Charlie7

Thanks Bobspex. This is the first honest answer I have received all day.

jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY

Charlie,
Since your original post, you have received about 47 replies to your question(s). Every one of them offered in good faith. Every one of them honest.
Not one condescending. In fact, there are a number of your responses that were clearly 'cut and paste'. Of course, this directly implied that the person making the comment did not understand your question nor understood the same reply already given to another; to your expected standard.
Bobspex gave his answer based on the fact that he has never used Apple's Photos. Simple. Everyone else tried to interpret your question and give you their opinion. The problem here is not that they do not properly understand your question, but that your question is not clear at all. As much as you may think it is crystal clear; the fact that so many people, who are clearly more expert than you; answered in a manner that is not acceptable to you; points to a conclusion that it is your question that is unclear.
Quite frankly I am surprised that so many have gone out of their way for you after many of your replies.

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

I was duped. I thought he had an issue and he wanted assistance with it. I was willing to help. But, as his posts piled up, it became apparent that he uses Photos and he wants folks to argue with him about his perceived adequacies of the tool.

Charlie7

Thank you jbk224. I appreciate the all of the responses. Yes, my responses were "cut & paste", repeating what I thought was a simple question. I do use PSE, Lightroom and Affinity. I understand processing raw exposures. I am sure there are people more expert than each of us.

My original question was quite simple. Has anyone used MacOS Photo for processing raw photos. I have had good results, but wanted other opinions. Bobspex was the only expert to answer my question.

jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY

Charlie, this is your original 'question'.
"First post and confused. I have been shooting photos in RAW and uploading them into Photos on my Mac for quite awhile. I use photo's processing tools and the photos look good. What am I missing about processing RAW photos in a separate program before post processing?"

I do not see 'Has anyone used MacOS Photo for processing raw photos.' Nor, do I see that you have requested other opinions about Apple's Photos and it's RAW processing tools compared to other programs. And certainly as a user of PSE, Lightroom, and Affinity; you could provide your comparison to Photos and ask if anyone has anything to add.
Clearly your original question was not 'quite simple'.

Charlie7

not looking for folks to argue. I simply started using MacOS Photo as an alternative to Lightroom, with good results. I was looking an opinion of folks who had experience with the tool.

Charlie7

jbk224, Thanks for your response. You are absolutely correct. My first question should have been more clear. Your version is much better. Still looking for an opinion.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

If I understand your question - are you losing something by using Photos to edit a raw file compared to Lightroom, the answer is "it depends" - on what is in the original image, and what you want to adjust. Photos has some limited abilities to adjust raw files. Lightroom, and other full-featured raw converters will preserve more information, providing output in 16 bit - I believe Photos only outputs 8 bit files. Lightroom has dehaze, clarity, vibrance and saturation adjustments, you can adjust color channels individually, precise adjustment of sharpening and contrast, local adjustments, dust remova, radial and linear gradients and an adjustment brush to be able to do some simple local adjustments - and it plays sensationally with plugins - part of the appeal of using the leading software for raw conversion.

I am a little familiar with the older version which was described in this article from 2015, but not at all familiar with the newest version, described in the second article below:

https://www.macworld.com/article/2965934/software-photography/the-hidden-editing-power-of-photos-for-os-x.html

https://www.pcmag.com/review/348690/apple-photos-for-macos

With some images, a simple global approach where you can apply adjustments to the entire image, there is little advantage to using Lightroom over Photos. But if you have more complex images, which can benefit from the more comprehensive set of tools offered in LR, then Photos isn't going to cut it.

Nikon1201

I have 2 cards in my Nikon , if im going to an air show where 500/600 photos I shoot Raw set it to overflow to the other card . If im just shooting something Im not concerned with I shoot 1 card Raw and the other jpeg.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Side comment, use "quote reply" and then the post you are replying to will be plain to all.

As to use of "Photos" vs other programs, I don't use Apple and so don't use programs written for that OS, but there are many PP apps and each has good points and bad. The one you use is determined by how well it meets your needs/goals. And a lot of us use multiple apps. I used to use Corel Photo Paint and then Paint Shop Pro. A few years back I tried first LR, then the LR/PS package. Now my go to is LR/PS but for some things I still use Paint Shop Pro, NIK, Topaz Simplify and the Franzis Project Pro suite of apps. (I do also own PSE with the add-on "Elements +" but almost never use it anymore. I have it installed on a laptop with LR 6.) As time goes by I find I can duplicate results with multiple apps. Easier in some then in others but doable.

So, try each of your apps, ask for and try hints and tips from others but in the end only you can decide which is for you. If an app does all you want and is easy for you to use then that answers your question. The enemy of good is not bad, it is perfect. If something is good enough, then that settles the question.

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, Colorado

Yep, I opened it in Corel, no problem.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

It is generally not an either-or between Photos and Lightroom. Photos is a lightweight user-friendly program intended to be used by everyone while Lightroom is a feature rich professional level raw editor. If you don't need the power of Lightroom and are happy with the results you're currently getting, you've answered your own question. Unlike Photos, to become a power user of Lightroom you will face a fairly significant learning curve requiring a substantial commitment of time and effort. If you are not willing to make that commitment and are happy with Photo's more limited functionality, then stay with it.

Charlie7

Thanks for your input. I have been using Lightroom and PSE for years. I have spent the time and effort. The functionality of the new version of Photos is not limited. I was looking for an opinion from someone who has used it. If you get a chance, take a look. You will be surprised.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Photos is slowly adopting many of the former features in Apple Aperture. It's getting better, slowly, because they want to keep it intuitive while making it powerful.

Yes, it edits raw images pretty well. Yes, I've tried it. No, I don't find it desirable to use instead of Lightroom, Photoshop, or various camera manufacturers' raw conversion programs.

My primary beef with Photos is the way it "hides" your images in a very inconvenient place. Apple wants Photos to be the central clearing house for your images. That works for casual users, but professionals and others with tens of thousands of images need the ability to get to them quickly and efficiently.

I WILL use Photos for images I want to pass over to iMovie when creating slide shows. I love the power and simplicity of iMovie for small video projects. Photos is tightly integrated with it.

Charlie7

Thank you.