What does /p/ use to edit their photos? Right now DxO OpticsPro

I use lightroom, PS sometimes...what exactly is your problem with LR?

>>2740631
I find the interface really clunky and I don't use it enough to warrant paying monthly for Adobe CC.

>>2740648
idk, for me the sliders are pretty intuitive, you even have an option to auto adjust things (that you can also change). As for paying, there's always pirating. Had DxO recommended by a photographer once, but didn't really bother with checking it out

>>2740629
Whats fucking wrong with VSCO presets? They look awesome and simplify the workflow a lot. The problem lies in all those massive faggots who fade the shit out of their photos.
Plus, LR is goat.

>>2740979
they can be used a crutch, preventing people from learning how to use lightroom or photoshop to process their photo to their own design.

emphasis on the "can" aspect, because you can always tweak the presets and make it your own.

>>2740979
I don't like their presets because they've literally turned photography into one grey mush. If I took a bunch of photos from a big-name photogs on tumblr/instagram and placed them in front of you I bet you couldn't tell who took what, hell, they probably couldn't tell either.

>thread about dxo vs lr
>everyone talks about vsco
Sounds about right.

>inb4 vsco is a deal breaker

Better to slave over color sliders for houra until you become a demi-god of color manipulation than be a vsco plebe

>>2740629
Capture one is Top tier and by far the best raw converter.
If you don't want to pay for a raw converter then darktable or the shit that comes with your cam will do the Job just fine.

>>2742044

i did literally that and i succeeded.

feels pretty goodman.

>>2740979
>VSCO
once we're on the subject.. can you change the intensity of the presets? As far as I understood lightroom doesnt use layers, so you will have to manually downplay a preset (which is just lotsa wasted effort) or import it into PS for mixing out the right look for you between layers.

>>2742135
The presets merely adjust the sliders in the develop module, so you're free to go back after and move any of the effects to be more or less.

>>2740979
There's nothing inherently wrong with VSCO, people just bash it/use it because they think its one click and done but in reality the presets are just a base to build off of. That's the thing with all presets, its not just one and done, you have to work with the image and adjust it to what you want the outcome to be.

LR 3.5, Adobe PS CS2 and Irfanview

File: JUST.jpg (44KB, 667x932px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 667x932px

>>2742388
>LR 3.5, Adobe PS CS2 and Irfanview

>>2742050
>something is Top tier and by far the best in its category
>lemon is top tier and by far the best ice cream flavor
it may be the most accurate raw converter, the raw converter with most options, but you're being unreasonable there
>>2742261
>they think its one click and done but in reality the presets are just a base to build off of.
depends on the approach
if you want to emulate a particular film then you really should not tweak a preset more than a little

* Nikon's Capture NX-D to convert raw files from my Nikon camera (white balance, minor changes to levels and curves, distortion, vignetting)

* Photoshop CC for pre-resize sharpening, most edits and retouching, color profiling, etc.

* BenVista PhotoZoom Pro for resizing and post-resize sharpening as it has a bunch of interpolation algorithms that are superior to those of Photoshop and decent sharpening controls (can't do color profile conversions, though, so sometimes I have to go back into PS to do that, depends on the situation)

>>2742415
Oh, before someone criticizes me for using Nikon's own raw conversion software: It has the most accurate color information and fully understands the settings that follow the raw data when shooting raw in this manufacturer's own cameras + accurate distortion compensation due to Nikon's own info about lenses. If you shoot Nikon and go Lightroom or Adobe Camera Raw your colors and distortion a shit. It's not a big deal, Photoshop is a more powerful editor anyway and all it needs to do is conversion. <3

>>2742417

I don't know why someone would criticize you. NX-D is great, and it's awesome that it's free. NX2 used to cost $200. Nikon updated it and released it free of charge, which is pretty fucking rad.

Photoshop CS6 extended on PC
Lightroom 5.7 on Laptop
Polarr on iPad/iPhone

Pixelmator.

Yeah, I'm going to switch. PS & LR for €10 a month is pretty tempting but I'm getting the X-T10 tomorrow and I know X-trans still sucks with Adobe.