Oly Users: Lightroom 4 or Olympus Viewer 2?

[theITguy]

As you know, I have EM5 but I have not edit any photos due to time issue.

I come from Lightroom 2.x/3.x and is comfortable using LR. Yesterday was the first time I use the Olympus Viewer 2. Kind of sucks because the RAW setting cannot be saved for each individual files. Sometimes I have no time to do the adjustment on the camera and would have the "take first talk later" attitude.

I need your opinion and sharing. My questions for you guys are:

1. Do you have any restriction with regards to using LR4 instead of OV2?

2. Does the OV2 offer any significant advantage over LR4? For example Art Filters and JPEG engine?

3. Which is faster in doing batch conversion?


Thanks, for I have over 2k photos to edit

 

[Oly5050]

As you know, I have EM5 but I have not edit any photos due to time issue.

I come from Lightroom 2.x/3.x and is comfortable using LR. Yesterday was the first time I use the Olympus Viewer 2. Kind of sucks because the RAW setting cannot be saved for each individual files. Sometimes I have no time to do the adjustment on the camera and would have the "take first talk later" attitude.

I need your opinion and sharing. My questions for you guys are:

1. Do you have any restriction with regards to using LR4 instead of OV2?

2. Does the OV2 offer any significant advantage over LR4? For example Art Filters and JPEG engine?

3. Which is faster in doing batch conversion?


Thanks, for I have over 2k photos to edit

The answer is LR4.

 

[NazgulKing]

LR4 is miles ahead of OV2.

 

[theITguy]

OK thanks. Just bought it from Funan for $195.

 

[cannedpineapples]

Over 2K photos? It's a no-brainer. LR4.

Although Oly Viewer is good for art filters after-the-fact...

 

[cannedpineapples]

BTW, as a new LR4 user (congrats!) you may be interested in this:

Huelight Color Profiles Released for Olympus and Panasonic Micro Four Thirds Cameras - Micro Four Thirds User Forum

 

[wormz777]

OK thanks. Just bought it from Funan for $195.

Which shop did you buy from?

 

[theITguy]

Funan #04-16 Pic & Pixel

 

[wormz777]

Thank you.

 

[diCam]

As you know, I have EM5 but I have not edit any photos due to time issue.

I come from Lightroom 2.x/3.x and is comfortable using LR. Yesterday was the first time I use the Olympus Viewer 2. Kind of sucks because the RAW setting cannot be saved for each individual files. Sometimes I have no time to do the adjustment on the camera and would have the "take first talk later" attitude.

I need your opinion and sharing. My questions for you guys are:

1. Do you have any restriction with regards to using LR4 instead of OV2?

2. Does the OV2 offer any significant advantage over LR4? For example Art Filters and JPEG engine?

3. Which is faster in doing batch conversion?


Thanks, for I have over 2k photos to edit

Let me share my experience of editing E-M5 ORF using Lr4 and OV2.

Typically I'd shoot in ORF with camera default settings plus NF off.

I agree OV2 sucks big time but to attain maximum quality, especially to retain that Olympus' colors, I've no other choice.

My own observation is that Lr do not optimize the image quality of the ORF. The best method is to export the selected ORF to TIFF using OV2 then edit it with Lr. After that, export it to 100% JPEG. This is the best method to yank maximum details from the ORF. It's a long way I know. I use this method on selected files only and is not meant for mass production.

As mentioned earlier, using OV2 allowed me to retain Olympus colors profile. Lr cannot do this. Do not bother to use profiles created by third party in Lr. Those are never accurate. I would rather use the above-mentioned method. It's faster.

I'd apply the desired art filter, including its variation in OV2 and do other minor adjustment like exposure thereafter export the TIFF to Lr to do further post-processing.

Forget about mass batch conversion using OV2. It will involve creating a batch profile. It a pain in the a^%!

One last thing. OV2 retain the settings, one time only, if you edit the ORFs in RAW edit mode but you will need to export the files before closing this application or move out of this mode.

 

[albertri]

Only problem I have with LR is the color tone :-( I cant seems to emulate the JPEG OOC color tones if I process my RAW using LR :-(

 

[ageha]

Let me share my experience of editing E-M5 ORF using Lr4 and OV2.

Typically I'd shoot in ORF with camera default settings plus NF off.

I agree OV2 sucks big time but to attain maximum quality, especially to retain that Olympus' colors, I've no other choice.

My own observation is that Lr do not optimize the image quality of the ORF. The best method is to export the selected ORF to TIFF using OV2 then edit it with Lr. After that, export it to 100% JPEG. This is the best method to yank maximum details from the ORF. It's a long way I know. I use this method on selected files only and is not meant for mass production.

As mentioned earlier, using OV2 allowed me to retain Olympus colors profile. Lr cannot do this. Do not bother to use profiles created by third party in Lr. Those are never accurate. I would rather use the above-mentioned method. It's faster.

I'd apply the desired art filter, including its variation in OV2 and do other minor adjustment like exposure thereafter export the TIFF to Lr to do further post-processing.

Forget about mass batch conversion using OV2. It will involve creating a batch profile. It a pain in the a^%!

One last thing. OV2 retain the settings, one time only, if you edit the ORFs in RAW edit mode but you will need to export the files before closing this application or move out of this mode.

Only problem I have with LR is the color tone :-( I cant seems to emulate the JPEG OOC color tones if I process my RAW using LR :-(

Yeah, Lightroom's interpretation of raw files sucks, not just files from Olympus. I always shoot raw + SF, let LR handle both files and in 99% of all cases I take the JPEG coz the raw would need too much tweaking just to come even close. Also, if the photo isn't under or overexposed 8bit per channel are enough for me. Just in the worst case scenario I fall back to the raw and edit from there.

I tried those homemade profiles version 1.2 a few days ago. Sometimes they make things better, sometimes worse. From my experience there is no point in using them. You can just start directly tweaking the raw, you need to do that anyway after you applied them.

 

[hanzohattori]

Yeah, Lightroom's interpretation of raw files sucks, not just files from Olympus. I always shoot raw + SF, let LR handle both files and in 99% of all cases I take the JPEG coz the raw would need too much tweaking just to come even close. Also, if the photo isn't under or overexposed 8bit per channel are enough for me. Just in the worst case scenario I fall back to the raw and edit from there.

I tried those homemade profiles version 1.2 a few days ago. Sometimes they make things better, sometimes worse. From my experience there is no point in using them. You can just start directly tweaking the raw, you need to do that anyway after you applied them.

RAW import is just... RAW import.. thats all. It lets you see the image, it does not tweak the colors. To do that you have to apply some preset.
I particularly like how film preset look. I use one from X-Equals.
LR 3 offer huge improvement over LR3, from the 2012 process itself, and the recent CA correction in 4.1.
The only thing that I found useful in OV2 is the art filter.. especially Diorama, everything else I can do in LR

 

[ageha]

RAW import is just... RAW import.. thats all. It lets you see the image, it does not tweak the colors.

lol, I guess that's the reason why it looks completely different by default in every package. ;-)

 

[bousozoku]

lol, I guess that's the reason why it looks completely different by default in every package. ;-)

It's dependent on how each software developer interprets the data sent them by each camera maker.

You can bet that they spent more time on making the best of the Nikon D4 profile than the Olympus E-M5 profile.

 

[ageha]

It's dependent on how each software developer interprets the data sent them by each camera maker.

You can bet that they spent more time on making the best of the Nikon D4 profile than the Olympus E-M5 profile.

That's what I just said above.

You might be right but I doubt it.

 

[NazgulKing]

Colors aside, Lightroom handles image artifacts and noise much better however.

 

[ageha]

Colors aside, Lightroom handles image artifacts and noise much better however.

So true and that's the only reason why I still use it if I need to.

 

[albertri]

Colors aside, Lightroom handles image artifacts and noise much better however.

This is where LR shines

 

[vainqueur]

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't EM5 12 stop for dynamic range? JPEG for EM5 should be very good enough even if you want to recover some details from example the darkest or lightest portion (have to check histogram), I recently went to henderson wave and took some nightshot, there is 1 shot I took towards the main road below with tall dense trees, that particular photo I took was with other section in the right exposure except for the trees which was closed to black but somehow I managed to recover the trees back to dark green again.