Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Capture One Q&A => Topic started by: jeremyrh on March 25, 2017, 05:23:10 am
-
When I have seen TV shows about fashion shoots - e.g. the Pirelli Peter Lindbergh video - it seems that Capture One is the software being used, rather than say Lightroom. Is that the case, or just a skewed sample? If so - why is that? Better support for tethered shooting? Better handling of skin tones? Some other random thing?
Or is my observation wrong to start with? :-)
-
Better support for tethered shooting? Better handling of skin tones?
Yes and yes. Also, P1 hardware has a large presence in the fashion industry so it's natural they'd use C1.
-
CaptureOne Pro loads faster, has better color rendering and more detail in the shadow to start with.
-
Yes and yes. Also, P1 hardware has a large presence in the fashion industry so it's natural they'd use C1.
True, but if they are shooting with any other medium format camera than P1 then they won't be using C1 because it doesn't support them. Hasselblad will be using Phocus for example.
-
Hi,
One small point that James Russel (AKA 'bcooter') made once is that if you send an image to retouchers the first thing they do is to open it in ACR.
James was shooting Phase One mostly and used Capture One, not least because it worked that well with tethered shooting, but switched to Lightroom in part because he had licensing and hardware related issues with C1.
James Russel now has Leica S2 as favourite camera system and Leica S2 is out of favour with C1.
With Hasselblad, it seems that Adobe has implemented Hasselblad's colour model in Lightroom, at least for the X1D. Some users have reported that they get almost identical colours out of Lightroom or Phocus with the X1D.
Best regards
Erik
Best regards
Erik
-
Hi,
One small point that James Russel (AKA 'bcooter') made once is that if you send an image to retouchers the first thing they do is to open it in ACR.
James was shooting Phase One mostly and used Capture One, not least because it worked that well with tethered shooting, but switched to Lightroom in part because he had licensing and hardware related issues with C1.
James Russel now has Leica S2 as favourite camera system and Leica S2 is out of favour with C1.
With Hasselblad, it seems that Adobe has implemented Hasselblad's colour model in Lightroom, at least for the X1D. Some users have reported that they get almost identical colours out of Lightroom or Phocus with the X1D.
Best regards
Erik
Best regards
Erik
Hi Erik,
That simply not true as a blanket statement. 'Some' retouchers may go to ACR but an equal amount if not a majority will go to Capture One.
-
I hope that the arrival of the Hasselblad XD1 and of the Fuji GFX will make Capture One to reconsider their policy. I do not think anybody planning to buy one of those cameras will give up just because it is not supported by Capture One; I, for one, will not.
-
Hi David,
This is the statement I had in mind:
"I believed for a long time that c-1 processed out dslr files better than lightroom, even went so far as to buy our retouchers c-1 liscense.
They never used them as most professional retouchers process out everything in photoshop, then get to work."
Here is the link: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=96424.msg790702#msg790702
Having this from one of the leading commercial photographers in the US may be interesting in the context, wouldn't it?
If you are not familiar with James, here is his homepage: http://www.russellrutherford.com
Best regards
Erik
Hi Erik,
That simply not true as a blanket statement. 'Some' retouchers may go to ACR but an equal amount if not a majority will go to Capture One.
-
With Hasselblad, it seems that Adobe has implemented Hasselblad's colour model in Lightroom, at least for the X1D. Some users have reported that they get almost identical colours out of Lightroom or Phocus with the X1D.
Hasselblad certainly have a tether plug in for Lightroom. I don't use it and I don't know anyone who does, but there may be plenty. As for colour, well there is a post somewhere on LuLa where X1D pictures were posted from Phocus, Lightroom and C1. Phocus was more accurate than C1, which was slightly more accurate than Lightroom.
For me I use Phocus to tether, browse in my catalogue program, which is Aperture and then the heros go to Photoshop. If the colour is critical you export out of Phocus as a TIF.
I just found the is the comparison of files of the XiD. Note the skin tone of the model.
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=116643.0
This may be worth a read as general interest.
https://jrphoto.wordpress.com/spotlight-interview-fashion-beauty-photographer-peter-coulson/
-
Hi,
What I have written was:
With Hasselblad, it seems that Adobe has implemented Hasselblad's colour model in Lightroom, at least for the X1D. Some users have reported that they get almost identical colours out of Lightroom or Phocus with the X1D.
Not a single word about tethering.
Here is the best raw file I have from the X1D, courtesy Tim Ashley, processed in Lightroom and Phocus. WB on grey stone area shown below
Best regards
Erik
Hasselblad certainly have a tether plug in for Lightroom. I don't use it and I don't know anyone who does, but there may be plenty. As for colour, well there is a post somewhere on LuLa where X1D pictures were posted from Phocus, Lightroom and C1. Phocus was more accurate than C1, which was slightly more accurate than Lightroom.
For me I use Phocus to tether, browse in my catalogue program, which is Aperture and then the heros go to Photoshop. If the colour is critical you export out of Phocus as a TIF.
I just found the is the comparison of files of the XiD. Note the skin tone of the model.
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=116643.0
This may be worth a read as general interest.
https://jrphoto.wordpress.com/spotlight-interview-fashion-beauty-photographer-peter-coulson/
-
Not a single word about tethering.
What I was getting at was that Hasselblad is obviously happy to work with Adobe if they have gone to the trouble of making a tether plugin for Lightroom. I don't know what features it has though.
-
Hi David,
This is the statement I had in mind:
"I believed for a long time that c-1 processed out dslr files better than lightroom, even went so far as to buy our retouchers c-1 liscense.
They never used them as most professional retouchers process out everything in photoshop, then get to work."
Here is the link: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=96424.msg790702#msg790702
Having this from one of the leading commercial photographers in the US may be interesting in the context, wouldn't it?
If you are not familiar with James, here is his homepage: http://www.russellrutherford.com
Best regards
Erik
Eric, I am happy to put you in touch with a bunch of high end retouchers who use Capture One. Yes, I aware of James, but he is one photographer (an excellent one of course) but his experience my vary depending on who he uses for retouching.
-
Hi David,
Just to put things a bit into perspetive:
- I live in Sweden, a country where I think Hasselblad is dominant.
- I own a Phase One back, an old one, P45+.
- I have never met a single MFD user in person, except Hans Kruse who was instructor on some Phase One workshop
- I have never met a single C1 user in person, but some friends on GetDPI and LuLa are C1 users.
- I have never seen an article in Sweden about any professional photographer using Phase One cameras, and it seems that non Phase One MFD users are locked out from the pleasure to use C1.
- It may be that MFD market has just grown quite a bit larger with the X1D and the GFX, neither of which are supported by Capture One. If you expect that potential buyers of X1D, GFX, Leica, Pentax or Hasselblad will choose Phase one instead of Capture One, I guess you are wrong, especially as it seems that Lightroom actually implements Hasselblad's colour processing pipeline.
So, yes, what I see from my horizon is quite different than the US high end fashion market, but I happen to live in the real world and in that world Phase One and C1 stuff is not very abundant.
Getting back to James Russel, he is a hard working pro who used to be a Phase One enthusiast, but it seems that he has lost most of his interest in Phase One products in the latest few years. Undoubtedly, the lack of support for Leica-S mattered a lot.
One of the points James made that the retouchers he works with just don't use C1. He is a leading photographer, so I guess he works with leading professionals in the business.
A point James also used to make is that all production they do includes both stills and video. So he uses Red and some Canon video cameras or a Panasonic GH4, another of his favourite systems. At some point he stated that all the still cameras he uses, at that time Canon 5DIII, Leica S2 and Panasonic GH3 costs less than a single body from Phase One.
So, in that case, Phase One lost a very enthusiastic customer to what is known as reality.
Best regards
Erik
Eric, I am happy to put you in touch with a bunch of high end retouchers who use Capture One. Yes, I aware of James, but he is one photographer (an excellent one of course) but his experience my vary depending on who he uses for retouching.
-
Just to put things a bit into perspetive:
- I live
- I own
- I have never
- I have never
- I have never
- It may be
what I see from my horizon
maybe it's about time to put yourself into perspective...
-
As a fashion shooter for the past 37-years, I can safely say that C1 is not the only program used by fashion shooters. I started using C1 when it was first introduced to process the original Canon 1D files. It was the best conversion program out there at the time. Times change. For conversions, I find it more convoluted to process RAW files than in earlier years. Tethered, it's "OK", but I find it slows me down. (Lightroom is even worse when tethering, except still-life. For both, this is because of the "overhead" required to convert RAW on the fly while you shoot. I have issues with both crashing when shooting tethered quickly.)
In reality, for my workflow, EOS Utility is far more stable, and I shoot RAW+JPEG. You may wonder why? The camera is doing a much faster job on the fly than the computer. I also don't believe in doing "refined" TIFF images for every frame I shoot when I may shoot 300-400 frames on a shot and the client wants one final image. Most of my clients prefer I do a final conversion of their select, and those who don't, prefer to work with the in-camera JPEG while having the RAW as backup. I also have never found that C1 does that great a job with skin tones. I prefer the rendition from Lightroom. In a way, you can liken it to issues I had during the film days. Kodak EPN (what a crappy, flat film) was "more accurate", but in the end Fuji Provia had more pleasing color. The other advantage for Lightroom is the ability to create a custom camera profile with the X-rite Passport, whereas I have to rely upon C1 to give me what they have created.
The one area you can say C1 has become the "standard" is from the standpoint of tethering MF cameras. There just are no real alternatives if you tether, and as such, it is a captive market. Most of my work is on location, so I only tether for studio shoots. All these comments aside, every time C1 comes out with a new version, I test it to see if tethered shooting is any better than previously demonstrated.
-
Hi,
It happens to be my point of view. To change point of view we need to somewhere else.
Best regards
Erik
maybe it's about time to put yourself into perspective...
-
maybe it's about time to put yourself into perspective...
Why should he change his perspective? It's his personal experience and therefore perspective.