Why CaptureOne Pro 10 and Not Photoshop/LR CC?

[john beardsworth]

Personally I don’t think this really applies.  C1 has never removed support for a camera, much like all the other raw processor makers.

I know I could have been clearer, but that's not really what I was saying, Wayne. I would not expect them to remove support for a camera, but by "your next GFX" I meant a future GFX Mark II which might be determined to fall outside any changed policy. But if that change of policy isn't happening anyway, this is pretty moot.

[dchew]

I'd be interested in a clarification on several of these points, which by way of being on your list implies they are better than LR or do not exist in LR.

I can't speak to all of Paul's points, but here are my thoughts:

1.  Adjustment layers that operate independently of each other up to 15 per image: Is there a functional advantage to adjustment layers over the LR paradigm of unlimited adjustment brushes and gradients?
It's just easier to go back and find a specific adjustment brush or gradient. I've gone back to images months later to make changes. In LR you have to guess and figure out what gray dot to pick and edit. Also I may forget I had a brush for some specific change. I go in, add a brush, then later find out I have two "sky" brushes. Now I have to change them both and keep them similar. C1 you can name the layers to remind yourself. Fewer clicks as a result too.

4.  With version 10 new sharpening options which use deconvolution:  I believe LR also uses deconvolution when you move the detail slider past 50.  Is the C1 sharpening superior?
The nice thing about C1's implementation is you can apply deconvolution only. It is applied separately from sharpening.
     
4.  With Version 10 sharpening options for output (depending on web view, printing etc): Is the C1 implementation more sophisticated than the LR low, medium and high options? 
I'm not sure it is more sophisticated but it is more adjustable. They give you sliders with default settings instead of default settings with no options. Whether this is good or bad depends on how much you like LR's fixed options. For example, I'm fine with LR's default std for glossy paper, but for matte paper I would like something in between std and high. I haven't done any tests yet so I don't have a sense for C1's sharpening as it appears on papers, so I still use LR to print from. For now...
     
7.  Ability to control WB per layer (huge for my workflow): Is this functionally different from creating different WB in adjustment brush or gradients in LR? 
It's just easier (for me at least) to use sliders with real color temp vs. the color picker approach of LR. You have sliders in LR too but the implementation feels different. Frankly this might just relate to the other layer-approach benefits above.
     
8.  ease of copying adjustments from one image to another: There are multiple ways to do this in LR.  How is the C1 implementation better? 
Just fewer clicks. In C1 shift click and you are done. This does depend on how you approach this type of editing. It really shines when you are experimenting with settings in a specific adjustment panel/tool.     

9.  Side by side viewing (I have never liked LR's way of enabling this, just too complicated for me): Does this comment include LR's reference view?  If so, how is the C1 implementation better? 
I'm not sure of Paul's original comment, but I suspect it did not consider LR's new-ish reference view. Sometimes I like LR better for this, sometimes not.

Dave

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

A problem is that there are a lot of adjustments. LR allows you to pick which adjustments to pick.

C1 has an awful user interface. There are tons of options, but nothing in C1 is obvious.

I am a quiet a bit partial to LR as I have used it since it's conception. But I cannot escape from the feeling that C1 is ill conceived, not documented well and has tons of ill defined options.

Adding to that, it crashes each time I try to import a file. I should possibly issue a problem report? But I use the DB version and I don't know if that entitles me to support. I have owned two of the previous versions, but I don't have any great experience with any of them so I didn't buy the later ones. The crash issue is specific to versions 9.x and 10.x.

I can go into finder and open a file in C1, so it is the file dialogue in C1 that causes the crash.

Best regards
Erik

I can't speak to all of Paul's points, but here are my thoughts:

8.  ease of copying adjustments from one image to another: There are multiple ways to do this in LR.  How is the C1 implementation better? 
Just fewer clicks. In C1 shift click and you are done. This does depend on how you approach this type of editing. It really shines when you are experimenting with settings in a specific adjustment panel/tool.     

9.  Side by side viewing (I have never liked LR's way of enabling this, just too complicated for me): Does this comment include LR's reference view?  If so, how is the C1 implementation better? 
I'm not sure of Paul's original comment, but I suspect it did not consider LR's new-ish reference view. Sometimes I like LR better for this, sometimes not.

Dave

[dchew]

Hi,

A problem is that there are a lot of adjustments. LR allows you to pick which adjustments to pick.

Hi Erik,
Actually C1 can do that too. You can copy using a similar path as LR where you pick specific settings to copy. The difference is C1 also allows you to quickly copy (and paste) a specific setting by tool.

C1 has an awful user interface. There are tons of options, but nothing in C1 is obvious.

I am a quiet a bit partial to LR as I have used it since it's conception. But I cannot escape from the feeling that C1 is ill conceived, not documented well and has tons of ill defined options.

I agree. I might not call it "awful" but I do feel there is a much longer learning curve. I'm a neophyte and I think the power users "get it" but I certainly do not.

Adding to that, it crashes each time I try to import a file. I should possibly issue a problem report? But I use the DB version and I don't know if that entitles me to support. I have owned two of the previous versions, but I don't have any great experience with any of them so I didn't buy the later ones. The crash issue is specific to versions 9.x and 10.x.

I can go into finder and open a file in C1, so it is the file dialogue in C1 that causes the crash.

Best regards
Erik

I had crashing issues when 9 came out with the better LCC process. But since then I've had no issues. It makes me wonder about computer compatibility. Anecdotally, it seems like those like me on MBP's are happy, while others, even on much more powerful desktop machines, are not so happy with speed and/or performance.

Dave

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

It is often said that Lightroom/ACR has bland colours while Capture One has great colour.

I mostly use Lightroom with home made profiles and colour does not play such a great role for what I shoot. With Lightroom I can use:

• Adobe DNG Profile Editor
• ColorChecker Passport software
• QPCard software
• Anders Torger's DCamProf

to generate profiles. Of these, only DCamProf works with Capture One.

The enclosed samples show some differences.

Best regards
Erik

[Wayne Fox]

I can't speak to all of Paul's points, but here are my thoughts:

1.  Adjustment layers that operate independently of each other up to 15 per image: Is there a functional advantage to adjustment layers over the LR paradigm of unlimited adjustment brushes and gradients?
It's just easier to go back and find a specific adjustment brush or gradient. I've gone back to images months later to make changes. In LR you have to guess and figure out what gray dot to pick and edit. Also I may forget I had a brush for some specific change. I go in, add a brush, then later find out I have two "sky" brushes. Now I have to change them both and keep them similar. C1 you can name the layers to remind yourself. Fewer clicks as a result too.

I would add that one nice feature of C1's adjustment brush is just like layers in photoshop, you can turn individual adjustments off or on.  Allows you to try a few different things without having to use a virtual copy, or just enable/disable to see the results.  Unfortunately for me most of the time, this doesn't make up for all the other weaknesses in the adjustment brush tool, especially the very poor automask function.

8.  ease of copying adjustments from one image to another: There are multiple ways to do this in LR.  How is the C1 implementation better? 
Just fewer clicks. In C1 shift click and you are done. This does depend on how you approach this type of editing. It really shines when you are experimenting with settings in a specific adjustment panel/tool. 

I think this is one area where C1 is superior.  It basically copies adjustment to a "clipboard" with a single click.  You can then also click to apply the adjustment to other images.  Or you can use a single click to copy all adjustments which can be applied.  Not only can this be done on a global scale, but each individual tool also allows the same paradigm for copying that tools adjustment and allow it to be applied to other tools. 

[Rory]

Thanks for the clarifications gentlemen.  I'll have to give C1 another go.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Wayne,

The way I see it I have three options in the Adjustments menu:

- Copy adjustments - doesn't have any options
- Apply adjustments - doesn't have any options
- Copy and apply adjustments - has option to select adjustments to copy and apply

Nice functionality but not so easy to find…

Best regards
Erik

I think this is one area where C1 is superior.  It basically copies adjustment to a "clipboard" with a single click.  You can then also click to apply the adjustment to other images.  Or you can use a single click to copy all adjustments which can be applied.  Not only can this be done on a global scale, but each individual tool also allows the same paradigm for copying that tools adjustment and allow it to be applied to other tools.

[Wayne Fox]

Hi Wayne,

The way I see it I have three options in the Adjustments menu:

- Copy adjustments - doesn't have any options
- Apply adjustments - doesn't have any options
- Copy and apply adjustments - has option to select adjustments to copy and apply

Nice functionality but not so easy to find…

Best regards
Erik

I don't use the menus for copying adjustments.  Each tool has a double arrow.  If you select the image you want to copy from, the shift click the images you want to copy to, you click the double arrow to apply the most selected image adjustments to the rest of the selected images for the settings in that tool.
the same double arrow can be placed in the toolbar (not there by default) so it's pretty easy to copy/paste the settings.  Works pretty much just like the sync button in Lr. Additionally the other arrows copy the adjustments to the adjustment clipboard and the other arrow applies them to any selected image.  Once copied, the image they are copied from does not need to be part of a selection.  You can also bring up the adjustment clipboard if you want to exclude any adjustments when you paste them.  When you copy the adjustments from an image, only those adjustments being used in the image are enabled in the clipboard, so it's pretty easy to go down and see what is going to get copied (and disable any you don't want).

Perhaps not so easy to find, but certainly any software that is robust and flexible has a learning curve.  I find the implementation better than that in Lr, although I have no real issues with Lr's implementation. Just a little different way to do things.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Wayne,

Thanks, most helpful! You are right on the learning curve issue! I probably have opinions on C1 depending not being very far on that learning curve.

Best regards
Erik

I don't use the menus for copying adjustments.  Each tool has a double arrow.  If you select the image you want to copy from, the shift click the images you want to copy to, you click the double arrow to apply the most selected image adjustments to the rest of the selected images for the settings in that tool.
the same double arrow can be placed in the toolbar (not there by default) so it's pretty easy to copy/paste the settings.  Works pretty much just like the sync button in Lr. Additionally the other arrows copy the adjustments to the adjustment clipboard and the other arrow applies them to any selected image.  Once copied, the image they are copied from does not need to be part of a selection.  You can also bring up the adjustment clipboard if you want to exclude any adjustments when you paste them.  When you copy the adjustments from an image, only those adjustments being used in the image are enabled in the clipboard, so it's pretty easy to go down and see what is going to get copied (and disable any you don't want).

Perhaps not so easy to find, but certainly any software that is robust and flexible has a learning curve.  I find the implementation better than that in Lr, although I have no real issues with Lr's implementation. Just a little different way to do things.

[Kevin Raber]

C1 V10 tutorial update should be posted within the next ten days.

[john beardsworth]

I don't use the menus for copying adjustments.  Each tool has a double arrow.  If you select the image you want to copy from, the shift click the images you want to copy to, you click the double arrow to apply the most selected image adjustments to the rest of the selected images for the settings in that tool.
the same double arrow can be placed in the toolbar (not there by default) so it's pretty easy to copy/paste the settings.  Works pretty much just like the sync button in Lr. Additionally the other arrows copy the adjustments to the adjustment clipboard and the other arrow applies them to any selected image.  Once copied, the image they are copied from does not need to be part of a selection.  You can also bring up the adjustment clipboard if you want to exclude any adjustments when you paste them.  When you copy the adjustments from an image, only those adjustments being used in the image are enabled in the clipboard, so it's pretty easy to go down and see what is going to get copied (and disable any you don't want).

Perhaps not so easy to find, but certainly any software that is robust and flexible has a learning curve.  I find the implementation better than that in Lr, although I have no real issues with Lr's implementation. Just a little different way to do things.

AutoSync in Lr.... When that's on, any global or local adjustment applies automatically to all the selected images, without any extra clicks for copying and pasting. Just a different way to do things.

[DrakeJ]

Here are some observations from a Lightroom user who uses C1 for medium format awesomeness:

Lightroom pros:

- moving sliders is a much more smooth experience in lightroom, especially white balance
- shadow and highlight sliders can move both negative and positive
- a bit more inituitive, especially as mentioned before how to copy adjustments from one image to the next
- I have a large catalogue consisting of over 100.000 raw files in Lightroom, handling large catalogues is a breeze

Capture One pros:
- skin tones tool is something I find hard to live without nowadays
- color tools are superior in both isolating colors and intuitively color grading your image
- using layers (with names) is easier than creating a whole lot of brushes on "one layer"
- tethering actually works

[razrblck]

I tried version 10 when it came out, loved the skin and color tools. For many layers I still prefer working in Photoshop. Tethering works beautifully in Capture One on Nikon cameras, Lightroom is truly behind on that!

On profiles, I haven't noticed many differences. Capture One does have better default color profiles compared the the Adobe Standard profile for my Nikons, but the Camera Neutral and other variants are comparable and I can set them as defaults.

Frankly the biggest advantage of Lightroom is in the CC Photography Plan that includes Photoshop as well. That package for very little a month is the ultimate deal if you have to work but prefer putting the money on better gear rather than 30 different RAW processing applications. Then again if you really need it, you can always justify the cost and amortize it in the long run (or get the C1 subscription which is also a sweet deal).

[Steve Hendrix]

I tried version 10 when it came out, loved the skin and color tools. For many layers I still prefer working in Photoshop. Tethering works beautifully in Capture One on Nikon cameras, Lightroom is truly behind on that!

On profiles, I haven't noticed many differences. Capture One does have better default color profiles compared the the Adobe Standard profile for my Nikons, but the Camera Neutral and other variants are comparable and I can set them as defaults.

Frankly the biggest advantage of Lightroom is in the CC Photography Plan that includes Photoshop as well. That package for very little a month is the ultimate deal if you have to work but prefer putting the money on better gear rather than 30 different RAW processing applications. Then again if you really need it, you can always justify the cost and amortize it in the long run (or get the C1 subscription which is also a sweet deal).

Actually, purchasing Capture One is a better deal than the subscription ($497 for purchase with 2 upgrades vs $540 subscription over 36 months), and you have the opportunity for dealer support, in addition to the Phase One online support vs Phase One online support only with the subscription.


Steve Hendrix/CI

[Steve Hendrix]

Hi,

I am quite a bit biased in favour of Lightroom as it has been my tool of choice since 2006. I generally use my own colour profiles with Lightroom but I have not taken that effort with Capture One.

Generally, I use the highlight and shadow sliders in Lightroom quiet a lot to map the high dynamic range of the images to the limited luminance range of screen and print. I would say that these controls work more subtle than the corresponding tools in Capture One.

There are some areas where I think Capture One works better, one of those areas is the demosaic process which may show less artefacts than LR/ACR.

I attach an image shot with P45+ and processed by Capture One and Lightroom. Both are processed to taste. The Lightroom image is using my own colour profile created by Anders Torger's DCamProf while the Capture One processed image uses the built in default colour profile. Both are white balanced for the same separate grey card shot.

My processing skills with C1 are not any good, so the comparison is not really even.

Eleanor Brown, who just got an X1D has run some tests comparing Hasselblad's own Phocus and Lightroom and finds the results are near identical. So, it may seem that Lightroom can yield very good colour when combined with a good colour profile.

Best regards
Erik

I would just add one thing to this. Custom profiling can yield substantially improved results, however, I would hazard that the majority of photographers will shoot defaults and will not employ a custom profile approach, opting for what they perceive - rightly or wrongly - as a simpler approach. I'm not going to convince photographers to employ custom profiles. But in addition to 3rd party solutions, it is possible to edit existing LCC profiles from within the Capture One Color Editor Tool.

However in keeping with the simple theme - for Phase One digital back landscape shooters in particular, if you do nothing else, consider changing the default profile from Flash V2 to Outdoor Daylight. You can then set that as a default and never have to change it again, and your colors will come out better automatically. This profile would likely create a significant improvement in Eric's above example.

Steve Hendrix/CI

[Paul2660]

I would just add one thing to this. Custom profiling can yield substantially improved results, however, I would hazard that the majority of photographers will shoot defaults and will not employ a custom profile approach, opting for what they perceive - rightly or wrongly - as a simpler approach. I'm not going to convince photographers to employ custom profiles. But in addition to 3rd party solutions, it is possible to edit existing LCC profiles from within the Capture One Color Editor Tool.

However in keeping with the simple theme - for Phase One digital back landscape shooters in particular, if you do nothing else, consider changing the default profile from Flash V2 to Outdoor Daylight. You can then set that as a default and never have to change it again, and your colors will come out better automatically. This profile would likely create a significant improvement in Eric's above example.

Steve Hendrix/CI

Hi Steve
I have always been curious why C1's default is Flash? I guess P1 feels most users are in a Studio?

Paul Caldwell

[Steve Hendrix]

Hi Steve
I have always been curious why C1's default is Flash? I guess P1 feels most users are in a Studio?

Paul Caldwell

From the beginning, Capture One really made its bones as a high quality raw converter and advanced tethering solution for professional photographers - at a time when very little existed in the way of optimal alternatives. As a result, the intent was to produce a look and quality of capture that came close to creating a ready to go image, with as little post work as possible. And at that time, the vast majority of mainstream commercial work was performed with strobe - still is really.

However, what sort of look actually comes closest to ready to go has changed quite a bit since those days, and in fact today, there is no telling what sort of "look" an image might ultimately be edited to look like. Still - some sort of starting point has to be decided upon, whether the look is going to be more or less saturated, sharp, or contrasty. It's only a starting point. As time has gone on, additional profiles have found their way into the dedicated canned Phase One digital back profiles found in the Base Characteristics (for example, Outdoor Daylite, etc). Even the original "Flash" profile has less saturation than the current "Flash V2" default.

At any rate - if someone doesn't want to dedicate any real time or effort on custom profiles, but would like colors reigned in a bit more realistically, particularly in ambient or natural settings, the Outdoor Daylite profile offers a built-in, one time, effortless adjustment.


Steve Hendrix/CI

[Shrev94412]

Thanks Paul:

I use PS and only use LR for preparing stacks for Zerene Stacker. So my question is: can we easily use C1 without using their image management feature. I don't want to get my photos locked up in the way LR does it. I use Adobe Bridge to read my disk files, which are stored by date in folders. I am on the PC. I have a number of Macs, but I prefer the power and flexibility of PC... at this point.

Paul did a great job here explaining some differences.....# 7 on his list is huge for me. My use of Photoshop has greatly diminished. I mainly use PS for image blending or stacking and a few plug-ins that I still love but, many times I never take the image to PS beyond C1...It's kinda funny because part of my brain says..."Wait....don't you need to do something in Photoshop before you finish??".....

[Paul2660]

Per my first list, many pointed out the "reference view" in LR.  I had missed that totally, and I agree it's vastly superior to the older method of side side by side viewing in LR.  So I wanted to point out my mistake

Between C1 and LR that would have to be a draw IMO.

Both have very nice solutions.

Paul Caldwell