# Best RAW editing software?



## ceejtank

I usually only use Canon's software for RAW editing, but am assuming it's lacking in it's overall abilities.  I just read on the football pics post about shooting in raw so you can use the "fill light tool" in it and light up their faces.. to my knowledge(which lets face it.. itsn't all that much ) my canon digital professional doesn't have that option.. 

so what's the best out there?

For other editing software I have PSE7, PS CS3(full), Photomatix(for HDR if anyones unfamiliar w/ the program).


----------



## 480sparky

ceejtank said:


> ..........so what's the best out there?...........



There is no such thing as 'the best'.  If there truly was, it would be the only one on the market.


----------



## MTVision

ceejtank said:
			
		

> I usually only use Canon's software for RAW editing, but am assuming it's lacking in it's overall abilities.  I just read on the football pics post about shooting in raw so you can use the "fill light tool" in it and light up their faces.. to my knowledge(which lets face it.. itsn't all that much ) my canon digital professional doesn't have that option..
> 
> so what's the best out there?
> 
> For other editing software I have PSE7, PS CS3(full), Photomatix(for HDR if anyones unfamiliar w/ the program).



Fill light should always be used sparingly! 

Adobe camera raw comes with cs3 and is a great raw processor.


----------



## ceejtank

480sparky said:


> ceejtank said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..........so what's the best out there?...........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no such thing as 'the best'. If there truly was, it would be the only one on the market.
Click to expand...



Lets go with "some alternatives you people prefer".. and there definitely is such a thing as the best, it's just relative.


----------



## ceejtank

MTVision said:


> ceejtank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I usually only use Canon's software for RAW editing, but am assuming it's lacking in it's overall abilities. I just read on the football pics post about shooting in raw so you can use the "fill light tool" in it and light up their faces.. to my knowledge(which lets face it.. itsn't all that much ) my canon digital professional doesn't have that option..
> 
> so what's the best out there?
> 
> For other editing software I have PSE7, PS CS3(full), Photomatix(for HDR if anyones unfamiliar w/ the program).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fill light should always be used sparingly!
> 
> Adobe camera raw comes with cs3 and is a great raw processor.
Click to expand...



Thanks.. I'll have to check to see if that installed and I just didnt see it.. it'd been a while (obviously since I'm running CS3) that I've even looked at those files.. or that install disk(s)


----------



## MTVision

ceejtank said:
			
		

> Thanks.. I'll have to check to see if that installed and I just didnt see it.. it'd been a while (obviously since I'm running CS3) that I've even looked at those files.. or that install disk(s)



It's there. Bridge is also part of photoshop. It's an image viewer and has its own ACR. the only way, I believe, to open ACR is to open a raw file. If you open bridge and right click on a raw file it gives you the option to open in camera raw. 

If you have a fairly new camera your version of ACR may not open your raw files. You can try updating ACR but that still may not work. The only get around is to (a) upgrade photoshop or (b) download adobes DNG converter. You would then convert all all your canon raw files to DNG. DNG is an open source raw file that adobe created. The dng files are also a little smaller but are really no different then the canon raw file.


----------



## 480sparky

ceejtank said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ceejtank said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..........so what's the best out there?...........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no such thing as 'the best'. If there truly was, it would be the only one on the market.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Lets go with "some alternatives you people prefer".. and there definitely is such a thing as the best, it's just relative.
Click to expand...


If you can't afford it, it's not the 'best' then.


----------



## swanseamale47

The best is debatable, whats best for you might not be best for me.  
In theory Canons own software should do the best raw conversion (they have all the raw information) others would disagree.   Many would argue that photoshop is the industry standard, but it is expensive, while programs like gimp (similar to earlier version of photoshop) is free.
Personally I'd look at a newer version of Elements (v11 due out soon-ish) it's changed a lot since your version, or maybe Lightroom, free trials of both from adobes site, see what works for you.


----------



## Rick58

ceejtank said:


> I usually only use Canon's software for RAW editing, but am assuming it's lacking in it's overall abilities.  I just read on the football pics post about shooting in raw so you can use the "fill light tool" in it and light up their faces.. to my knowledge(which lets face it.. itsn't all that much ) my canon digital professional doesn't have that option..
> 
> so what's the best out there?
> 
> For other editing software I have PSE7, PS CS3(full), Photomatix(for HDR if anyones unfamiliar w/ the program).



I have Photo Pro X3. It's cheap and it works.


----------



## MLeeK

I know RawTherapee was a freeware that was pretty damn close to Adobe Camera Raw/Lightroom. I haven't played with it in years now.


----------



## 480sparky

IrfanView is another freebie.


----------



## Big Mike

Lightroom
Lightroom
Lightroom

In terms of quality, Lightroom uses the same 'engine' that Adobe Camera Raw does, so no real difference there.  But Lightroom puts it into a more efficient system.  It's especially great when you're dealing with a large number of images.


----------



## Overread

There are differences between different RAW programs - however in every comparison review I've read they generally come to the same conclusions. Yes there are differences and specific RAW programs can sometimes give you (generally minor - only visible at 100% view) advantages over the others - however the conditions where one program has an advantage over the others are not repeatable for a photographer. As such you'd have to own, use and compare all the different software options for each RAW photo to pick out the "best one". For most photographers the gain from that is so tiny that its just not worth it. 

What it then comes down to is the features, interface and how easy it is to control and use the program. Some of them are quite powerful, others lack certain tools (eg Adobe strip down bits of their RAW processing engine setup for Elements) whilst others just present things better. Adobe Lightroom is a very popular tool for RAW processing because it offers a lot of functionality, a simple easy to use interface and also doubles as a library and management software package. With the inclusions of layer masks and more in Lightroom 4 its really become a very streamlined program which can do a lot if not all a photographer needs to get a photo from RAW to print ready -- it still lacks some CS5 features, but it generally presents a very complete and powerful tool which will do most if not all of what you need.



Also - I've personally never liked the interface in Canons RAW processing software - good or bad I just can't get to grips with it.


----------



## gsgary

Capture One Pro is the choice of top pros


----------



## TheLost

More training books...
More online guides...
More video tutorials...
More support...

Lightroom ... Its the best $129 you'll spend on photography.


----------



## Derrel

Big Mike said:


> Lightroom
> Lightroom
> Lightroom
> 
> In terms of quality, Lightroom uses the same 'engine' that Adobe Camera Raw does, so no real difference there.  But Lightroom puts it into a more efficient system.  It's especially great when you're dealing with a large number of images.



Correction: LIGHTROOM!
                LIGHTROOM!
                LIGHTROOM!

For the beginner, Lightroom's entire,total feature set FOR THE PRICE point it sells at, makes it the value leader. I think that for most people, it will do the "normal" image editing things that the majority of images need to look good. I know some people keep harping about "pixel-level editing" capabilities found in $699 copies of Photoshop CS...but...honestly...if you're asking the question about what the best software is, and are a beginner, I have to say, Lightroom. The vast majority of real-world tasks can be accomplished with LR. When you need to get into "pixel-level editing", then buy whatever version of Photoshop is current at that time.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

*LIGHTROOM*  <---only when "second best" won't suffice


----------



## Big Mike

Someone mentioned that Lightroom has great value because you get most of what you'll need, for less than $150.  I agree with that.

And if you do need to do the 'pixel level' editing, there are plenty of good choices.  Photoshop CS is the 'best', but also very expensive.  Photoshop Elements is much less expensive and will do 90% of what a photographer might want to do.  GIMP is free.

Another option is Adobe's new subscription program.  For something like $30-$50 per month, you can have access to all of their creative software.  I'd rather buy it outright, but it's an option.


----------



## Ajecphotos

Lightroom gets mentioned a fair bit.


----------



## ceejtank

Overread said:


> There are differences between different RAW programs - however in every comparison review I've read they generally come to the same conclusions. Yes there are differences and specific RAW programs can sometimes give you (generally minor - only visible at 100% view) advantages over the others - however the conditions where one program has an advantage over the others are not repeatable for a photographer. As such you'd have to own, use and compare all the different software options for each RAW photo to pick out the "best one". For most photographers the gain from that is so tiny that its just not worth it.
> 
> What it then comes down to is the features, interface and how easy it is to control and use the program. Some of them are quite powerful, others lack certain tools (eg Adobe strip down bits of their RAW processing engine setup for Elements) whilst others just present things better. Adobe Lightroom is a very popular tool for RAW processing because it offers a lot of functionality, a simple easy to use interface and also doubles as a library and management software package. With the inclusions of layer masks and more in Lightroom 4 its really become a very streamlined program which can do a lot if not all a photographer needs to get a photo from RAW to print ready -- it still lacks some CS5 features, but it generally presents a very complete and powerful tool which will do most if not all of what you need.
> 
> 
> 
> Also - I've personally never liked the interface in Canons RAW processing software - good or bad I just can't get to grips with it.





Big Mike said:


> Lightroom
> Lightroom
> Lightroom
> 
> In terms of quality, Lightroom uses the same 'engine' that Adobe Camera Raw does, so no real difference there. But Lightroom puts it into a more efficient system. It's especially great when you're dealing with a large number of images.





Big Mike said:


> Someone mentioned that Lightroom has great value because you get most of what you'll need, for less than $150. I agree with that.
> 
> And if you do need to do the 'pixel level' editing, there are plenty of good choices. Photoshop CS is the 'best', but also very expensive. Photoshop Elements is much less expensive and will do 90% of what a photographer might want to do. GIMP is free.
> 
> Another option is Adobe's new subscription program. For something like $30-$50 per month, you can have access to all of their creative software. I'd rather buy it outright, but it's an option.




Seems to me lightroom is the way to go.  I'll have to check some sources to see what it's capable of for raw editing.  Thanks to everyone for their input/help on this.  I'll start checking it out tonight!  :thumbup:


----------



## unpopular

I use Raw Photo Processor. It's only available on mac. It's very, very precise and lightweight, no bells and whistles at all, it's intended to be more like processing color film - so the approach is a little different. Uses 32-bit math for all calculations, which makes it slower, but the results are great and film-like.

The thing I really like about it is how it handles noise, almost looks like color rodinal; never smeary or splotchy.

It is standalone or compatible with Lightroom.


----------



## KmH

Lightroom's Develop module uses the Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) parametric Raw converter edit rendering engine .
Lightroom 4 uses ACR 7. The first Lightroom used ACR 4

Adobe Camera Raw first appeared as a plug-in to Photoshop 7.
Photoshop CS (Photoshop 8) Camera Raw uses ACR 2.
Photoshop CS2 (Photoshop 9) Camera Raw uses ACR 3.
Photoshop CS3 (Photoshop 10) Camera Raw uses ACR 4.
Photoshop CS4 (Photoshop 11) Camera Raw uses ACR 5.
Photoshop CS5 (Photoshop 12) Camera Raw uses ACR 6.
Photoshop CS6 (Photoshop 13) Camera Raw uses ACR 7. Essentially the same ACR 7 Lightroom 4 uses. Lightroom has other modules that support it's main function image database management.


----------



## unpopular

I never liked ACR. The results always seem sterile and noise rendering (not noise reduction) is awful.

I've looked into Silky Images, though never downloaded the demo. Capture One was too slow. There was another one, I'll have to think what it was called. Kind of slow, but had some REALLY great interface features.


----------



## Otros

480sparky said:


> ceejtank said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..........so what's the best out there?...........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no such thing as 'the best'.  If there truly was, it would be the only one on the market.
Click to expand...


Your logic is flawed...truly, there is always a "best" -- it's just that you can't afford them -- so less than the best is an option.


----------



## nmoody

Another fan of Lightroom here, its great for workflow raw editing


----------



## JDFlood

If you are asking the question... The answer is Lightroom! Has what you need, relatively easy to use... And in five years when you are a garu you can add on photoshop... Maybe. JD


----------

