Skip to main content

Shooting RAW - software comparison

In my last two articles I’ve discussed the benefits of shooting in RAW format and some of the techniques I use to get the most out of the information captured by a digital camera sensor.
I also mentioned that not all RAW processing software will give you the same quality results.

Everyone works in different ways so here’s how I judged the four software packages that I’ve tried. I looked at ease of use, speed, flexibility, features and for me the most important thing of all, quality.

This is not an exhaustive or scientific test and you may have a different opinion – it’s just what works for me. I’ve tried Nikon Capture 4 (I use Nikon so don’t know how the other manufacture’s software compares), Adobe Photoshop CS2, Rawshooter Essentials 2006 and Capture One Pro.

Nikon Capture 4
Loaded with features including correction for fisheye lenses, filter plugins from NIk and totally integrated with the camera controls. It also enables you to shoot tethered to your computer. Results are good quality but the software is very clunky to use and oh so slow.

Rawshooter Essentials 2006
Lots of features, easy to use and its FREE. When you deal with RAW files shot at a high ISO there are some questions about the quality. See Gary Wolstenholme’s excellent article which compares the results from the three non camera manufacturer software packages discussed here.

Adobe Photoshop CS2
I found the RAW processing feature the easiest to use of those discussed here. Photoshop’s auto settings feature is pretty good as a starting point and many times you don’t have to do much more to the image. It has not got quite as many features as the other software packages but it is very convenient , straightforward and easy to use.

Capture One Pro/LE
If you’re after professional workflow and superb output quality then this is the software to go for and it is my preferred choice. Capture One pulls out more detail, gives you superb control and delivers a film like quality. Gary’s article covers the features in detail so I’m not going to repeat everything here again. The LE version has the same processing engine as the Pro version and unless you need the extra professional features don’t spend more than you have to as the output quality is the same (and that’s what really counts).

I hope you’ve found this useful and please feel free to email your comments to me or add them below.

All the best,Paul

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Approach to taking a portrait

Portrait of Amitabh Bachchan. Click on the image to see larger version. Every portrait is different but there are also elements which are the same, whether you’re shooting the famous or the locally famous. Fame is of course all relative. It depends on profession, accomplishments or media celebrity status. Whoever the ‘famous’ individual is there are millions of people in the world who will never have heard them. For example I photographed the legendary Indian Bollywood actor Amitabh Bachchan, who amongst his many accolades was awarded the Legion d'Honneur, the highest civilian award of France. But I’m positive that many people in North America will not have heard of him – although he has more fans than Tom Cruise, Jack Nicholson and Robert De Niro put together. I find that however well known a person is cracking through egos and insecurities is really important when it comes to getting authentic strong portraits. However I hasten to add that when it came to photographing Amitabh th

The portrait photographer's motivation

Easy access to the Internet and digital photography has resulted in an ever growing number of photographers uploading their images for comments and ratings from peers. Online communities evolve and these mini-societies each have their pecking order, internal groups and communal preferences. Photographers learn from each other. On sites that have a rating system there is often pressure to conform to certain styles, techniques and even subject matter. Although I participate in numerous sites (it's great fun), I recognise the danger of becoming a herd animal and losing the edge of individual creativity. There will always be the creatives that lead the way and the imitators that can only try to follow in their footsteps. This lead me to think about classifying photographers according their inner motivation. So as a bit of fun here are a few different types: The innovator Driven to always find something new, different and creative. Wants to be leading edge. Motivated by creative satisfa

Is professional photography still a viable career?

I am not against amateurs and semi-professionals selling their photography. It's a great way to earn some extra cash. However I am concerned about the level of high quality published work and the standards that clients and the public accept these days. It seems that just about everyone is a photographer. The line between amateur enthusiast and professional is fuzzy to say the least. Photography enthusiasts are selling their images through stock libraries and microstock websites, directly to magazines or through their own and third party sites. They're accepting commissions to shoot weddings, being hired to shoot for magazines and selling fine art prints from their websites. They're teaching photography on the weekend and guiding photographic holidays and safaris. Photography became accessible to the masses with the first non-expert cameras and the famous Kodak slogan"You press the button, we do the rest." The digital camera age has taken the whole thing to a ne