Has anyone checked out lightzone?

I use it regularly and it's excellent. Controls are unique (not the norm) and it takes some getting used to but it's very capable software. It's designed primarily as a raw converter however -- not your thing right.

Joe
 
Here's a recent photo processed through LightZone.

First the camera JPEG SOOC:


$SAM_1656.jpg


And here's the raw file after processing through LightZone. I used LightZone's masking tool to burn in the sky -- a really nice feature in a non-destructive raw converter, but not the precision possible in Photoshop. There's a hint of a halo that Photoshop could avoid or correct.


ted-drews_zps844360bf.jpg


Joe

P.S. Photos like this are why some of us shoot raw. If I increased exposure the JPEG would start losing color in the neon lights. With only the JPEG to edit there's no way you could lift the shadows like I did using LightZone with the raw file and maintain the same degree of quality.
 
Last edited:
Ah, St. Louis
 
I used the old lightzone several years ago before the commercial version went under. It's an interesting UI, but in my opinion, it's pretty much just that.

This isn't to say it's not useful, but it's not some magic bridge to darkroom zone system photography.

At the time, it was about $130 which I thought was a bit too pricey for what was essentially a raw processor with a unique way of looking at levels. But if it's GPL'd I'll probably keep a closer eye.

I wouldn't worry too much about beta software, btw.
 
I used the old lightzone several years ago before the commercial version went under. It's an interesting UI, but in my opinion, it's pretty much just that.

This isn't to say it's not useful, but it's not some magic bridge to darkroom zone system photography.

At the time, it was about $130 which I thought was a bit too pricey for what was essentially a raw processor with a unique way of looking at levels. But if it's GPL'd I'll probably keep a closer eye.

I wouldn't worry too much about beta software, btw.

Yep, the whole zone BS is bogus. It just creates a quirky interface that you have to get accustomed to -- everybody needs a marketing gimmick.

Looking past the gimmick and the quirky UI it's a good raw converter that implements the basics well. It's missing things I wish it had, but it also offers some nice features including at least one really nice feature that LR/ACR doesn't provide. Tone response and color saturation are linked in an RGB photo such that making tone adjustments also alters color saturation. One of the big advantages of the Lab color model is the ability to separate tone from color so you can work them separately. Using LR/ACR you don't have this access. If you make a tone response adjustment you're going to get a color saturation change along for the ride. Sure you can go back and then make a separate saturation adjustment, but it's really nice to be able to see just the tone change by itself when that's what you trying to correct. LightZone provides this access and it's really handy.

Now that it's free it's also a raw converter that implements local tone, color, sharpness, and noise suppression via masking -- a sophisticated feature that other $$$ raw converters still lack like Photo Ninja, DPP, SilkyPix. At least on the Windows side of the fence it may be the only free raw converter that provides that access.

Joe
 

Most reactions

Back
Top