![]() ![]() It makes no sense to use a pixel based editor for anyone that typically edits (crop, straighten, color tweak, exposure, etc) every picture. Completely unnecessary to just add some text.Īgreed, and completely unnecessary if you use PhotoLab. Using LR + Elements (I'm sure Photoshop would be the same) always blows up the file size to near 100MB from the original RAW+edits size of about 25MB. But, if you have already created a fancier text or other image elsewhere, you can embed it in the exported image, without creating large files. ![]() You can have one text string, with full control over font, colour and position, but you can't do anything fancy with it. You can add some limited text using PhotoLab in the form of a watermark. I does seem a shame that there isn't and integrated package that supports LR style RAW conversion + edits with the addition of a text layer. My current tools will all die when I move to an M1 Mac. I may just move to C1 and stick with Elements for the occasional times I need to add text to a picture. That’s the combination I use as well (together with some other programs). PhotoLab would make a very good LR replacement, providing you don't use LR mainly for the DAM. I use PhotoLab as my raw developer, and Affinity as my paint program. Affinity can develop raw files, but without sidecar files, it's only useful for the occasional raw file. I’m sure you will also get products like darktable pop up in the responses, and if you’re on a Mac Raw Power might also be a LR replacement, but it does lack a lot of DAM features.Īgreed, Affinity is a pixel editor similar to Photoshop, not a raw developer like Lightroom. If you are looking to drop Adobe completely then C1 + Affinity would be a good choice. That said, I prefer it to PS and use it in with Capture One.įrom what you have written it is not the product to replace LR for you. Affinity as of now doesn’t have a LR equivalent product, and there are better choices for raw conversion. Affinity is a pixel level product similar to, but not identical to Photoshop. So for many and maybe for you, Affinity Photo would be a reasonable replacement for Photoshop-but not for Lightroom. They're 'baked in' at that point-which is a frustrating limitation. However, once you're finished the basic edits from the raw file and switch over into the next 'persona', there's no sidecar file or ability to go back and change the raw edits. Now saving edits made in AP in its native file format will make quite a large file. Likewise, 95% of Affinity Photo's editing operations are non-destructive. export to same folder as source file, using the exact same file name). It's totally non-destructive with raw files, and with TIFF and JPEG source files, it's non-destructive unless you export over it (i.e. Now to be fair, Affinity Photo is not a destructive editor. Affinity Photo does not have a DAM (although it doesn't sound like you really need a DAM), and its raw conversion and printing capabilities are quite basic and limited, compared to Lightroom's. If so, it is a deal breaker and unfortunate because it seems a nice package.Īlthough I've used Affinity Photo for several years, like it, and think it's a good value, I agree with the previous responses that Affinity Photo is not at all a reasonable replacement for Lightroom. It looks like the original RAW file is not preserved. My research seems to indicate that it is a destructive editor that creates a very large (3 to 7X) file for every edited RAW file even if it is just a crop plus some LR style image tweaking. Affinity seems to give me the RAW processing of LR plus most of PhotoShop in one application, but …. Time moves on, I’m getting a new Mac and looking around to see if I could / should dump Adobe. Less than 3% of the files get simple additional text (and other processing not available in LR) using Elements creating a large PSD file. I do use some simple ratings and labels in Bridge.) (This is a simple LR setting that lets me keep my original file structure which (for me) is easier to search, save and backup while only adding a few kilo bytes of storage compared to the LR library which I regularly completely purge. Process every file in LR, storing the data in the XMP sidecar file in the original location with the original RAW file Store / organize RAW files in a simple year- month file structure. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |