 and to my eye the contrast is better in 1.

[McGregNi]

Of course your highlights are screwed on the 2nd, and there is that slight contrast difference as Percy said.

But really, I'd be cautious about trying to line up two specific outputs for comparison and drawing conclusions about the software based on that. Only you yourself can know the steps it took, and get the feeling for what was involved in getting to the results you wanted. Presumably (assuming the Coral software is fully featured) it would be possible to get very similar results from both. Its just about HOW you get those results, how it feels for you, and which is easier or more intuitive in use.

No one here can say that the Coral software is no good with highlights based on these examples, because we don't know the process involved. But if you found that you had really tried hard, read the guidance available, and struggled to get the results then you could reasonably reject that software as too difficult or making life too hard to bother with. Ultimately it can only be your own sense for that that counts.

[Smeggypants]

#1 is much better

And what Nigel said really.

[richandfleur]

The blown out sky is a big deal on the second one.

I think either program could produce these two outputs.

Personally I'd head down to the lens correction section and straighten those building verticals plus level out the horizon a bit

[bwlchmawr]

One is better with more contrast but I'd try to correct the verticals. Nigel's words are, as ever, wise.

[MrB]

The basic principle of experimentation is to ensure that there is only one variable. If the variable under investigation is the software, I don't really understand why you didn't start by using the same file for each software to process.

Cheers.
Philip

[Derek897]

The basic principle of experimentation is to ensure that there is only one variable. If the variable under investigation is the software, I don't really understand why you didn't start by using the same file for each software to process.

Cheers.
Philip

Very true that.
Again no 1 for me. Even without the blown out sky of no 2 it would still have been no 1.

[Steve.Ledger]

I think the question really is, "which software do you prefer".. Everyone has their own software preferences which suits their workflow style, pocket and UI aesthetics. For me it's Lightroom.

[Derek897]

I think the question really is, "which software do you prefer".. Everyone has their own software preferences which suits their workflow style, pocket and UI aesthetics. For me it's Lightroom.

As you have said, everyone has their own preferences as to software and work flow style. It would be next to impossible for us to comment on which software is best for John because of those reasons. All we can really do is answer the question that was asked, which of these 2 images do we prefer.
John may have spent 2 hours editing in one program and 10 mins in the other. So really only he can decide which is best for him based on his input, ease of use, options available and finished product.

[Ian]

No.1 by a country mile for me. Nigel, of course, is right - you can't draw many conclusions from a single comparison except to say, in this instance, the the LR4 version is better.

[oldjoe]

number one for me as it has a bit more contrast but the great lump in the right bottom corner distracts me on both, personally would have cropped across above that. i would recommend Nik Silver Exfex for Black and White processing. will have to have a wander around Gloucester again myself at some point being only 1/2 hr away.

[LennyBloke]

Thanks for the initial comments - I realise that it's not a fair comparison, but that was down to my error spotted after I'd done the processing

The blown highlights comments I expected, and some preferences for the higher contrast in the LR image too - but I thought the tonal range in the AS image might have been preferred by some - the verticals I'll have a tinker with to see which I prefer

This is only really a first stab at using the Corel package as a proper workflow, and I will re-do the image with a RAW file as the base

It took me a fair amount of time to get used to Lightroom, and I still don't think I get the best out of it, so I'll persevere with X8 to "mimic" the flow I would expect from LightRoom with some tweaks along the way - once I reached that level I should them be in a position to decide which suits me better. As some of you have said, both packages should be capable of producing similar quality results. in the end I think the deciding factors will be ease of use, output quality, and price (I'm not a big fan of the Adobe pricing model).

[Smeggypants]

A big part of why I'm a Lightroom fan is the cataloguing and more recently the geotagging, as well as the ability to very easily batch edit