Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Leonardo Barreto on October 22, 2008, 12:15:35 am
-
I processed the same image with 3.7.9 and 4.5PRO and compared the two images and saw no difference in Image Quality. Also even the most unhappy of posters I have read talking about 4 mention that IQ is good.
But at least one experienced busy photographer has found that "C1pro 3.7.4 was far better... in terms of micro contrats, cripsness, details, noise, shadows, quality/richness of colors…"
What is your experience so far?
-
But at least one experienced busy photographer has found that "C1pro 3.7.4 was far better... in terms of micro contrats, cripsness, details, noise, shadows, quality/richness of colors…"
What is your experience so far?
The experience is that in V3 you have to disable sharpening in the preferences (or in output) to have an image without any sharpening.
Setting the sharpening sliders to zero V3 still applies some sharpening. The opposite in V4.
-
The experience is that in V3 you have to disable sharpening in the preferences (or in output) to have an image without any sharpening.
Setting the sharpening sliders to zero V3 still applies some sharpening. The opposite in V4.
I'm finding micro contrast to be better in V4, sharpness better, skin tones better. Basically when it comes to IQ, a lot better in all regards.
-
I'm finding micro contrast to be better in V4
I compared V4.0 to V3.7.7 months ago... maybe they improved the algorithms in later V4 update?
But I couldn't notice an improvement in micro contrast when I compared tifs processed with film curve "linear response" and camera profile "no color correction" out of V3 and V4 and compared them on layers in Photoshop. Maybe they edited the film curves "standard" and "extra shadow"? But I'll give it a try once again...
sharpness better
the sharpening tool is much better in V4 as you can adjust more precisely (and there seems to be a "mask" for sharpening as the blacks are less agressive in V4 when sharpening is applied). But the essential detail extraction when sharpening is disabled... is the same in V3 and V4.
skin tones better
Same values set for white balance V4 gives slightly warmer results (regardless of the camera profile). May very well be that especially skins tones profit from this change.
-
I compared V4.0 to V3.7.7 months ago... maybe they improved the algorithms in later V4 update?
But I couldn't notice an improvement in micro contrast when I compared tifs processed with film curve "linear response" and camera profile "no color correction" out of V3 and V4 and compared them on layers in Photoshop. Maybe they edited the film curves "standard" and "extra shadow"? But I'll give it a try once again...
the sharpening tool is much better in V4 as you can adjust more precisely (and there seems to be a "mask" for sharpening as the blacks are less agressive in V4 when sharpening is applied). But the essential detail extraction when sharpening is disabled... is the same in V3 and V4.
Same values set for white balance V4 gives slightly warmer results (regardless of the camera profile). May very well be that especially skins tones profit from this change.
Of course, I should have stated, I'm using a P21, maybe thats the difference in what we are seeing, I find V4.5 to be the same as 4.1 IQ wise. What camera/back are you using?
-
What camera/back are you using?
P45
-
P45
Thats so strange. It just shows how subjective this all is. Anyone else?
-
Thats so strange. It just shows how subjective this all is.
Maybe it just shows how extremely well IQ in V3 already was (and in V4 still is) ;-)
I do not count very much on comments about colors (may that be skin or outdoor daylight tones) as I think it totaly depends on the settings and the camera profiles. Using e.g. V3 DB or Pro (or V4) with an on board color editor and being unhappy with certain tones... I ask "why" as it is quite easy to create profiles for a certain look. (Though I know that skins tones are by far the most difficult tones to adjust - and especially with these tones I have little experience).
Anway - if you want to compare output quality of V3 and V4 I think you should set filmcurve to "linear respeonse" and camera profile to "no color correction" ... otherwise you probably compare curves, settings, profiles... not the essential "quality".
-
Well I think 4.5 is better for sure . I always use the same profiles and such and in some beach shots I did in version 4 I had a really tough time on color balance . After loading 4.5 it was dead on, now obviously it is subjective but after doing a lot of processing of older images i did before 4.5 just seems better on detail, color and such. One thing for sure it is not worse , so I view that as a plus. It overall just seems better when it comes to image quality and that maybe subjective but I feel pretty good about the update and tethered seems faster along with processing . So as far as the program and the extra features i do like it a lot more. I am using a P25 plus back but I have images from the P30 plus and P45 plus back in the same shoot as well and they also seem better. It may have something to do with the Plus backs because there is some technology advancements there that are now supported by 4.5 . We need a Phase person to confirm that
-
Maybe it just shows how extremely well IQ in V3 already was (and in V4 still is) ;-)
I do not count very much on comments about colors (may that be skin or outdoor daylight tones) as I think it totaly depends on the settings and the camera profiles. Using e.g. V3 DB or Pro (or V4) with an on board color editor and being unhappy with certain tones... I ask "why" as it is quite easy to create profiles for a certain look. (Though I know that skins tones are by far the most difficult tones to adjust - and especially with these tones I have little experience).
Anway - if you want to compare output quality of V3 and V4 I think you should set filmcurve to "linear respeonse" and camera profile to "no color correction" ... otherwise you probably compare curves, settings, profiles... not the essential "quality".
I don't use linear tone curves as thats not how I process my files, if there able to get more out of my files by making better tone curves and better profiles thats fine with me. I've never created custom profiles for my camera, I always hear color geeks say that they are only relevant for the exact lighting conditions that were present when making the profile so as soon as you change that then they become invalid?
-
I always hear color geeks say that they are only relevant for the exact lighting conditions that were present when making the profile so as soon as you change that then they become invalid?
Nonsense (but I don't want to step in a color management debate in the MFDB forum or elsewhere here on LuLa).
-
Nonsense (but I don't want to step in a color management debate in the MFDB forum or elsewhere here on LuLa).
Do you want to try and explain? It won't be much of a debate, I really know almost nothing about creating or using a camera profile though it certainly sounds interesting.
-
I have a friend that has the expensive software and calibration tools and profiled my camera. I have that profile installed alongside the PhaseOne profiles and try it accordingly with the image I'm working on. There is a difference and in some cases it is the best profile. When shooting installations whit white walls the EASY GRAY profile is very useful,,
What I want to know how to use is the COLOR EDITOR.. anyone knows where to get a PDF on how to do it? the C1 4.5 User Manual does not even mention it...
-
What I want to know how to use is the COLOR EDITOR.. anyone knows where to get a PDF on how to do it? the C1 4.5 User Manual does not even mention it...
The Walter Borchenko Book (with CD) on Capture one explains, with worked examples, the colour editor. I found it helpful to say the least. This is a UK link which explains the content, no doubt you can google one locally.
http://www.teamworkphoto.com/index.php?mai...oducts_id=12703 (http://www.teamworkphoto.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=12703)
No commercial connection- I paid full price.
-
We offer over-the-web training. We send by FTP a packet of training/demo files, then using Leopard we can view/control your screen and using skype can talk for free. Not a sales pitch (well it is), but you should be aware that such training exists. My entire job, and my kin at various Value Added dealers, is to research/learn/problem-solve, and to work with many photographers using the hardware/software who find their own problems and solutions. For these reasons we are a very very good resource for such training.
We'll also be doing various free tutorials on the new tools in the coming weeks/months. But one-on-one training can't be beat. It's not free like the forums, but it is expert, and fast.
Walter's book was made for 3.X. YES it is a very good read and your dealer should be able to get you one for less than list (given that its for an older version), and YES it is still somewhat relevant in 4.5 Pro (most of the concepts translate, even if the details do not). But clearly its not as good as a guide/education/training specific to 4.5. Color Editor has many great uses that few people ever touch on (JR has spoken about this at length before). Great great tool, and even better in 4 than in 3.
Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One Dealer (http://www.captureintegration.com)
Personal Portfolio (http://www.doug-peterson.com)
-
We offer over-the-web training. We send by FTP a packet of training/demo files, then using Leopard we can view/control your screen and using skype can talk for free. Not a sales pitch (well it is), but you should be aware that such training exists. My entire job, and my kin at various Value Added dealers, is to research/learn/problem-solve, and to work with many photographers using the hardware/software who find their own problems and solutions. For these reasons we are a very very good resource for such training.
We'll also be doing various free tutorials on the new tools in the coming weeks/months. But one-on-one training can't be beat. It's not free like the forums, but it is expert, and fast.
Walter's book was made for 3.X. YES it is a very good read and your dealer should be able to get you one for less than list (given that its for an older version), and YES it is still somewhat relevant in 4.5 Pro (most of the concepts translate, even if the details do not). But clearly its not as good as a guide/education/training specific to 4.5. Color Editor has many great uses that few people ever touch on (JR has spoken about this at length before). Great great tool, and even better in 4 than in 3.
Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One Dealer (http://www.captureintegration.com)
Personal Portfolio (http://www.doug-peterson.com)
So what does the color editor do? I can't find anything about it anywhere?
-
So what does the color editor do? I can't find anything about it anywhere?
Technically speaking: Color editor modifies the ICC profile used to interpret colors coming out the back. It is low in the processing stack, so it allows color correction/enhancement/modification prior to exposure/contrast/sharpening etc allowing for style-independent color modification. This leads to less artifacts in shadows/highlights and less cross-over failure and color bleed issues in enlargements.
Plain speaking: It's a flexible and fast way to modify colors while staying in the raw file. It makes the color change before anything else happens to the file so it's great quality and saves tons of time in workflow.
It can modify lightness allowing you to use it as a selective dodge/burn tool (e.g. lightening the shadow side of a blue couch while leaving the rest of it alone. It can modify hue allowing selective changes in color (push a green dress on a model more towards yellow). It can modify saturation allowing you to turn the volume up on a particular shade, or turn it down. I use that all the time to remove distracting background elements (e.g. a bright green purse) in event situations.
All of this can be applied to incoming captures as a modified-and-saved ICC profile or as a set of adjustments to the existing capture. It can be batch applied to 10 or 1000 images very quickly.
Since skin tones are almost entirely a derivative of ICC profiles, this also means you can push skin tones in any direction that you personally find "appealing". JR sometimes uses it to cool an overall image via WB and then bring skin tones back towards warm/natural via Color Editor.
Very very powerful. Few used it in 3.X because it was hidden and cumbersome. It's much easier to learn and use now; though, as I said, to get the most out of it a bit of paid instruction specific to your workflow and imagery/style wouldn't hurt :-).
Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One Dealer (http://www.captureintegration.com)
Personal Portfolio (http://www.doug-peterson.com)
Quick Edit: yes, you can do 99% of this in Photoshop in post, but if you learn the tool right you will save TONS of time, and be uncoupled from the style you process the file in. The same photoshop batch action will not work on an image when you change the WB and contrast. Also, yes you can do this in lightroom/aperture/etc when converting raws, but this (to my knowledge) is the only way to save your results in a cross-platform-cross-application ICC profile and is specifically tuned to the Phase One backs (though it does a fine job on other raw files too). In any case it is MORE than worth a look if you've never used it.
-
Technically speaking: Color editor modifies the ICC profile used to interpret colors coming out the back. It is low in the processing stack, so it allows color correction/enhancement/modification prior to exposure/contrast/sharpening etc allowing for style-independent color modification. This leads to less artifacts in shadows/highlights and less cross-over failure and color bleed issues in enlargements.
Plain speaking: It's a flexible and fast way to modify colors while staying in the raw file. It makes the color change before anything else happens to the file so it's great quality and saves tons of time in workflow.
It can modify lightness allowing you to use it as a selective dodge/burn tool (e.g. lightening the shadow side of a blue couch while leaving the rest of it alone. It can modify hue allowing selective changes in color (push a green dress on a model more towards yellow). It can modify saturation allowing you to turn the volume up on a particular shade, or turn it down. I use that all the time to remove distracting background elements (e.g. a bright green purse) in event situations.
All of this can be applied to incoming captures as a modified-and-saved ICC profile or as a set of adjustments to the existing capture. It can be batch applied to 10 or 1000 images very quickly.
Since skin tones are almost entirely a derivative of ICC profiles, this also means you can push skin tones in any direction that you personally find "appealing". JR sometimes uses it to cool an overall image via WB and then bring skin tones back towards warm/natural via Color Editor.
Very very powerful. Few used it in 3.X because it was hidden and cumbersome. It's much easier to learn and use now; though, as I said, to get the most out of it a bit of paid instruction specific to your workflow and imagery/style wouldn't hurt :-).
Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One Dealer (http://www.captureintegration.com)
Personal Portfolio (http://www.doug-peterson.com)
Quick Edit: yes, you can do 99% of this in Photoshop in post, but if you learn the tool right you will save TONS of time, and be uncoupled from the style you process the file in. The same photoshop batch action will not work on an image when you change the WB and contrast. Also, yes you can do this in lightroom/aperture/etc when converting raws, but this (to my knowledge) is the only way to save your results in a cross-platform-cross-application ICC profile and is specifically tuned to the Phase One backs (though it does a fine job on other raw files too). In any case it is MORE than worth a look if you've never used it.
How interesting. Thanks. I shall have a good look at that. This V4.5 has some nice things in and I do like the IQ I get from it, it will be a great program when they get the focus window back in.
-
All of this can be applied to incoming captures as a modified-and-saved ICC profile or as a set of adjustments to the existing capture. It can be batch applied to 10 or 1000 images very quickly.
Cool thing in V4 is that color editor is now part of the tools. In V3 the color editor window has to stay opened to apply the adjustments to the image if you didn't want to safe them as a new icc profile (and afterwards load the icc profile in color management options). Now - as part of the tools - the difference between "safe as preset" and "safe as icc profile" is unmistakably clear.
Thanks for the hint that adjustements of the color editor are done prior to other adjustments (which makes sense as it works on the level of the camera icc profile). Wasn't aware of that by now. Just prefered the color editor over the selective color correction in Photoshop as it is somehow more consistent and more understandable. Feels more like a "photographic" tool as a "digital imaging" tool to me.
Anyway... the color editor is one of the very strong tools in C1.
-
it will be a great program when they get the focus window back in.
I have read a number of posts referring to this issue, which if I understand it correctly, refers to the initial preview image not being sharp. But I am puzzled because on my computers (mac 10.5.5 on a 15 inch and a 30 inch cinema display) the preview is very crisp. It does blur momentarily whenever I apply a change of any sort (white bal, exposure, saturation etc etc) but immediately clears and becomes sharp again. This is true whether I'm at full view, 10% or 100%.
Am I misunderstanding the problem or am I just lucky??? Or has it something to do with the video card?
Bill
-
I have The Walter Borchenko Book, I even met him personally when I was in New York, but I moved and don't know where I put the book.
It is also made for C1 3x
What I want is a simple PDF that reminds me how to use it... it is not very intuitive --the fact of it is that I studied the ultimate book and can't make it work in C1 4.5
The other thin is that I have asked photographers that know C1 up and down and don't use the COLOR EDITOR at all...
What I did was to put a technical support ticket with Phase.
-
I have The Walter Borchenko Book, I even met him personally when I was in New York, but I moved and don't know where I put the book.
It is also made for C1 3x
What I want is a simple PDF that reminds me how to use it... it is not very intuitive --the fact of it is that I studied the ultimate book and can't make it work in C1 4.5
The other thin is that I have asked photographers that know C1 up and down and don't use the COLOR EDITOR at all...
What I did was to put a technical support ticket with Phase.
Regarding how to use the Color Editor: There are some nice tutorial videos at www.phaseone.com/4 . They are free.
If you click Go for PRO -> Video Tutorials -> Color Tool, there's a nice piece on how to use the Color Editor. I know it isn't quite what you looked for, but it may get you started.
-
Is that for C1 4.5 ?? I'll check it out, thanks...
Regarding how to use the Color Editor: There are some nice tutorial videos at www.phaseone.com/4 . They are free.
If you click Go for PRO -> Video Tutorials -> Color Tool, there's a nice piece on how to use the Color Editor. I know it isn't quite what you looked for, but it may get you started.
-
Is that for C1 4.5 ?? I'll check it out, thanks...
Yes, those are for 4.5.
-
I watched all the tutorials. --I could recognize Walter Borchenko's voice--, this is exactly what I wanted THANKS. I get the idea of the COLOR EDITOR it is a good thing to know and I will probably use it soon.
This is a vast program, and it is good to have someone like Walter to give you the grand tour...
Yes, those are for 4.5.
-
I processed the same image with 3.7.9 and 4.5PRO and compared the two images and saw no difference in Image Quality. Also even the most unhappy of posters I have read talking about 4 mention that IQ is good.
But at least one experienced busy photographer has found that "C1pro 3.7.4 was far better... in terms of micro contrats, cripsness, details, noise, shadows, quality/richness of colors…"
What is your experience so far?
Hi all
I am the so called "experienced busy photographer", thank you for such good qualification Leonardo! But you missed the fact (or maybe I didn't mention) that the comparison I made was with 1DsM3 files, hence images made with/thru a debayering filter as opposed to MF files…
As I am stubborn, I still continue to work and try to learn CO 4.5 as I see no reason for it to give less IQ than 3.7… needs to find the right settings…