Better than Lightroom?

preview_player
Показать описание

This week I'm talking about a tool I'm enjoying that helps me edit my photos faster than ever.

---

---

MUSIC:

MB01M7NGVFIH8FN
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

A quick flick through the comments tells me that some people think I've made a sponsored video about the joys of AI. Maybe I should watch the video back, but I tried to explain what the software became known for before going on to talk about how I like to use the product, which is a long way from sky replacements and generative fill etc.

Anyway points taken onboard, new video next week!

JamesPopsysPhoto
Автор

couldn't live with myself if I started replacing my skies tbh

nremac
Автор

I have been using this for over a year as a cheaper alternative to lightroom, I struggled with lightroom but have learned to edit with neo really fast. Also I have been amazed on how many updates neo has put out since I started to use it. Very impressive program and highly recommended for an amateur photographer.

photojames
Автор

I may be the odd one here, but I happen to think this video was an honest assessment of Luminar's capabilities. I moved from Photoshop to Luminar last year and, while I don't care for the gimmicky features, I agree with James that basic editing functions are faster in Luminar. I still have Photoshop for about 10% of what I edit, but for 90% of what I do, Luminar just does it faster.
There is definitely a danger with over processing in Luminar, which I think James demonstrated, but to me that is a user issue, not a software issue.

schoolofmediocrity
Автор

James a couple of weeks ago - embrace imperfections in photos.
James now he’s being paid - use AI to remove power lines.

ballbagbill
Автор

Neo has all the features I would find useful in Lightroom, and was a breeze to learn. You don't have to replace your skies or use generative functions of course. I have used the AI features which deal with noise and sharpness to good results. The nuts and bolts are all there too. One of the most useful features for me has been the Supercontrast panel, allowing highlights, midtones, and shadows contrast to be adjusted independently.

tremaincheerful
Автор

I agree. In my mind currently the best combination is DxO, for precision and noise, and Luminar Neo for ease of use and fun stuff.

macsprotte
Автор

The question is, does it still bring you joy, when generate most of the image?

philipcooper
Автор

I think HDR uses the time stamp to organize bracketed photos. It must give it a few seconds from each other to group them.

underthedrone
Автор

I think the issues with AI depend on how it’s used. Luminar (like most other software nowadays) uses AI tech to speed up some tasks such as masking and adding localised contrast etc and I happily use those tools. I can do the same edits more quickly in Neo than I could have done with Photoshop for example, as James has demonstrated in this video. There’s nothing wrong with speeding up the creative process when the end result is the same as we would have produced a decade ago with our Photoshop skills. People were arguing 20+ years ago whether any digital manipulation was “photography”. However, I’m not in favour of the generative AI tools that have been added more recently. I don’t agree with adding components (skies, fake lighting etc) that then create a new composition. Erasing is a fine line. Removing small details akin to spot healing seems acceptable. However, erasing people/large areas where the background has to be AI generated seems wrong to me. On the whole, I think Luminar Neo is a great piece of software, but like all photo editing, it depends how far you go with it as to whether your image loses its authenticity. Luminar Neo offers a lot more than just its generative AI tools, it’s a shame that the marketing seems to promote that side so strongly.

darrenletley
Автор

I am happy using luminar. I want to go out and spend my time taking photos, Not spend hours stairing at a computer.
I won’t replace sky’s or people, Only dust spots.Getting it right in camera is still the most important thing.

Thetyrerepairer
Автор

How are people so upset about him talking about a tool… you can literally do sky replacement in photoshop too… doesn’t mean you have to, just means you can do that in neo and it can do that better and faster than other TOOLS… It’s a Tool you can use if you want to… Also if you use a Software you don’t have to use every single feature of it. You can choose what you integrate in your workflow and what not…

mick
Автор

Key phrase: "for most photographers". Many photographers are perfectly happy to automate the processing, hence the many preset packs that are scooped up to simplify the process. It comes down to personal preference. Enjoy the emerald isle. Carry on. 👍🥂

tjsinva
Автор

Thank you. Being relatively new to Neo, I have just run through the vid for a second time to get your take on some of the features. I have used PS and the Topaz trio (with a very light touch) and find neo to be a nice addition, but not necessarily a replacement in the editing process. I agree though that for most of my edits, it does speed things along quite nicely. After taking a quick look at a few of the comments below; please forgive me for wanting to make a couple of points. Firstly, the information in the video is very helpful. The program is complicated and the more hints as to how to best use it are appreciated. Secondly, there is no small amount of time and effort exerted to learn the nuances of a beast such as this and I for one am not only OK with but very happy that you are compensated for gathering so much information and passing it along. I have never had cause to doubt that the observations you make are anything other than your honest opinion. Finally, when it comes to our new found ability to over process the work; with the advent of the digital age, the degree to which editing is applied is completely the judgement of the editor. The purest form of photography remains film, and even that has a darkroom between the subject and the final viewer. Thanks again.

timeaston
Автор

I am a pro photographer and use 5 brackets for most photos and merge in LR... you can automate it sort of. Select your entire shoot, chose 'stack by capture time' 4 seconds seems to work for me. It will them make each bracket into a separate stack, then select the whole shoot again, right click and choose photo merge, merge to HDR, and go for lunch... the pixies batch process it all while you are away.

oliverstuart
Автор

Luminar has the most aggressive sponsoring of photographers on youtube. I have seen every photographer I follow go from hardcore Adobe users to .... (paraphrasing) Luminar is such a great and easy tool to use. It is what it is, and hopefully it helps some people to edit images. I have to say three things about Luminar a) it is super easy to overprocess images 2) it is easy to fall into their gimicky features 3) it always runs like a dog on my computer. I just have a super hard time taking these sponsored videos seriously, we all have to make a living I guess.

williams
Автор

80% off with 6 days 23h left before it ends.
3 weeks later - still 80% off and 6 days left.

mcar
Автор

I picked up Neo a few years ago on your recommendation of the Mystical tool. It's only gotten so much better with updates like the HDR, Relight, and Erase tools since then. I can't recommend it enough. One other thing that Neo has that Lightroom is missing is the ability to do layered overlays. Adding a slight overlay of light rays, swirling mist, or subtle lens flare or bokeh can yield some lovely results. I'm not a huge fan of the fad of putting things like flower wreaths around pregnant mom photos or adding fake falling leaves and sparkles to autumn portraits, but I have to admit, the layers function in Neo makes stuff like that super easy and very powerful.

bradsimsphoto
Автор

I've had some Luminar products in the past but wasn't really blown. However, this is clearly a step up for them. This was a great little runthrough!

johnchedsey
Автор

The thing I can see this being most beneficial for is people who get it right in camera. They can largely ditch raw files and let ai figure it out. Most of what I'm using raw files for is data recovery in highlights or shadows. This seems like the ideal jpeg editor.

-grey