Calling All Digital Techs

[fredjeang]

Capture One works quite similar to Aperture (Mac OS), meaning that it first needs to support the camera (or file) by which the DNG was produced.

Yair

What??!!? Is that it really? Then it's completly absurd. (not talking about C1, talking about DNG).

[John R Smith]

What??!!? Is that it really? Then it's completly absurd. (not talking about C1, talking about DNG).

Absolutely right. Completely absurd. It negates the whole object of DNG as a supposedly open and universal format. It's like PS not being able to open a jpeg if it comes from a camera which Adobe didn't happen to like. All that this is about, is a stupid childish spat between Phase and Hasselblad. C1 can reject a Hass DNG because somewhere in the EXIF data is an identifier of the camera type used. And so it does. Why we have to put up with this crap I really don't know.

John

[JonathanBenoit]

Absolutely right. Completely absurd. It negates the whole object of DNG as a supposedly open and universal format. It's like PS not being able to open a jpeg if it comes from a camera which Adobe didn't happen to like. All that this is about, is a stupid childish spat between Phase and Hasselblad. C1 can reject a Hass DNG because somewhere in the EXIF data is an identifier of the camera type used. And so it does. Why we have to put up with this crap I really don't know.

John

I think it makes sense. All other software from camera makers are made for their cameras only. The great thing about photoshop is that it accepts all these image files. It is third party software. We shouldn't expect the same thing from MF digital makers, but it looks like things will end up getting there within the next couple version releases.

[Guy Mancuso]

Capture One works quite similar to Aperture (Mac OS), meaning that it first needs to support the camera (or file) by which the DNG was produced.

Yair

Exactly take a S2 DNG file into C1 and it sucks big time. Reason is there is no profile for the S2 in C1 it sees it as a generic DNG file just as it sees a Phase file as generic in LR, it's not supported  . DNG is NOT the gold standard that people hoped or thought it would become. Far from it it still is in the hands of the OEM's putting there proprietary algorithms in it. There is nothing open standard about it, except anyone can use it but they all put there own sauce in it, but if a program can't read it than it is generic . Here comes the Adobe god's now to pour fire on that comment.

I don't know all the ins and outs on DNG but there has been a lot of criticism on it as well. Here is some more data http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Negative_(file_format)

[fredjeang]

But in the end, and like with browsers, flash etc...who's the victim of this generalized mess? The consumer of course.
There should be an international organism to put order in all that and prevent abuses once for a while. But that's another step I'm not sure it fits in the nowdays situation.

Anyway, so we have a supposed standard that is not. As I pointed before in another thread, comparing RAW files from native/dng I have not been able to notice any difference. At least from my eyes perception.
Exporting the same shot in tiff from DNG or Native brings exactly the same result, a part from the inherent characteristics of the sofware involved.
Wich makes the all situation even more absurd. Why should we use DNG then? If it's to make sure we gona use Adobe software then I'll go against this standard, as it happened with Flash.

But in the kingdom of absurdities, the non-flash Ipad position has maybe the crown. I can understand Apple, I can even think they are right with HTML 5, but the result is that 70% of the websites can not be viewed properly. No more no less. Completly stupid!

I see with DNG something similar in a way. Thought it was the promised land of Raw standardization and in fact we are in non-sense-land.

[gwhitf]

I've never understood why DNG. What's wrong with the manufacturer's software?

If my Lexus breaks, I don't get mad because I can't take it to the Ford dealer to get fixed. How would Ford know the exact ins-and-outs of Lexus? They didn't make it.

I think DNG was the brainchild of some beancounter newspaper editor. He had one guy shooting Canon, another guy shooting Nikon, and another guy shooting Sony, and he was too lazy (or cheap) to learn all three softwares. So he stands up and says we need DNG.

Does anyone not think, in ten years, that you wont' be able to find some way to process your RAWs? Is that it? If that's so, why not just batch your RAWs now, into TIFFs, as a safeguard. The whole DNG thing seems like a solution for a problem that never was.

[Guy Mancuso]

Fred that was the idea of DNG and it was a good one but many companies just ignored even using it. If you can't get them to the party than they can't drink the water either. I think that is the case with DNG. Obviously this is a big discussion that has been tossed around like a football for quite some time. But it still has not hit the ground. Again i don't know all the in's and out's but I do know many OEM's said not for us we want our own deal for our cams and the ability to use there secret sauce in those programs that can see there files. Some would say DNG is just a wrapper around a proprietary file ext.

[fredjeang]

Fred that was the idea of DNG and it was a good one but many companies just ignored even using it. If you can't get them to the party than they can't drink the water either. I think that is the case with DNG. Obviously this is a big discussion that has been tossed around like a football for quite some time. But it still has not hit the ground. Again i don't know all the in's and out's but I do know many OEM's said not for us we want our own deal for our cams and the ability to use there secret sauce in those programs that can see there files. Some would say DNG is just a wrapper around a proprietary file ext.

Agree Guy. The idea was good, but as you point, everybody should play the game then to make it interesting. But there is no problem for a Brand to both admit a RAW standard, DNG or whatever, and at the same time developp their special secret sauce for their native files. IMO, it could even be a strong sale argument like: "look what we are able to do compare to the standard"...but the reality seems, (and I say that with caution because I'm not absolutly sure if I'm right), that there is no difference in file quality between Brand native Raw and DNG version.

Gwhitf pointed to backup Tiff if we fear a RAW uncompatibility in the future, but if you think about it, catastrophy is not likely to happen. So, yes, what's the point? It was because we were sure than a new gear was immediatly usable in PP. In fact it's usable in Adobe and they have the monopoly with Photoshop. There is no alternative. (please don't say me the Gimp   ).

Gwhitf, What's wrong with the manufacturer software? nothing, just some thoughts. For example: I have not upgraded yet to CS4, still use CS3 because I do not feel the need of upgrading so far. It results that the last camera I bought is not supported by CS3 but yes by CS4. So DNG is the only way I can devellop the RAW files in Adobe. But the native files are fully supported by my C1 5 (and not the DNG). Combining 2 softwares I have full compatibility. It just would be nice to have this in one. But I admit, you can say: "and so, what's the problem?". I use both ACR and C1, fine, no hassle but I thing that concentrate in a sofware you like and are use to is getting a better and safer workflow.
Regarding manufacturer software, it's a little bit of an hassle to have to deal with different animals. I use different brands like most of us and I don't want to inundate my computers of each brand's softwares. Whithout talking about the time of adaptation to each etc...Really, less is more IMHO. In fact if all those files would just work in C1 I'd be happy.

[arashm]

I thought I was the only one who did not upgrade to CS4 and now 5
am

[gwhitf]

I had an interesting thing happen yesterday, that seemed worth mentioning. Was shooting a studio job in New York, and the Tech that I hired did not have EOS Util or DPP installed on his tower. He only used Capture One 5.1.1. The job was to be shot with the 5dMarkII, tethered.

Everything chugging along fine until about lunchtime, when the camera began to slow down and appeared to hit the buffer. I'd never seen that, EVER, using EOS utility to tether. It just jams right along, no matter how many images in the folder. As it turned out, CaptureOne 5.1.1 was the culprit. For some reason, after you get so many images in one Capture Folder, it just begins to bottleneck, no matter how fast you're shooting. Luckily, it was lunchtime, so I just called it, and we broke for lunch, and the client never knew there was a problem. The Tech started a whole new Session after lunch, and we shot the rest of the day.

But I just found it odd that this high-falutin' CaptureOne bogged down, when the laughed-at Canon software never bogged down once. So just be forewarned about this. Maybe there could be some jobs where you'd really need all the bells and whistles of CaptureOne to tether, but if you just need super fast, super clean Previews, and hassle free performance, stick with EOS Utility and DPP linked together.

If CaptureOne bogged down with sissy little 5d2 RAW files, imagine how quickly it might bog down with P65 RAW files.

No thanks.

[bcooter]

I friend of mine told me the other day C-1 rules.

OK, for him I guess it "did", but shooting lingerie last week, beauty this week we started both projects with the p30.

Same thing, everything went fine, then all of a sudden a slow down, then a stop then we went through the process of reconnecting, changing firewire cords, checking batteries, etc. etc. etc.

The clients didn't say anything, because we did the checking and rechecking when we did the video sessions, but it was a little tense on our end.

So we decide to make a new session for each change and never let the folder get much past 100 images.

We finished the day fine.

Flash forward 4 days and we do a beauty shoot.  Different tech running the computer and we purposely deleated everything c-1, (this is the capture computer so everything is kept clean), added new firewire cords and tested the evening before.

All was fine until mid morning and same thing as before except this time the client did notice the slowdown so I just yanked off the phase backs, went to the Canons, shoot to eos utility and the day went smooth.

Turned out the new tech was shooting everything to one folder and I don't know how many images were in it, a few hundred and I don't know if that was the problem, but on a day with 11 different beauty setups and a color story, very intricate lighting, you just don't have time to try to reconnect a camera.

Now maybe we're dong something wrong, I'm not going to lay it on Phase because it could have been a thousand things, but I do know that the Canon plugged in to eos utility and running bridge in the background works flawlessly and easy.

And I have to admit I'm not a real fan of V4/5 for tethering.  I think it's fine for processing, but I like v 3.7 something a lot better.  3 didn't have the best previews and anything over 400 images to a folder would crash it but it restarted quickly, always kept the settings and I had such few problems with it I could count them on two fingers.

BC

I had an interesting thing happen yesterday, that seemed worth mentioning. Was shooting a studio job in New York, and the Tech that I hired did not have EOS Util or DPP installed on his tower. He only used Capture One 5.1.1. The job was to be shot with the 5dMarkII, tethered.

Everything chugging along fine until about lunchtime, when the camera began to slow down and appeared to hit the buffer. I'd never seen that, EVER, using EOS utility to tether. It just jams right along, no matter how many images in the folder. As it turned out, CaptureOne 5.1.1 was the culprit. For some reason, after you get so many images in one Capture Folder, it just begins to bottleneck, no matter how fast you're shooting. Luckily, it was lunchtime, so I just called it, and we broke for lunch, and the client never knew there was a problem. The Tech started a whole new Session after lunch, and we shot the rest of the day.

But I just found it odd that this high-falutin' CaptureOne bogged down, when the laughed-at Canon software never bogged down once. So just be forewarned about this. Maybe there could be some jobs where you'd really need all the bells and whistles of CaptureOne to tether, but if you just need super fast, super clean Previews, and hassle free performance, stick with EOS Utility and DPP linked together.

If CaptureOne bogged down with sissy little 5d2 RAW files, imagine how quickly it might bog down with P65 RAW files.

No thanks.

[Justin Berman]

I know this is OT, but as someone who shoots beauty often, how in god's name do you shoot 11 looks in one day? I mean, maybe if you have 6 models and 6 sets of MU/Hair that could be doable, but good lord man, I would like to watch that production!

I friend of mine told me the other day C-1 rules.

OK, for him I guess it "did", but shooting lingerie last week, beauty this week we started both projects with the p30.

Same thing, everything went fine, then all of a sudden a slow down, then a stop then we went through the process of reconnecting, changing firewire cords, checking batteries, etc. etc. etc.

The clients didn't say anything, because we did the checking and rechecking when we did the video sessions, but it was a little tense on our end.

So we decide to make a new session for each change and never let the folder get much past 100 images.

We finished the day fine.

Flash forward 4 days and we do a beauty shoot.  Different tech running the computer and we purposely deleated everything c-1, (this is the capture computer so everything is kept clean), added new firewire cords and tested the evening before.

All was fine until mid morning and same thing as before except this time the client did notice the slowdown so I just yanked off the phase backs, went to the Canons, shoot to eos utility and the day went smooth.

Turned out the new tech was shooting everything to one folder and I don't know how many images were in it, a few hundred and I don't know if that was the problem, but on a day with 11 different beauty setups and a color story, very intricate lighting, you just don't have time to try to reconnect a camera.

Now maybe we're dong something wrong, I'm not going to lay it on Phase because it could have been a thousand things, but I do know that the Canon plugged in to eos utility and running bridge in the background works flawlessly and easy.

And I have to admit I'm not a real fan of V4/5 for tethering.  I think it's fine for processing, but I like v 3.7 something a lot better.  3 didn't have the best previews and anything over 400 images to a folder would crash it but it restarted quickly, always kept the settings and I had such few problems with it I could count them on two fingers.

BC

[bcooter]

I know this is OT, but as someone who shoots beauty often, how in god's name do you shoot 11 looks in one day? I mean, maybe if you have 6 models and 6 sets of MU/Hair that could be doable, but good lord man, I would like to watch that production!

You work 14 hour days, run two sets, and work damn fast and hard.

Except for the color story this wasn't a one background shoot, but the good side of beauty is the sets aren't that large.  I also keep about 15 lights and modifiers, flags, etc. all mounted and ready.  No time for hunting around, it's all ready to slide in

You also block it out before hand and are very clear to the clients of what your going to achieve, stop the moment you get there.

Hell, compared to working three distinct locations in Hong Kong, or San Francisco, (I'm talking with a crew of 20 something) shooting 11 different looks in studio in a day is easy.  The color story is a different animal as it's pretty much detail work.

The new world.

BC

[emcphoto]

I had an interesting thing happen yesterday, that seemed worth mentioning. Was shooting a studio job in New York, and the Tech that I hired did not have EOS Util or DPP installed on his tower. He only used Capture One 5.1.1. The job was to be shot with the 5dMarkII, tethered.

Everything chugging along fine until about lunchtime, when the camera began to slow down and appeared to hit the buffer. I'd never seen that, EVER, using EOS utility to tether. It just jams right along, no matter how many images in the folder. As it turned out, CaptureOne 5.1.1 was the culprit. For some reason, after you get so many images in one Capture Folder, it just begins to bottleneck, no matter how fast you're shooting. Luckily, it was lunchtime, so I just called it, and we broke for lunch, and the client never knew there was a problem. The Tech started a whole new Session after lunch, and we shot the rest of the day.

But I just found it odd that this high-falutin' CaptureOne bogged down, when the laughed-at Canon software never bogged down once. So just be forewarned about this. Maybe there could be some jobs where you'd really need all the bells and whistles of CaptureOne to tether, but if you just need super fast, super clean Previews, and hassle free performance, stick with EOS Utility and DPP linked together.

If CaptureOne bogged down with sissy little 5d2 RAW files, imagine how quickly it might bog down with P65 RAW files.

No thanks.

By the way . .

USB is the problem. I recently teched a job with a P65 to a laptop and it never locked up, crashed or slowed down.  Most shoots are Canon though and there is always a problem when you hit the buffer. If you shoot more than a frame a second tethered with Canon you will crash the software.  No way around it.  Shoot at a steady pace - not too fast - you can shoot all day. Of course if you need to shoot fast then you have to go to card.  I believe it is just the reality of the connection USB vs. Firewire. Also Canon has changed their USB connection specs and third parties do not have access to everything - according to Phase One.   Even working in a session - not shooting - with canon files vs phase files is very difficult on some machines like laptops.  

But I can say Capture One 5.1 with a macbook pro a year old - not one problem. Also when people have issues keeping connections with Phase one backs it is usually from bad firewire cords - cheap ones or they get stepped on all day, a bad firewire port or a machine that needs some maintenance.  

[gwhitf]

By the way . .

USB is the problem.

Hmm. Same USB cable going to EOS Utility, and shoot as fast as you want, as long as you want.

Plus, when I hit that bottleneck, I wasn't shooting any faster then than I had been earlier in the day.

Plus, when it stopped, it really stopped; as in, shoot one or two frames, and bam, you're dead -- wait for it to clear out, or whatever it was doing when it clogged.

[emcphoto]

Hmm. Same USB cable going to EOS Utility, and shoot as fast as you want, as long as you want.

Plus, when I hit that bottleneck, I wasn't shooting any faster then than I had been earlier in the day.

Plus, when it stopped, it really stopped; as in, shoot one or two frames, and bam, you're dead -- wait for it to clear out, or whatever it was doing when it clogged.

Every situation has its own issues, its not always predictable with tethered capture, there are many variables involved. I have been using eos utility for a few years too, works fine usually, does what it supposed to do. I currently use bridge to rename files shot to a card then view them in C15 because the rename function in C15 is terrible.  Unfortunately I think Adobe's color and image processing are not very good (even the new LR3) compared to C15 so I have to use a few applications to get it all right, but that's ok for now, its not a perfect world.
Recently (and since the USB canons were introduced) I was having Canon tethering issues with C15 so I compared it to eos utility on a shoot. The problem was it was fashion, a good fast moving model, quick recycling lights - we were shooting too fast for the camera. Eos utility locked up tethered just as C15 did. It might be alittle better with some types of shoots but its not the answer for what we are shooting.
That said if you are considering a DB do not judge C15 on its Canon performance at all. It is a totally different thing.

[gwhitf]

The problem was it was fashion, a good fast moving model, quick recycling lights - we were shooting too fast for the camera. Eos utility locked up tethered just as C15 did. It might be alittle better with some types of shoots but its not the answer for what we are shooting.
That said if you are considering a DB do not judge C15 on its Canon performance at all. It is a totally different thing.

I understand. I was shooting a model, and also using Hot Lights, so I did not even have to wait for Profoto recycle. So who knows, maybe I was shooting faster than I even realized.

Yes, you might be right about Canon being its own animal, since it uses USB. Maybe it's completely different performance than using DB with FW.

Having said all this, I still wish that Phocus and Capture One could break apart their tethering application from their processing application. I say, give me a "Mini Me" version of the master application, with it's only role in life being just to to capture the file, tethered. Streamline it. If you want to process your big TIFFs later, that's fine, but do that in the main application. But while the client is in the room, and everyone is watching, make sure that that Tethering Application is rock solid, and that it can run quickly and reliably on even a MacBook Pro.

Just one opinion.

[Dustbak]

I understand. I was shooting a model, and also using Hot Lights, so I did not even have to wait for Profoto recycle. So who knows, maybe I was shooting faster than I even realized.

Yes, you might be right about Canon being its own animal, since it uses USB. Maybe it's completely different performance than using DB with FW.

Having said all this, I still wish that Phocus and Capture One could break apart their tethering application from their processing application. I say, give me a "Mini Me" version of the master application, with it's only role in life being just to to capture the file, tethered. Streamline it. If you want to process your big TIFFs later, that's fine, but do that in the main application. But while the client is in the room, and everyone is watching, make sure that that Tethering Application is rock solid, and that it can run quickly and reliably on even a MacBook Pro.

Just one opinion.

I totally agree with this part. I would welcome an application that solely tethers as well.

[fredjeang]

I totally agree with this part. I would welcome an application that solely tethers as well.

I've been claiming that for ages.
Agree 100%.

Strange that in the overall mess and useless applications the software industry provide us many time, there is not so far an independant solid application for tethering any camera. Let's say a kind of photoshop for tethered.(that would just do that), or a distracting erotic movie that shows up to the client when the application detects any slowness, so the distracted client won't notice the disaster   )

[Guy Mancuso]

USB and Macs never really got along oh so well in the first place.