In DXO it would have taken me WAY longer to get a comparable image and many times I couldn't have done it solely in DXO. I can pull up a raw image (CR2) and spit out a nice looking final render in under a couple minutes. Every raw image I threw at was processed reasonably quickly on a mid range machine and the ease of getting a nice looking image is terrific. I have had really good experiences with Luminar 2018 so far (granted I have only been using it for a couple days). However, feature wise they are getting closer and closer to each other and thus other factors like performance, mem usage, stability and quality of the output images will finally only make probably a difference here. ![]() Sometimes I wonder if they all are going ( or are dictated) to imitate Apple Photos here or it's more due that they think they must have/offer some seemless integration (in terms of L&F). The tools even look all quite similar in their UI L&F styles and also often usability wise, which is sometimes a little bit boring. Lately they all have the tendency to combine their previously seperated sold tools into one. Well nowadays those tools all offer mostly similar things, one vendor looks what the other has and offers here as features and then adds that too. Where it does shine is, like Nik, in the range of filters, such as the sunburst effect. Generally, though, if you like layers, stick with Affinity. It doesn't have On1's smart brush but is easier for using layers. Overall, it looks a bit like a cross between Nik and On1, with a simplified adjustment stack, applicable on multiple layers, either globally or painted in.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |