Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Capture One Q&A => Topic started by: mtakeda on October 07, 2018, 06:20:56 am
-
If you will please tell me the advantage of Capture One over Adobe only from the point of processing capacities excluding the cost aspect. How about black and white aspect?
-
Much better color fidelity, esp with skin tones from Nikon cameras.
-
Thank you. Anything I would like to know is if it works with Helicon stacking or it does the same thing within ?
-
I have been very tempted by C1 since Kevin demonstrated it to me, and I played with it quite a bit, in Antarctica. It's fast, which is nice, its conversions appeared excellent and its use of layers is an interesting concept. The single thing which prevented me from changing to it from LR is that it lacks a history palette. I don't know why, and I gather it's not impossible that it will in due course acquire one, but for me at least that's a killer.
Jeremy
-
This is worth a read;
http://4bcokm12bvu948gi7312gnab.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/Lightroom%20vs%20Capture%20One%20Pro.pdf
I've got both. LR 6 is my main 'go to' program, but either can deliver great results without too many difficulties.
I find LR's DAM functions easier to use and, as Jeremy says, the lack of a good history option frequently annoys.
-
If you ever tether then it’s a no brainer. C1 is a very good tethering tool. LR is simply awful. You can use watched folders and so on but actually to be honest you have to say LR has no usable tethering functionality worthy of the name.
Sony cameras simply give much better colour with C1 in my opinion. A missing piece of the puzzle as it were. I also prefer the workflow and tools.
-
I had a longtime client that insisted on Adobe products and I humored them for a short period of time. We had a lifestyle shoot and the images came up in 8-10 seconds which drove everyone crazy. I launched CaptureOne and the images came up in 2-3 seconds, they said use whatever you're comfortable with. I find it to be faster all around, better color control and the output is beautiful to name a few. I still use CC2018 for Photoshop but have no use for Lightroom.
-
Hi
Well its fast, tethers well ,colours are spot on and it can be a non subscription model which means its cheaper overall than Adobe products and did I mention its fast.
Regards
Jon
-
Thank you all for the input. It took me sometime to be able to use the layer in PS and make me nervous if I can use the layer in CP 1 but I assume I can do it in the end but so far I do not know if I can use the Helicon or some other way to do focus staving with CP 1.
-
This is worth a read;
http://4bcokm12bvu948gi7312gnab.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/Lightroom%20vs%20Capture%20One%20Pro.pdf
I've got both. LR 6 is my main 'go to' program, but either can deliver great results without too many difficulties.
I find LR's DAM functions easier to use and, as Jeremy says, the lack of a good history option frequently annoys.
Very very informative. It is eye opening. Thank you.
-
So you don't have to use Lightroom's maddening cataloging system
-
I have LR CC and Capture 1 Pro for Sony and use either or, in some instances I prefer LR and in others C1.
I always use LR to download my photos from the memory card as it it a simple process, I prefer the LR print module.
If I had to only have one over the other I'd pick LR, overall I find it easier to use all things considered.
-
So you don't have to use Lightroom's maddening cataloging system
Maddening for you perhaps, the reason so many others use it, need it, want it. Or there's ACR.
I'm with Kiwi Paul; the print module alone is worth the price of admission. I find nothing maddening about the DAM capabilities but that's me. Perfect no. But anyone who suggests any software product is, probably shouldn't be listened to.... ;)
-
Maddening for you perhaps, the reason so many others use it, need it, want it. Or there's ACR.
I'm with Kiwi Paul; the print module alone is worth the price of admission. I find nothing maddening about the DAM capabilities but that's me. Perfect no. But anyone who suggests any software product is, probably shouldn't be listened to.... ;)
Thank you very much. I feel this assessment along the one by Kiwi Paul is very reasonable and convincing to let me stay with LR besides I do not enjoy another learning curve. Thank for all again.
-
Thank you very much. I feel this assessment along the one by Kiwi Paul is very reasonable and convincing to let me stay with LR besides I do not enjoy another learning curve. Thank for all again.
I will add that if you have a DNG workflow, C1 is a deal breaker. At least when I looked it over.
-
I made the switch to C1 years ago and have never looked back. There are many advantages I could cite, but one of the biggest is C1's layer model - and being able to give the layers descriptive names. Layers let me keep track of my edits, see their individual masks, turn them on or off individually, and I can go back anytime later and easily retrace my steps and make improvements. It's huge.
-
I made the switch to C1 years ago and have never looked back. There are many advantages I could cite, but one of the biggest is C1's layer model - and being able to give the layers descriptive names. Layers let me keep track of my edits, see their individual masks, turn them on or off individually, and I can go back anytime later and easily retrace my steps and make improvements. It's huge.
How do they differ from layers in Photoshop?
-
I have been very tempted by C1 since Kevin demonstrated it to me, and I played with it quite a bit, in Antarctica. It's fast, which is nice, its conversions appeared excellent and its use of layers is an interesting concept. The single thing which prevented me from changing to it from LR is that it lacks a history palette. I don't know why, and I gather it's not impossible that it will in due course acquire one, but for me at least that's a killer.
Jeremy
I used LR since V1 but never found the history function of any interest for three reasons:
1) LR's history recorded every tiny irrelevant detail. Increased brush size, decreased brush size, increased feather etc, etc.
2) In a pixel editor (PS) history makes sense. With a parametric editor, for me, it does not. If you decide an area is too bright you can step back in history until you find the brightening step but then you lose all other edits. With a parametric editor you simply darken the bright area, no need for history.
3) Layers allow you to organise your workflow into discreet steps which "contain" your edits for that area / type of edit, which combined with 2, further limits the usefulness of a history function.
Ian
-
I will add that if you have a DNG workflow, C1 is a deal breaker. At least when I looked it over.
What DNG issues? C1 works fine with DNG.
Ian
-
I made the switch to C1 years ago and have never looked back. There are many advantages I could cite, but one of the biggest is C1's layer model - and being able to give the layers descriptive names. Layers let me keep track of my edits, see their individual masks, turn them on or off individually, and I can go back anytime later and easily retrace my steps and make improvements. It's huge.
I agree, besides the top-notch Raw conversion quality, the adjustment layers for all tools is a significant feature.
Hopefully, the next version of C1 will expand on it with some kind of intelligent Luminosity Masking.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Very very informative. It is eye opening. Thank you.
Yes, I found it interesting. I wonder if this part is the reason peopel say they prefer the "look" of C1 images?
"I would describe Capture One’s contrast setting as producing a more film-like look. When Capture One encounters high-contrast subjects, however, it adaptively applies a softer contrast curve."
Ian
-
How do they differ from layers in Photoshop?
Although similar results can be achieved in both, C1 doesn't require Photoshop (!) and (unlike earlier incarnations of Photoshop) therefore the adjustments are part of the Raw conversion process. That's significant because C1 doesn't use a fixed workingspace. The adjustments can also be applied to several very powerful tools like the Advanced Color Editor with a specific mask, either one tool alone on in concert with several other tools at the same time per adjustment layer. That also makes it easy to create several adjustment layers with different tools, at different settings, for different purposes, that can be switched on/off as required for those purposes.
Cheers,
Bart
-
What DNG issues? C1 works fine with DNG.
Ian
Oh it 'works' but not fully unless things have changed since I last tried to use custom .DCP profile:
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=97957.0 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=97957.0)[/size]
Other 'oddities":
http://www.markgaler.com/top-10-reasons-i-wont-be-switching-to-capture-one-pro (http://www.markgaler.com/top-10-reasons-i-wont-be-switching-to-capture-one-pro)[/font]
https://fstoppers.com/education/confessions-lightroom-user-trying-capture-one-pro-workflow-153879 (https://fstoppers.com/education/confessions-lightroom-user-trying-capture-one-pro-workflow-153879)
-
I made the switch to C1 years ago and have never looked back. There are many advantages I could cite, but one of the biggest is C1's layer model - and being able to give the layers descriptive names. Layers let me keep track of my edits, see their individual masks, turn them on or off individually, and I can go back anytime later and easily retrace my steps and make improvements. It's huge.
I agree the layers functionality is excellent for the reasons you described, the adjustment brush in LR can achieve similar results but doesn't have the full range of adjustments available and if you have several different adjustments it can be tricky going back to edit them trying to locate the correct "pin".
-
How do they differ from layers in Photoshop?
Layers in C1 are adjustment layers only and you are still in a parametric editor. The way to localize edits is by drawing masks (analogous to layer masks) for the region where you want the apply the edit. Layers in photoshop can be adjustment layers or bitmap layers, which increase the size of the file.
If Adobe put the effort, they could make the adjustment brushes in LR work like the layers in C1.
What is missing in LR adjustment brushes?
- No way to assign a name or a label
- There is no way to select an adjustment brush that is just below another adjusment brush
- There is only a limited set of adjustments that you can use (HSL panel for instance)
-
Layers in C1 are adjustment layers only and you are still in a parametric editor. The way to localize edits is by drawing masks (analogous to layer masks) for the region where you want the apply the edit. Layers in photoshop can be adjustment layers or bitmap layers, which increase the size of the file.
If Adobe put the effort, they could make the adjustment brushes in LR work like the layers in C1.
What is missing in LR adjustment brushes?
- No way to assign a name or a label
- There is no way to select an adjustment brush that is just below another adjusmebt brush
- There is only a limited set of adjustments that you can use (HSL panel for instance)
I'll add the ability to adjust Layer opacity at any point.
Also, what I like is adding filled Layers in Capture One, so you can fine tune an edit and then brush in / or erase where needed.
Oh, and Styles as a Layer with variable opacity is also a good feature.
Finally, Filled Layers with a Color Grade from the Color Balance tool.
-
Oh it 'works' but not fully unless things have changed since I last tried to use custom .DCP profile:
https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=97957.0 (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=97957.0)[/size]
Other 'oddities":
http://www.markgaler.com/top-10-reasons-i-wont-be-switching-to-capture-one-pro (http://www.markgaler.com/top-10-reasons-i-wont-be-switching-to-capture-one-pro)[/font]
https://fstoppers.com/education/confessions-lightroom-user-trying-capture-one-pro-workflow-153879 (https://fstoppers.com/education/confessions-lightroom-user-trying-capture-one-pro-workflow-153879)
The last article is from Capture One 9, we are now on V11.
I agree if you are sold on a DNG workflow, then Adobe products will handle it better, which is no surprise as it is an Adobe format after all.
One man's oddity is another's delight I am sure. :)
-
A strong case in being made for Capture One. I currently use ACR + Photoshop. If I downloaded Capture One, and some video tutorials, how long would it take for me to become a proficient user? Could I learn it in a weekend?
-
Oh, and Styles as a Layer with variable opacity is also a good feature.
That’s the icing on the cake! :)
-
A strong case in being made for Capture One. I currently use ACR + Photoshop. If I downloaded Capture One, and some video tutorials, how long would it take for me to become a proficient user? Could I learn it in a weekend?
Tough to say. First how smart are you and what do you consider proficient? I think I am of average intelligence but quite experienced. Took me about a day of fiddling and watching youtube to be able to produce results I was happy with and to create a rudimentary workflow.
I enjoy working in C1. The tools match the way I think and see. It kind of reminds me a little of a weird old program called Live Picture from the mid 1990s that I really loved working with.
There are some things I would like to see improved such as luminosity masking as someone has already said on this thread. The lack of a history palette is meaningless to me. Never used it in LR. I dont see the point. I generally know what I want and will edit until I have it. If the image is too dark I brighten it, if later I think its now too bright I go and darken it a bit. I just dont go back to a history state. I thought that might be a way to work but I never got into it. It was only when someone mentioned the lack of a history in C1 that I actually realised it wasn't there.
-
The last article is from Capture One 9, we are now on V11.
I agree if you are sold on a DNG workflow, then Adobe products will handle it better, which is no surprise as it is an Adobe format after all.
As is TIFF (owned and controlled by Adobe); do they handle that correctly? Either fully and correctly follow the spec or don’t support it at all! Does newer versions of C1 do this for DNG or not?
-
A strong case in being made for Capture One. I currently use ACR + Photoshop. If I downloaded Capture One, and some video tutorials, how long would it take for me to become a proficient user? Could I learn it in a weekend?
Take a look at learn.phaseone.com and use the filters to go by experience level or subject. Enjoy!
-
The last article is from Capture One 9, we are now on V11.
Since you appear to represent Phase One, perhaps you can provide the software change logs that indicate DNG support (so to speak), from V9 to current has been addressed? IF SO, I'd revisit the software again. IF NOT, well, maybe you guys should fix or stop with DNG?
-
A strong case in being made for Capture One. I currently use ACR + Photoshop. If I downloaded Capture One, and some video tutorials, how long would it take for me to become a proficient user? Could I learn it in a weekend?
As was said it does depend a bit on how proficient you want to be after the weekend. I was making basic edits that I was (am still) happy with after a couple of days. I used to use Photoshop for everything (in my scanned film days) so I didn't need to learn how to use layers and masks - just the controls in C1. After a few months on C1 I am still learning but I would be still learning LR too I am sure.
One of the things that I have really enjoyed in C1 is the colour editing capabilities - still got a lot to learn to get better but it is something that I am sure I can get better results easier in C1 than LR once I have some more experience.
-
I used LR since V1 but never found the history function of any interest for three reasons:
<reasons snipped>
What I used to use it for was when revisiting an image that I thought could be better I would embark on a course of action and if it didn't work out I used the history to return to where I started in one step. Yes, undo would get me the same thing - just after a lot of clicking. Yes, a virtual copy would have also worked - and possibly better too. I'm not saying history is needed just how I used it. Now in C1 I use a second variant to accomplish the same thing. Frankly, it's a better way to go.
-
Now in C1 I use a second variant to accomplish the same thing. Frankly, it's a better way to go.
I also do not use history, but I do use Variants. I see no need for a record of every little tweak I do while honing in on a setting. But for testing different approaches, Variants are much more useful. CaptureOne additionally offers to (temporarily) roll back changes per slider or per tool with a single (ALT-) mouse-click, which makes it easy to isolate the contribution of that control or tool to the final image.
And that is one of the pitfalls for new users. They attempt to replicate a prior workflow they taught themselves while circumnavigating peculiarities (or a specific MO) in a given program. No need to try and do the same in a program that offers 'better' ways of achieving things.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I agree, besides the top-notch Raw conversion quality, the adjustment layers for all tools is a significant feature.
Hopefully, the next version of C1 will expand on it with some kind of intelligent Luminosity Masking.
Cheers,
Bart
Can you elaborate a bit on what "intelligent Luminosity Masking" would be and do?
-
What I used to use it for was when revisiting an image that I thought could be better I would embark on a course of action and if it didn't work out I used the history to return to where I started in one step. Yes, undo would get me the same thing - just after a lot of clicking. Yes, a virtual copy would have also worked - and possibly better too. I'm not saying history is needed just how I used it. Now in C1 I use a second variant to accomplish the same thing. Frankly, it's a better way to go.
That's just a superficial use of LR's History log. It has two main roles:
- An Undo that works even if you've closed LR numerous times
- A way of setting the Before side of the Before / After view for fine tuning - hit Y, drag any previous editing step into the Before side
Variants aren't equivalent to LR's History. LR has variants too, called virtual copies, and you can also use them as a workaround for whatever History-like activity you choose. But in its History panel LR simply has a valuable feature that C1 lacks.
-
If you will please tell me the advantage of Capture One over Adobe only from the point of processing capacities excluding the cost aspect. How about black and white aspect?
Download it, watch a few of the excellent tutorials and despite what the rabid Adobe fanboys tell you it's great program.
-
Download it, watch a few of the excellent tutorials and despite what the rabid Adobe fanboys tell you it's great program.
And I thought the C1 users were the rabid ones. It kind of depends on which forums you visit.
-
Can you elaborate a bit on what "intelligent Luminosity Masking" would be and do?
Hi Jim,
Luminosity Masking is making selections of regions in the image, based on the scene luminosity. That allows to select e.g. Shadows for an Adjustment layer Mask, based only on Luminosity, not Color. So irrespective of the shadow color, the same selection can be made for different images with the same exposure.
The intelligent part would e.g. allow selecting an adjacent region to those shadows selected earlier, say dark midtones, or everything between shadows and highlights (threshold is user selectable or based on histogram counts), with a smooth transition between such adjacent selections, thus allowing a different adjustment to those regions without affecting the shadows (besides the smooth transition between). Tony Kuyper created such functionality for Photoshop, based on Photoshop actions and scripts (http://goodlight.us/writing/videos/videos-1.html).
Other Smart/intelligent options could be based on different Luminosity clustering strategies, or Color and region clustering strategies (e.g. face recognition).
Combined with the possibility to manually adjust the masks, that would be something.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hi Jim,
Luminosity Masking is making selections of regions in the image, based on the scene luminosity.
Sorry but I have to ask. How does C1 know/measure scene luminosity? ;) Luminosity is a measure of the total radiant energy from a body no?
Lightness perhaps?
-
Sorry but I have to ask. How does C1 know/measure scene luminosity? ;) Luminosity is a measure of the total radiant energy from a body no?
Lightness perhaps?
Depends on how one incorporates Gamma precompensation.
One could even use Luminance (with or without gamma). Lots of creative possibilities.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Depends on how one incorporates Gamma precompensation.
One could even use Luminance (with or without gamma). Lots of creative possibilities.
Cheers,
Bart
Well perhaps way OT. I don't see how the software knows anything about the total radiant energy from a body. It has nothing to do with what a human perceives but rather describes the total radiant energy, such as watts/second of a source (the surface of a radiating object like a display), cd/m^2, no?
-
Well perhaps way OT. I don't see how the software knows anything about the total radiant energy from a body.
Indeed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminosity_function
Cheers,
Bart