ON1 Photo Raw..... Please help me decide

Barryboy

Barryboy

Suspended / Banned
Messages
274
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
I've had an email from ON1 offering me ON1 PHOTO RAW for US $69 (approx £50). That's less than six months subscription for Adobe. Now I use LR more than PS and in truth I'm a light user of both so I'm tempted. Has anyone made this change? pleased to hear.

Rob
 
•


OnOne is an image processor, presets applicator and
not a pixel editor nor a RAW converter… a dead end.

UK made Affinity Photo is a proper editor I use and the
v.11 of Danish made Capture One my Raw converter.
… but I wanted to be adobe free… so biased.
 
It depends how you like to work. I use ON1 Photo Raw as a Lightroom plugin and quite like it. I don't use it on every image but for many of my landscapes it can give quite good results. I do find it a bit slow, though.
 
Aha... thanks, Kodiak Qc. I suppose that my ultimate goal, too, is to replace Adobe products. You mention that you use 'Capture One' as your RAW converter of choice.... Isn't the RAW converter in Affinity Photo as good?

Rob
 
Last edited:
Barryboy said:
You mention that you use 'Capture One' as your RAW converter of choice.... Isn't the RAW converter in Affinity Photo as good?
Click to expand...


IN NO WAY AS GOOD!

The dedication of AP goes to pixel editing and does it well.
RAW conversion, in Serif's sense, is ok if one wants to work
on a single file… a "one trick pony" instance so to speak.

Since I opted for C1 some years ago and made it the pivot
of my workflow, I went from surprises to greater ones as it
comes with always updated colour engines and tools, and
productivity and customizations enhancements that take C1
to the top of the possible options.
 
I use Photo Raw to edit my Panasonic .RW2 raw files, as well as raw files from my Nikon D5100 and Samsung NX2000, so I don't know why Kodiak Qc says it's not a raw processor. He's right that it's not a pixel editor in the way that Photoshop and Gimp are, though you can use a brush to add colour to an image using the same modes as Photoshop (e.g. Normal, Overlay, Soft Light, etc). And with all due respect to Kodiak, I don't think it's a dead end or I wouldn't have invested in it.

I used to use Lightroom 4.4 with Perfect Effects and ON1 Photo 10 (the predecessors to Photo Raw) and LR doesn't recognise raw photos from my Panasonic TZ70, So I upgraded to Photo Raw 2018 and use only that in standalone mode. I copy raw photos from my camera into a folder on my Windows PC and Photo Raw (PR) recognises them immediately and 'imports' them into its database in just the same way that LR did with other raw formats.

I then use the Browse module to cull them, the Develop module to do what I would have done in Lightroom, the Effects module to add 'filters' such as Antique, Bleach Bypass, Color Enhancer, Dynamic Contrast, Glow, Lens Blur, Skin Retouching, Split Tone, Vintage, etc. After I've added effects, I can save the entire stack (optionally together with the changes in the Develop module) as a new preset, which I can then apply to other photos.

I can then export them as JPEG, PSD, TIFF, or PNG. optionally using one of the best resize modules in existence, which used to be known as Perfect Fractals. PR also integrates directly with my cloud storage, i.e. Dropbox, Google Drive, and OneDrive totally transparently. If I used an iPhone (I don't) I could have my photos synced to it transparently using the free ON1 Photo for Mobile app.

For an extra fee, I also joined their ON1 Plus program so I can chat on the forums not only to the developers, but also to prominent ON1 professional users such as Hudson Henry, Blake Rudis, Scott Davenport, and Matt Kloskowski, as well as having access to all of the training videos, and critiques of my photos if I want them.

I would suggest that you check it out, Rob. Don't look at my photos, as there's little chance that you'd use it the way I do. Check out the website and check out their YouTube channel.

You didn't say whether it was Photo Raw 2017 or 2018 you were offered. If it's the latter I'd jump at it. Oh, wait, I did!
 
garryknight said:
I don't know why Kodiak Qc says it's not a raw processor.
Click to expand...
garryknight said:
I don't think it's a dead end or I wouldn't have invested in it.
Click to expand...


Garry, my reserve goes in the direction of productivity only
in my reply… as one can work on a single file at the time.
In that sense, it is not a dedicated RAW converter but a pix-
el editor with a RAW conversion feature.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
•


OnOne is an image processor, presets applicator and
not a pixel editor nor a RAW converter… a dead end.

UK made Affinity Photo is a proper editor I use and the
v.11 of Danish made Capture One my Raw converter.
… but I wanted to be adobe free… so biased.
Click to expand...

I disagree - On1 Photoraw 2018 is a full raw image manipulation suite, including non-destructive raw file handling & versioning, synchronising changes across multiple images, metadata use & digital asset management, a degree of pixel-level editing including layers, masks, pano stitching and much more.

Is it as good as Lightroom or DXO Photolab (previously DXO Optics Pro)? In terms of image quality, I'd say it's a *little* behind Lightroom in some ways, ahead in others and much more powerful for making bigger changes. I have a thread somewhere where I processed a fairly ordinary image through a bunch of packages and some preferred the results with On1. In use it's a little less refined than LR, but would be an acceptable alternative. I use LR as my preferred package, not least because it contains my image catalogue, but sometimes if I can't get a pleasing result with that I'll try either On1 or DXO.
 
ancient_mariner said:
I disagree - On1 Photoraw 2018 is a full raw image manipulation suite, including non-destructive raw file handling & versioning, synchronising changes across multiple images, metadata use & digital asset management, a degree of pixel-level editing including layers, masks, pano stitching and much more.
Click to expand...


Right, Toni, but one file at the time! :confused:

A RAW file is never to be altered by anything anyway! :)
 
ancient_mariner said:
How do you manipulate more than 1 file at a time?
Click to expand...



That's my point, Toni!

One needs a Raw converter that can develop x number
of files at once and an editor for the single manipulation. :cool:
 
Kodiak Qc said:
That's my point, Toni!

One needs a Raw converter that can develop x number
of files at once and an editor for the single manipulation. :cool:
Click to expand...

Lightroom only develops one image at a time too, but you can synch changes across multiple images in both packages.

On1 has an advantage in that it stores changes in the sidecar files that work on any machine running On1 that accesses the image, whereas LR changes are only stored in a single catalogue on a single machine. Edit images in the field on your laptop, then upload to your home computer and all the edits are still there without having to merge catalogues.
 
Last edited:
I have it for use in conjunction ( but not instead of lightroom/Photoshop) for one specific reason. It's ability to mask out skies. It's ability to mask out a sky "and then refine the edge" to get rid of the halo that tends to develop around selections is very useful in my main line of work. Wouldn't say it is better for other things however, just that particular task. Also worth adding that it doesn't add this to the raw file, it creates separate PSD s with layermasks, and adds these to the LR catalogue.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
Je suis un vieux pédant, moi? D'accord! Mais alors,
ça fait quoi de vous, mon cher Rog? SVP!


Si vous n'êtes pas capable d'y voir la différence,
eh bien merde, je vaque.

…/
Click to expand...

We all KNOW that you don't make changes to raw files with a 'raw editor', hence the old pedant comment. But the non-destructive bit is important because not everyone shoots raw or has all their images as raw files, and there are still common editors around that are destructive.

I'd hoped you would explain how you thought a raw editor would change multiple raw files at the same time, because right now I can't see a functional difference in that aspect of the software.
 
Onone does RAW, the clue is in the name. I don't think it's anything like as good as the alternatives, DXO etc, but it does what it says. It's also a pixel editor. The problem I have with it is it's still tied to presets, you don't have to use them and you can fiddle with them but that's where it comes from. If you like presets you're going to like it, I don't like anybodies presets so I'm not so committed. I have the 2017 version and have used it on occasion but mostly I don't even think to open it. Interesting that they are offering you the whole package for less than they are offering me the upgrade. I regret to say that, although I use DXO as a first processor, I still find Photoshop to be the superior programme, it is much more sensitive and subtle than any of the others and I still use CS6. ONone is ok, even good for the price that you are being offered but it isn't a replacement yet, I think we are looking at ONone RAW 2020 before that happens. Download the trial and see what you think, they'll make you a similar offer within 3 months.
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
On1 has an advantage in that it stores changes in the sidecar files that work on any machine running On1 that accesses the image, whereas LR changes are only stored in a single catalogue on a single machine. Edit images in the field on your laptop, then upload to your home computer and all the edits are still there without having to merge catalogues.
Click to expand...

FYI...
You can set LR catalog preferencess to write editing changes into XMP sidecar files (see below). It's not set by default because people often don't like XMP files seemingly littering their photo folders, and it may possibly cause a slight slowdown in LR.

LR-XMP-Save.jpg

I've always used this option as a belt & braces 'if all else fails' backup plan, in addition to my various standard catalog backups. I've never needed to utilise these XMP files <touch wood>, and have never experienced any problems having them - but it's another safety net in the event of an unforeseen technical meltdown.
 
TonyHall said:
FYI...
You can set LR catalog preferencess to write editing changes into XMP sidecar files (see below). It's not set by default because people often don't like XMP files seemingly littering their photo folders, and it may possibly cause a slight slowdown in LR.

View attachment 119308

I've always used this option as a belt & braces 'if all else fails' backup plan, in addition to my various standard catalog backups. I've never needed to utilise these XMP files <touch wood>, and have never experienced any problems having them - but it's another safety net in the event of an unforeseen technical meltdown.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that LR does not require merging of catalogues to transfer file edits between different computers if you use sidecar files? I found that LR5 always created .xmp files by default, and yes, there are sometimes delays while data is written to them.
 
I just remembered one thing that Rob, or anyone else thinking of buying Photo RAW should know: although ON1 claim that it's super fast, many people find that it runs quite slowly if you have anything else running at the same time, or if it's on an oldish PC. Using it on my quad-core i5 3.something GHz machine, I find it works OK if I reboot Windows and don't run anything else. It also helps a little to take down the Internet connection. It's always a good idea to run it as a demo version first.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Are you suggesting that LR does not require merging of catalogues to transfer file edits between different computers if you use sidecar files?
Click to expand...

Not the OP of that information, but yes. By writing the raw edits back to the original file, your changes will be visible in any program that looks at the original file and can read it (in LR you may need to go Metadata>Read Metadata From File). You don't have to set it auto (like Tony suggests) you can just CTRL+A in library mode, then CTRL+S to save all LR edits back to the original file as a manual job (Also under Metadata>Save Metadata To File). With raw files it's stored as a sidecar file, but with .dngs (and .jpegs if memory serves) it's stored in the header of the file - thus no additional files are created. (Minor) Downside is backup has to rewrite the whole dng rather than just a small xmp.

I tend to have it not on auto to save my backup job (which works OnFileChange) constantly running and updating while I'm playing in LR.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
That's my point, Toni!

One needs a Raw converter that can develop x number
of files at once and an editor for the single manipulation. :cool:
Click to expand...
You might need a Converter that can batch process others don't. Unless I am processing a focus stack I prefer to treat each and every raw file individually... So I think you were a little unfair towards OnOne Raw. The quality of the conversion is what most will be interested in.
 
PhilH04 said:
You might need a Converter that can batch process others don't.
Click to expand...


After I covered an event I'm back to the studio, I want
to upload all the files to my computer and process them
as quickly as possible.

This implies using a converter that can batch process
with speed, quality and reliability; and this is my defini-
tion of a dedicated RAW converter.

My RAW converter has a couple of features, tools, that
allow editing files as a pixel editor would but these are
only features and are way not as powerful as in a dedi-
cated pixel editor.

Beside a RAW converter, one needs a proper editor.
I bought, four years ago, OnOne and gave it the best run
I could but AP was the game changer. OnOne was no
longer used as I consider it way less useful than AP.
 
Daniel,

It is still a case of: You need a converter that can batch process (as will others), but not everybody needs or wants batch conversion, even if you only work on one file at a time it is still a raw converter...

What is more important for me at least is the quality of any conversion...

These days the importance of a pixel editor is diminishing, perhaps 90% of the time I go from raw file to finished print without touching a pixel editor (yes I know the raw data needs to be converted before printing, but that is in the background...)
 
PhilH04 said:
It is still a case of: You
Click to expand...


Of course it is… ME! This is the only experienced
workflow I can share after a long way on free trails
and mistakes that ended in this configuration of de-
dicated softwares.
 
A few additional points for consideration:

1) As well as .xmp files, Photo Raw also creates .on1 sidecar files, obviously containing extra information not in the .xmp specification. They're not significantly large, though they are bigger than the .xmp files. As an example, in a folder of 25 photos, the .rw2 files total 316 MB, the .xmp files total 59.4 KB, and the .on1 files total 1.09 MB. So the amount of extra data stored is less than .4 % of the original file size.

2) Photo Raw also has the ability to merge multiple shots to HDR or to panorama, right from within the Browse module.

3) I'm not a pro photographer and everything in my first reply to this thread relates only to serious hobby photography. Given the current state of Photo Raw (very few bugs to be ironed out, not as fast as it could be yet) I can understand some pros not wanting to commit to it just yet.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
After I covered an event I'm back to the studio, I want
to upload all the files to my computer and process them
as quickly as possible.

This implies using a converter that can batch process
with speed, quality and reliability; and this is my defini-
tion of a dedicated RAW converter.

My RAW converter has a couple of features, tools, that
allow editing files as a pixel editor would but these are
only features and are way not as powerful as in a dedi-
cated pixel editor.

Beside a RAW converter, one needs a proper editor.
I bought, four years ago, OnOne and gave it the best run
I could but AP was the game changer. OnOne was no
longer used as I consider it way less useful than AP.
Click to expand...

On1 has changed since 4 years ago. It is a raw processor, just like LR and Capture One.
Even Capture One, you can only process one image at a time. Certainly from the trials I have done Capture One does nothing special and has no additional ability to process multiple images over another application. You can sync edits to other images just like you can in LR and On One.

Saying that, On1 is not a good raw processor in my opinion. It's slow despite their hype of speed and the UI is clunky to say the least.
 
ecoleman said:
Certainly from the trials I have done Capture One does nothing special and has no additional ability to process multiple images over another application.
Click to expand...


:thinking::thinking::thinking::thinking::thinking::thinking::thinking:
 
I understand now - Daniel is talking about batch export (creation of conventional images from RAW) rather than processing (applying masks to alter the perceived appearance of images stored as RAW files). I have no idea if On1 can or can't batch export, and will try to remember to investigate in the next few days.

Regarding slowing down, I find with a quad core i7 and 16GB of ram that all images processors slow considerably with multiple applications open, and the best way to get decent performance is from a fresh restart. LR 5.7 seems particularly susceptible to poor performance if any other application has been opened previously, while On1 2018 and DXO are less so. Curiously, Nik Efex seems to have a big overhead, and using silver Efex gets the fans going when adjusting an image exported from LR - much more so than if I export into On1.
 
ancient_mariner said:
I understand now - Daniel is talking about batch export (creation of conventional images from RAW) rather than processing (applying masks to alter the perceived appearance of images stored as RAW files)
Click to expand...


I really meant both ways, Toni.

C1 can batch process multiple selected RAW files and export
multiple selected files to what ever output one desires.

But I am not here to win a point but to share so over and out …/
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
I have no idea if On1 can or can't batch export, and will try to remember to investigate in the next few days.
Click to expand...

It can in standalone mode. I use it to export multiple photos, processed in the Develop module (basic adjustments to raw) and/or the Effects module (filters and presets), for upload to Flickr and G+. Another feature not yet mentioned is its ability to batch rename photos using templates, e.g. currentname+text+serialnumber.
 
garryknight said:
It can in standalone mode. I use it to export multiple photos, processed in the Develop module (basic adjustments to raw) and/or the Effects module (filters and presets), for upload to Flickr and G+. Another feature not yet mentioned is its ability to batch rename photos using templates, e.g. currentname+text+serialnumber.
Click to expand...

In that case it is as capable of processing multiple images as much as Lightroom or CO, and does qualify as a raw processor using Daniel's defnition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top