Sharpness comparison LR Classic vs Capture One

[Fifer]

Lightroom Version Number

LR Classic version 9.0

Operating System

1. Windows 10

I have read several posts in other forums about the supposed advantage that Capture One has over LR Classic when it comes to sharpness. One person on YouTube stated that sharpening in Capture One was 1000 times better than LR! I decided, as a longtime LR Classic user, to investigate for myself. This is not some definitive scientific study, just what I found with one image (actually with a few, but I am showing only one).
I processed a dng file from my Fuji X-T30 (converted from a Fuji raf file) in LR Classic until I thought that it looked good, again just my opinion. I then processed the original dng file in Capture One Fuji Express until again I thought that it looked good, and reasonably matched the LR version. That file was exported back into LR as a tiff file. I viewed both files at 1:1 in LR and took a screenshot of the two files side by side. The png screenshot of that 100% crop (I think that's what it is called) is attached.

The file may be too small to see (or not see) any differences. How would I allow access to the full processed photos since they are too big to attach? There are certainly some slight colour differences, but what about the sharpness? Is there a difference, and if so is it significant?
I have deliberately not identified which photo is LR and which is Capture One. I would be interested in knowing if anyone else has compared the two editors, especially with regard to sharpness.

 

[Jimmsp]

OK. I guess I don't understand. No problem, we can move on to other things.

 

[Fifer]

By "the comparison doesn't make much sense" I was referring to the comparison of the two images in your original post. Obviously, an in-depth comparative review of software products is a completely different issue.

My original intent was not to compare the merits of LR and C1 - it was simply to investigate the various claims that sharpening in C1 was superior to that in LR. The only way to do this is to sharpen the same image in both editors and compare the end result, hence the comparison.
I found that the default sharpening in C1 is more aggressive than that in LR - that is neither good nor bad, just different. I then tried to sharpen the image more in LR to see if I could get something close to C1; I believe I was able to do that. I did have to very careful not to over sharpen in LR because that caused artefacts. So my conclusion, based on a comparison of the two images I posted (but also based on comparing many other images that I did not post) is that sharpening in C1 is not vastly superior to sharpening in LR. The end results, in my opinion, are not markedly different.
So while my comparison of the two images may not have made much sense to you, I'm not sure how I could have compared the sharpening of the two image editors, other than by sharpening the same images in both and comparing them. You obviously don't agree, so I guess we should just leave it at that.
I am certainly not claiming superiority of one editor over the other based on my limited testing. To my eyes, LR can produce a result, with respect to sharpening, that is very close to C1. That's it, nothing more, nothing less!!

 

[tspear]

I think what could be interesting is to take an image and sharpen to the max in both. And both to the min sharpen. Compare the results.
This eliminates the subjective eyeball trying to make the two equal and instead focuses on the extremes.
It might be useful to do the same at 25% 50%....

Tim

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk