I have never used Pixelmator. I plan to stay with PhotoLab since I am starting to get used to it, although sizing images for Internet posting (web ready photos) is overcomplicated with this app, so I end-up launching and using Graphic Converter for that task. By the way, GC is an outstanding photo-editing app, too.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Best Lightroom Alternative
- Thread starter TSE
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I tried Pixelmator some years ago and I still have it in the computer but haven't looked at it in a long time. It just didn't match up with my needs and preferences or approach to editing. It wasn't until I hit upon DXO PhotoLab 3 a couple of years ago that I finally began to feel somewhat at home in an editing program, as the layout was understandable and intuitive me and I actually was able to accomplish something without coming away feeling absolutely frustrated. That was in late 2019 and I'm still happy with DXO PhotoLab (now in v.5) so I'm sticking with it! My needs are simple, I'm not into fancy stuff like layers and such.
As for sizing images in PhotoLab, I simply set the parameters at 300 dpi and 1800 x 1800 pixels highest quality .jpg and that is what I use when posting images on the web. This size seems to work well for most web-based discussion forums in which I share images. If I were to do something else such as wanting to order a print of an image, obviously I'd need to do more with the processing, saving in .TIF for instance, and also making changes in the sizing parameters accordingly. Since my images aren't worth printing, I have never bothered with this.
As for sizing images in PhotoLab, I simply set the parameters at 300 dpi and 1800 x 1800 pixels highest quality .jpg and that is what I use when posting images on the web. This size seems to work well for most web-based discussion forums in which I share images. If I were to do something else such as wanting to order a print of an image, obviously I'd need to do more with the processing, saving in .TIF for instance, and also making changes in the sizing parameters accordingly. Since my images aren't worth printing, I have never bothered with this.
Since I haven't seen it mentioned yet: I use fileloupe to make selections after a photo shoot. It's like Adobe Bridge only better. Afterwards, I do editing in Pixelmator Pro or Acorn. But the best part of Lightroom is that everything is integrated into an asset manager (selection, rating, comparing, etc.). Just can't afford it anymore.
For quick review and culling of images prior to editing, I use Photo Mechanic, which has long been a respected standard tool in the industry.
I went with RAW Power 3 because of it's speciality in RAW Files and Photos integration. We'll see what I think.
And in particular Nik was a leader on Aperture, so great history there. It’s a very nice application indeed.
Molly makes a good point that gets overlooked.
I participate in some Capture One forums to help out and there are a fair number of LR orphans there who switched simply because of not liking subscription software. I can certainly get that to a degree. But then they get grumpy when they find out that Capture One isn’t just trying to ape LR, only with a different licensing philosophy
. That the features they were used to aren’t there or if it has similar ones, they behave differently or…. And when asked why they switched, it was just because of licensing. But they were really used to and loved the way LR did things. Like Adobe, Capture One is very opinionated about their software, and there are definitely “differences of opinion” between the two.In the grand scheme of things you do have to ask if you’re willing to invest in another company’s ethos and way of doing things because it will be different indeed. Bottom line, there are always other considerations when switching, in particular with raw converters, since a set of raw editing instructions in LR won’t translate to another tool. I can’t edit a raw file in LR and continue editing that same file in Capture One, for example. The two applications don’t understand one another’s instructions. Standard metadata will normally translate, things like star ratings, color tags and the like but that’s about it.
I use Capture One first and foremost because I love it, and because it works the best for my particular camera systems (personally speaking only). Licensing is tertiary (if that), and in fact I pay for the subscription currently. Make sure you love or at least really like the tool you move to. Clix mentions feeling at home with DXO, her choice of raw processing software. I think that’s a great way to think about it. Make sure you feel at home!
Well stated and keep in mind you can always use the free tryout (30 days) feature before making the decision..Molly makes a good point that gets overlooked.
I participate in some Capture One forums to help out and there are a fair number of LR orphans there who switched simply because of not liking subscription software. I can certainly get that to a degree. But then they get grumpy when they find out that Capture One isn’t just trying to ape LR, only with a different licensing philosophy
In the grand scheme of things you do have to ask if you’re willing to invest in another company’s ethos and way of doing things because it will be different indeed. Bottom line, there are always other considerations when switching, in particular with raw converters, since a set of raw editing instructions in LR won’t translate to another tool. I can’t edit a raw file in LR and continue editing that same file in Capture One, for example. The two applications don’t understand one another’s instructions. Standard metadata will normally translate, things like star ratings, color tags and the like but that’s about it.
I use Capture One first and foremost because I love it, and because it works the best for my particular camera systems (personally speaking only). Licensing is tertiary (if that), and in fact I pay for the subscription currently. Make sure you love or at least really like the tool you move to. Clix mentions feeling at home with DXO, her choice of raw processing software. I think that’s a great way to think about it. Make sure you feel at home!
Indeed the type of subscription is less important over the type of post production performance you like..
Next C1P 22 will include pano stitching and HDR merge..The only thing I still miss is the conversion of negatives into a positive. The switching from gamma to linear and reversing the black and white luma is quite finicky..
To the OP: what exactly in Lr Classic are you seeking to replace?
Image adjustment is the easy one...lots of alternatives.
It's the other organizing features, publishing, printing, metadata, plugins, etc that are tougher to replicate. If it's that stuff, I'd look at Bridge, Photo Mechanic Plus, or specialized programs for some parts of that, like Graphic Converter, Houdah Geo for geotagging, etc.
Image adjustment is the easy one...lots of alternatives.
It's the other organizing features, publishing, printing, metadata, plugins, etc that are tougher to replicate. If it's that stuff, I'd look at Bridge, Photo Mechanic Plus, or specialized programs for some parts of that, like Graphic Converter, Houdah Geo for geotagging, etc.
I have to admit ever since Aperture went away I have been adrift. There are many good programs out there, but I find myself vacillating between so many because I like parts of each. No one has mentioned Exposure X7 or Luminar both of which have their good points. For quick importing I use ApolloOne which is very nice and shows focus points which is a feature I really like.
Not that you can't change, but once you're a Lightroom person, or a CaptureOne person, or whatever it can be hard to switch.
Back in the dark days when Lightroom was a new program, Aperture became one of the hottest things around a lot who switched or started with it loved it. Unfortunately, Aperture users got orphaned nearly 10 years ago...
I keep picking up free trials of different programs, but nothing ever feels as comfortable to me and as able to get out of my way and just do what I need to do compared to Lightroom.
With that said, if I'd been an Apple user back when I'd likely have gone Aperture. I'm intrigued now and am going to RAW Power.
i also started with LR 1 when i first started shooting in 2007/08. Probably when i still shared a PC with my husband. by the time i moved to apple mid 2008 i was entrenched with LR. i’ve dabbled a bit with other programs but after so many years i have too much muscle memory built up and i am now just wired for LR/PS.
I loved Aperture and used it from the very beginning, when both it and LR were in their infancy. It just seemed logical to me to use Apple's own product and it was intuitive, did what I needed, and I was happy with its approach. Prior to that I had used Photoshop but always felt that PS was way above my skill set as well as more than I really needed for my simple, basic editing needs. I still had CS3 in the computer, but then the next time I updated/upgraded to a new Apple machine I left CS3 behind and that was the end of that.
I do have RAW Power but I'll admit I haven't used it all that much -- it just didn't feel quite the same as Aperture to me, although it does have some nice features and functionality. I should give it another try rather than having it just sitting in the computer!
I do have RAW Power but I'll admit I haven't used it all that much -- it just didn't feel quite the same as Aperture to me, although it does have some nice features and functionality. I should give it another try rather than having it just sitting in the computer!
I've been wanting to leave Lightroom/Adobe for years, but I can't find anything that replicates the catalog/IPTC editing/tagging functionality in Lightroom Classic. For processing/editing images, there are a ton of really good Adobe alternatives. For cataloging/tagging, there seems to be nothing, and It's hard to me to believe there are no decent alternative out there by now that even equals what Lightroom/Aperture did 10+ years ago. The ones that I can find, typically don't allow for proper IPTC editing (just viewing) or tagging. RawPower has a nice UI, but it is extremely limited. It doesn't allow metadata/IPTC editing, and doesn't even show all EXIF/IPTC fields. I can see more metadata opening an image in Preview than in Raw Power! If it could be enhanced to fully support this metadata and editing, allow writing it back to the original files or XMP sidecar files, batch editing, show selected images side-by-side, and allow sorting by metadata/camera/lens, then it would be a decent alternative. CaptureOne is the best I can find right now, but its metadata and cataloguing features are still not as good as Lightroom. Aperture worked well, and I loved its interface, but like Photos, I could never really use it because of its catalog system. At least Lightroom lets you right metadata changes back out to files on the file system, and not just in its catalog. Like with RAW Power, many apps seem stuck trying to support Apple Photos catalogues and end up limiting their features by it (like limiting to just the small amount of metadata Apple decided to support in Photos or expose in the Finder). I don't use Apple Photos (due to its catalog system, like old iPhoto). I can't imagine many serious photographers do either because of these limitations.
My workflow involves looking at large numbers of images stored in custom file system folders, comparing, rating, and selecting best shots and mass tagging via IPTC fields and keywords. Being able to search by this metadata. Considering the lack of apps that do this, do other Photographers not do any of this? Then either using Lightroom's develop module to process, or output to CaptureOne or Pixelmator Pro. I could care less about cloud, mobile, or AI-based editing features. What I'd like to see is AI-based tagging features for photos stored locally.
I feel like Adobe has become a company that hasn't meaningfully updated their apps in years. Requires you to re-buy their non-updated app on a yearly basis (via subscription cost) for no benefits. Ended development of Lightroom 'Classic' in order to focus on a new 'cloud' Lightroom, which offers no appreciable benefits and cuts many necessary features, only so they can require you to store your entire catalog in the cloud to use the app, which is impossible for most photographers, and offers no benefits if you properly backup, but tons of downsides, like requiring fast internet to do anything. But mainly so they can just keep selling you storage space just to be able to use the application. 20GB of storage (in the $9.99 photography plan) is a joke. Just one extended shooting trip with RAW would be a couple hundred GB. Which at best makes me feel like the new Adobe cloud products are focused on consumers and the smart phone crowd (like Apple & Google Photos) and abandoning professionals and serious hobbyists who can't work around the myriad of restrictions, and at worst just a complete and total cash grab by purposely restricting their products in new ways and changing licensing. Not to mention the CC bloat. I don't understand why photographers put up with it, and why there are no good complete alternatives (other than for processing) after years of this from Adobe.
My workflow involves looking at large numbers of images stored in custom file system folders, comparing, rating, and selecting best shots and mass tagging via IPTC fields and keywords. Being able to search by this metadata. Considering the lack of apps that do this, do other Photographers not do any of this? Then either using Lightroom's develop module to process, or output to CaptureOne or Pixelmator Pro. I could care less about cloud, mobile, or AI-based editing features. What I'd like to see is AI-based tagging features for photos stored locally.
I feel like Adobe has become a company that hasn't meaningfully updated their apps in years. Requires you to re-buy their non-updated app on a yearly basis (via subscription cost) for no benefits. Ended development of Lightroom 'Classic' in order to focus on a new 'cloud' Lightroom, which offers no appreciable benefits and cuts many necessary features, only so they can require you to store your entire catalog in the cloud to use the app, which is impossible for most photographers, and offers no benefits if you properly backup, but tons of downsides, like requiring fast internet to do anything. But mainly so they can just keep selling you storage space just to be able to use the application. 20GB of storage (in the $9.99 photography plan) is a joke. Just one extended shooting trip with RAW would be a couple hundred GB. Which at best makes me feel like the new Adobe cloud products are focused on consumers and the smart phone crowd (like Apple & Google Photos) and abandoning professionals and serious hobbyists who can't work around the myriad of restrictions, and at worst just a complete and total cash grab by purposely restricting their products in new ways and changing licensing. Not to mention the CC bloat. I don't understand why photographers put up with it, and why there are no good complete alternatives (other than for processing) after years of this from Adobe.
Last edited:
BTW, as far as file location-
My Lightroom files are exactly where I tell them to go. For me that's in Dropbox, but still the catalog file itself, all the DNG-converted imports, and the JPEG exports all exist within a folder I create for a specific project and each group of files is organized into sub-folders as I see fit.
Even though it does have default paths, they're very easy to change and they are structured in a way that's perfectly browsable in Finder(without touching Lightroom) and makes perfect sense to me such that I can locate a particular photo with ease.
Even though the catalog file is LR-generated, it's mostly just an expedient way for Lightroom to know exactly what's going on and where to find your stuff when you do revisit it.
My Lightroom files are exactly where I tell them to go. For me that's in Dropbox, but still the catalog file itself, all the DNG-converted imports, and the JPEG exports all exist within a folder I create for a specific project and each group of files is organized into sub-folders as I see fit.
Even though it does have default paths, they're very easy to change and they are structured in a way that's perfectly browsable in Finder(without touching Lightroom) and makes perfect sense to me such that I can locate a particular photo with ease.
Even though the catalog file is LR-generated, it's mostly just an expedient way for Lightroom to know exactly what's going on and where to find your stuff when you do revisit it.
yes the only thing about lightroom and file location is that LR doesn’t like if you move files outside of it. but it doesn’t actually mess anything up. you just reassociate the path. super easy. it just reads the finder path through LR (or explorer on windows).
I'm a mostly landscape / low volume shooter though will occasionally "live on the edge" and do wildlife shoots where I rattle off shots. I use Capture One for rit's fantastic raw processing and light catalog work but use Photo Mechanic Plus for ingest, culling, IPTC metadata, keywording and very sophisticated searching. It's traditionally used by a lot of sports or other event shooters but it has tremendous capabilities and is very, very fast. PM+ is really my catalog system and I mostly use Sessions in Capture One. It's worth checking out. Capture One are actually doing a lot of work with their cataloging and metadata capabilities, especially over the past year, but it's still miles behind LR and many miles behind Photo Mechanic Plus. Obviously, this is my take
.
Loving using Photos for photo organization, RAW Power for photo correction to my RAWs, and Affinity Photo for an additional level of editing when I feel an individual photo is in a good place.
Really the perfect trifecta! Goodbye Adobe!!!
Really the perfect trifecta! Goodbye Adobe!!!
I would suggest you also look at Darktable free yet extremely powerful if you are willing to learn it. I like and have switched to On One not the greatest raw processor but an easy workflow. Cheaper than capture one and you are not in capture one‘s convoluted folder structure. (What a pain)
there Is also digikam.org for more of a organizer than raw processor
there Is also digikam.org for more of a organizer than raw processor
if RAW Power had printing capability all Aperture, that would satisfy most of my needs.