Is there a better RAW image development workflow? It still feels very slow compared to Adobe.

[timothycdykes]

I have used Adobe software for my photography for over a decade. I hate paying the subscription for it, but it does work very well for my purposes. I started using Affinity a year or two ago in hopes it would be a replacement but it didn't meet my requirements. Apart from the way Affinity "develops" RAW files, I can cope with any other differences between Photoshop and Affinity. I was looking forward to the v2 update in hopes that it would introduce a more intuitive way to "develop" my RAW photos but the workflow is still significantly lacking - or I don't understand to replicate my current workflow.

My current process is as follows:

• Shoot photos. This could be a handful or a few hundred in a single shoot.
• Copy photos to PC.
• Drag-and-drop photos into Photoshop. This opens ALL of the photos in CameraRAW.
• Make adjustments. This is typically white balance, exposure, contrast, shadows, highlights, texture, clarity, dehaze, saturation, vibrance, color mixing, color grading, details, curves, and more. At this point, I can also quickly apply any of the dozens of presets I have created over the years.
• Once I am satisfied with the edits, I can quickly apply the same settings to the ENTIRE shoot.
• Now I can quickly sift through the images and rate them, apply color tags for sorting, and mark "bad" images for deletion.
• Save all "good" images as JPEG.
• Make further adjustments per image in Photoshop, such as cropping, object removal, retouching, etc.

I am not suggesting a 1:1 replica of Photoshop's process with Lightroom or CameraRAW, but something very close would be perfect and allow me to completely replace their software. Is there a way for me to almost completely replicate the above workflow in v2? I've been watching the YouTube tutorials but they only seem to develop multiple RAWs when they are focus-stacking or merging.

[Andreas S]

Eventually you can give RawTherapee a try for your Raw development. It is open source and offers a lot of settings. It also allows to copy all adjustments made for one photo to your other photos. So far I found nothing in Adobe Camera Raw which is missing in RawTherapee.

I dig not dig much into Affinity Photo's raw development as I have a working solution

[timothycdykes]

3 hours ago, Andreas S said:

Eventually you can give RawTherapee a try for your Raw development. It is open source and offers a lot of settings. It also allows to copy all adjustments made for one photo to your other photos. So far I found nothing in Adobe Camera Raw which is missing in RawTherapee.

I dig not dig much into Affinity Photo's raw development as I have a working solution

That's not a bad idea, I would just prefer the ease of one program handling it all. I'll revisit open-source alternatives to the RAW side of things and see how things go.

[matthiasbasler]

Looks like there are many photographers having the same wishes for speed/handling improvement of the RAW develop workflow.

See also this topic.

Here is my personal take on this topic. As a background, I have worked with CameraRaw from Photoshop Elements, which has a comparable price tag to Affinity Photo, anthough a different target user group. I have also tested Open Source applications like DarkTable and RawTherapee but the first one didn't convince me from the workflow aspect, the latter is pretty difficult to master imho. But all of them, including AP 2.0 get the work done somehow.

CameraRaw from Photoshop Elements has a (deliberately) limited set of adjustments, e.g. CA/color fringing correction is unfortunately missing. However, I find that what is there in CameraRaw works very efficiently. Here are the main differences to Affinity Photo which mean that I get the work done there in half of the time (or less, sometimes):

• Process multiple files at once: Just use DND to drop 2 or maybe 10 files into the application. You can then adjust settings for all of them or a subset of them, giving you full flexibily and avoiding redundant work for a series of images under equal conditions.
• Storing development settings in sidecar files transparently: Yes, in AP 2.0 you can link an .aphoto file to a raw image and thus do later changes to the development settings. Indeed this approach is flexible, as the .aphoto file will document changes both applied before developing the RAW file and edits done afterwards. In terms of speed however, a side care file has the advantage that it doesn't have to be saved explicitly. And if you decide to rename the RAW file, it is as easy as renaming the sidecare .XMP file equally. In Affinity you have to open the renamed .aphoto file, tell the application where the missing (renamed) RAW file is and save, which takes longer.
• Custom defaults per Camera and ISO: Lets say, you discover that for a certain camera and ISO you typically need the same corrections, like certain sharpening, noise reduction, shadow brightening and the like. In CameraRaw you can save these as a default and they will be applied automatically for future images of this camera/ISO. White balance settings are not stored in the presets, which makes totally sense given that they will differ among images. (And, in contrast to AP there's no bug preventing the presets from actutally getting applied.)
• An option to use the "last used settings": With two mouse clicks you can use your previously used RAW settings (covering all settings) as starting point for the current RAW image. I use this function often and it is a real time saver.
  In AP I tried to maintain a preset named "Last" to mimic this functionality, but this didn't work as you cannot even update a preset, you have to delete and then re-create it with te same name. And you would have to do this for every adjustment panel. In short, this is way too cumbersome
• Sensible (camera dependent) processing defaults: Here both applications aren't perfect. CameraRaw often shows a slight white balance shift (to the red) compared to the out-of-camera JPG, but otherwise matches the JPG pretty well (if the correct camera profile is selected!) The other RAW develoment applications are more or less pretty far off and require several sliders to be adjusted until the result matches or even excels the OOC JPG. In Affinity, specifically for my Powershow G5 II, the developed raw files lack saturation, maybe because there's no equivalent to the camera's "Landscape" camera profile (or "picture style") in Affinity Photo ... or is there?. So I need manual adjustments to get a blue sky blue again, for example. Also, RAW images are pretty soft in AP, initially. Same in CameraRaw.

One positive aspect that that solved some usability issues in AP is the customizability of the shortcuts. Initially I fould the "Redo" and "Zoom to extent" shortcuts to be unwieldy, but could correct them to be more comfortable and thus quicker to use.

[Horseflesh]

The ability to process a photo shoot is my top desire for AP. 

It's arguably not part of the Photo philosophy. Even Adobe released separate products for it. But if we just had Photoshop Elements-level features for handling a group of photos within AP, that would be a great start. As it is I maintain an old copy of Lightroom, but it sounds like I should check out Raw Therapee. 

 

[rvst]

This is the reason I still use Lightroom in my workflow and Photo as an external editor for the stuff I can't do in Lightroom.

UI-wise, it shouldn't even be that hard to do. Develop Persona needs a file-explorer-like window to display thumbnails of multiple files, then a couple of options to copy and paste settings and assign a rating to the file and a sort capability to only show files with a certain rating (or above) and an option to batch export the selected files.

Making some assumptions here, I suspect that the hard part would be that this type of functionality would require a catalogue with metadata, something that Affinity does not have at the moment. Unlike the UI pieces, it's non-trivial functionality as there are plenty of potential issues such as catalogue data integrity.

Also, that Affinity (as far as I understand it) doesn't have or use a RAW-type file format in the .aphoto file might be a significant hindrance to this type of workflow.  Consider that some of the Affinity functionality only works on a pixel layer, so even if you output a RAW file from the Develop Persona, tools such as the inpainting brush still need to work on a pixel layer. So you go remove a blemish on a portrait, the Assistant rasterizes the RAW layer, and then you no longer have a RAW layer.

If you turn off the auto-rasterize option, you'd still have to duplicate the RAW layer and rasterize it to use the inpainting brush, so going back and modifying the develop settings for the RAW layer won't do much because the pixel layer that's now on top of it has had the original settings already destructively applied. 

Only if all of the adjustments, filters and tools could work non-destructively on a RAW layer instead of some needing to work on a pixel layer would it be seamless. So it may require Affinity to completely rework some code or alter the .aphoto file format or a combination of the two. Hard to tell without knowing about the internals.

What seems relatively simple on the face of it could be a pretty big development undertaking

[matthiasbasler]

  

15 hours ago, rvst said:

Also, that Affinity (as far as I understand it) doesn't have or use a RAW-type file format in the .aphoto file might be a significant hindrance to this type of workflow.  Consider that some of the Affinity functionality only works on a pixel layer, so even if you output a RAW file from the Develop Persona, tools such as the inpainting brush still need to work on a pixel layer. So you go remove a blemish on a portrait, the Assistant rasterizes the RAW layer, and then you no longer have a RAW layer.

Isn't this exactly what they solved in AP 2.0 with the possibility to embed or link a RAW photo to an .aphoto file. You do still have a RAW layer after developing and applying further changes, and you can do modifications to it any time later without losing the modifications done on top. Not sure if there are tools where this doesn't work, I haven't tested each and every tool yet.

[rvst]

3 hours ago, matthiasbasler said:

  

Isn't this exactly what they solved in AP 2.0 with the possibility to embed or link a RAW photo to an .aphoto file. You do still have a RAW layer after developing and applying further changes, and you can do modifications to it any time later without losing the modifications done on top. Not sure if there are tools where this doesn't work, I haven't tested each and every tool yet.

There are a number of tools that don't work in that way. Those would be the ones on the toolbar on the left. The adjustments and filters can work non-destructively on the embedded raw layer. So it's a nice enhancement, but only a partial solution. 

When using a tool that works on a pixel layer, the assistant will auto-rasterize the raw layer. At that point, it destructively applies those develop settings. So you'll have to throw away the edits on the pixel layer if you need to go back and change the develop settings, after which you'll have to rasterize again to a new pixel layer and reapply the edits. 

An example: you output to a raw layer, make a couple of adjustments with say curves and white balance. Since they don't operate on a pixel layer, when you go back into the develop persona and change the develop settings then revert to the pixel persona, the image will reflect both the new develop setting as well as the adjustments you made with the curves and white balance.

But let's say you want to remove a blemish. You select the inpainting brush, copy the raw layer and either rasterize it yourself or let the assistant do it for you. At this point, the develop settings get destructively applied to the pixel layer, which now hides the raw layer. You remove the blemish with the inpainting brush. If you want to go back to alter the develop settings on the underlying raw layer, first you have to hide or delete that rasterized pixel layer (otherwise you'll be changing develop settings on the pixel layer instead of the raw layer). Then you alter the develop settings and go back to pixel persona. You'll see the updated raw layer, but the second you unhide that blemish removal layer, it in turn hides what you did on the raw layer as it's a snapshot of an older raw layer. 

That said, there are a lot of adjustments and filters, so multi-file enhanced-workflow functionality like we're talking about in this thread would be a huge leap forward even if it only works with adjustments and filters and not with the tools that operate on pixel layers only. It'll still need a metadata catalog in order to implement it though, but not necessarily a file format change I think

[carl123]

10 hours ago, rvst said:

But let's say you want to remove a blemish. You select the inpainting brush, copy the raw layer and either rasterize it yourself or let the assistant do it for you. At this point, the develop settings get destructively applied to the pixel layer, which now hides the raw layer. You remove the blemish with the inpainting brush. If you want to go back to alter the develop settings on the underlying raw layer, first you have to hide or delete that rasterized pixel layer (otherwise you'll be changing develop settings on the pixel layer instead of the raw layer). Then you alter the develop settings and go back to pixel persona. You'll see the updated raw layer, but the second you unhide that blemish removal layer, it in turn hides what you did on the raw layer as it's a snapshot of an older raw layer. 

After developing the RAW file add a Pixel layer on top
Use the Inpainting Brush Tool (on the pixel layer) to inpaint the blemish (use the option "Current Layer and Below" in the context toolbar)
Switch back to the RAW layer and go back and alter the develop settings
Now, if the part where the blemish was removed does not look right. Use the erase brush on the pixel layer to erase that inpainting bit, then inpaint the blemish again.
Note: There was no need to duplicate the RAW layer or Rasterise any Layer

But as regards blemishes, note that there is a Blemish Removal Tool in the Develop Persona which may be easier than inpainting for this particular situation

[rvst]

5 hours ago, carl123 said:

But as regards blemishes, note that there is a Blemish Removal Tool in the Develop Persona which may be easier than inpainting for this particular situation

Yeah - the example I gave was a little contrived, just to illustrate that there are some tools that can't be used in a non-destructive workflow even with an embedded RAW file. 

[ArieV]

On 11/20/2022 at 5:19 AM, matthiasbasler said:

An option to use the "last used settings": With two mouse clicks you can use your previously used RAW settings (covering all settings) as starting point for the current RAW image. I use this function often and it is a real time saver.

I used this feature A LOT in Adobe, before I switched to Serif/Affinity.  It saved me a lot of time/mouseclicks.  I would love to see something similar implemented in Affinity Photo raw persona.  It would really improve my workflow.

[rvst]

On 11/20/2022 at 12:19 PM, matthiasbasler said:

I have also tested Open Source applications like DarkTable and RawTherapee but the first one didn't convince me from the workflow aspect, the latter is pretty difficult to master imho.

I've just been playing around with Darktable. It's a very impressive piece of software for an open source package, with an enormous amount of settings one can tweak.

I particularly like some of the adjustments (for example the contrast equalizer, tone equalizer and the colour balance RGB which allows one to adjust vibrance/chroma/saturation according to tonal range). I was able to get a great develop on a very difficult RAW quicker than with some other software due to the fine grained control it gives of many settings.

It's not the most intuitive UI and it does a couple of odd things here and there (for example, I had red artefacts on some clouds on a brilliant blue summers day which I had to eliminate by going into the input profile setting and telling it to clip the output gamut. Wasn't obvious to work that one out (what was causing it that is).

It doesn't do a terrible job with the initial settings it applies to a raw file either, although some of them tend towards too much of a "processed" look

[olesya]

I am Adobe Subscriber, waiting for my subscription to end. I decided to buy Affinity Universal License this time, the offer was to good to avoid it. Now I am thinking what software to use for raw photos after my subscription ends: NX Studio is a little slow and there are no masks options, Luminar 4(got free copy) is too AI – click here and there and photo looks overdone, Capture One Express for Nikon(also free copy) - again no masks but at least Auto Adjust option, RawTherapee – preview photos look not enough sharp to me, Darktable is too complicated, but at the same time I lean more toward to Luminar 3(less AI than version 4 and masks available) or Darktable (still have plenty time to learn it step by step). 

What I would like to see from Affinity it is something similar to Adobe Camera Raw – where you can easily and fast to make quick adjustment to RAW photos (not a single photo, but many), simple masks options (even brush would be enough). Is there any hint that Affinity going to make something like this in near future?!..I really hope

Edited November 25, 2022 by olesya
huge font by an accident

[fde101]

6 minutes ago, olesya said:

Is there any hint that Affinity going to make something like this in near future?

This has been discussed for several years now.  No one outside of Serif really knows at this point, and I'm not sure there are too many even within Serif who know that definitively.

Here is one of the most recent comments made by someone from within Serif that comes up on a search:

 

Short version: it may or may not ever happen, but I wouldn't bank on it being anytime soon.

 

12 minutes ago, olesya said:

Capture One Express for Nikon(also free copy) - again no masks

This is a limitation of the Express version.  The Pro version supports layers with masks.

Other options you might want to look at are DxO PhotoLab and On1 Photo RAW.

[rvst]

31 minutes ago, fde101 said:

Other options you might want to look at are DxO PhotoLab and On1 Photo RAW.

I have On1 Photo RAW and I'd struggle to recommend it. The UI is absolutely awful. Every time I use it I'm confused about where things are located. It seems to have worsened across versions. I still use Lightroom 6 in preference to On1 - I really only use its Portrait AI now which does a pretty good job as long as you don't crank the settings up too high.

Their upgrade pricing sucks. There's barely a discount. I didn't even get a single update before they moved from the 2022 version to the 2023 version and charged the full upgrade price. So if you use On1, bank on paying $100 per year for an upgrade and getting few to no free updates before the next version they term "major version" is released, which often has functionality one would expect only of a minor release. Overall, On1 feels like a subscription product with once yearly updates priced too high for what it does. I chose not to upgrade from the 2022 version to the 2023 version.

[fde101]

1 minute ago, rvst said:

I have On1 Photo RAW and I'd struggle to recommend it. The UI is absolutely awful. Every time I use it I'm confused about where things are located.

I also have it.  I used it for a while in preference to DxO because there was a period of time during which On1 was much faster.  However, DxO has improved considerably over the past few releases, so the main advantage that On1 offers right now is that it is lower in price for the initial purchase.

All being said, for newly started projects, I am mostly using Capture One at this point (Pro version), though I believe DxO does have a few advantages for some use cases (particularly when combined with ViewPoint) so I may still opt to use that depending on the nature of whatever it is that I am trying to do.  Capture One: best at working with skin tones and thus for most types of people photography.  DxO PhotoLab + ViewPoint: best at handling lens distortions and the like and thus for architectural work; also potentially better noise reduction if doing a lot of high-ISO photography.

[rvst]

17 minutes ago, fde101 said:

 However, DxO has improved considerably over the past few releases

I should probably give DxO a look again. I last bought a copy around a decade ago and it was a little bit of a one-trick pony at the time. Based on your comment and the length of time since I last had a copy, it might be a worth a spin

[AlainP]

I use On1 Photo RAW too after I quit Adobe. I went to Darktable for a while and then On1, back to Darktable... now I use On1 but what was said earlier about the cost always going up is what makes me think to go back to Darktable which is better that Lightroom and On1 in some features.

For just a few pictures Photo is fine but when you come back from a photo shoot with 600 pictures.... you have to work overtime.