Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Kumar on December 20, 2006, 01:03:58 am
-
Okay. While we're putting Thierry and Yair on the mat, here's one more. Why haven't Sinar and Leaf come up with software for the PC? I know Leaf says Capture for Windows will be out "soon", and Sinar has had a beta for Windows out for a number of years.
What exactly seems to be the problem?
Cheers,
Kumar
-
probably to have much more work.......
incompatibilities, backward compatibilities, double as many bugs , to less manpower.....
and when they started with their programms mac was 95% standard in image editing.
i was working long time with pc only... and i am very happy that sinar forced me after 10years of resistance to move to mac finaly. like them so much more....
-
Phase and Hasselblad work with PC, as of course do most RAW programs and Photoshop and all the 35mm DSLRs. I'm not really talking about individual preferences. I simply want to know why they're not doing it.
Cheers,
Kumar
-
Phase and Hasselblad work with PC, as of course do most RAW programs and Photoshop and all the 35mm DSLRs. I'm not really talking about individual preferences. I simply want to know why they're not doing it.
Cheers,
Kumar
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91532\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Dear Kumar,
we have a window version in preparation with the new Exposure. Don't ask me for a release date, since the Mac version has of course priority, but the PC version will be there.
Hope this answers,
Thierry
-
Kumar hi,
We introduced the Windows version of Leaf Capture 10 in Photokina 2006 and it is currently going through Beta testing.
Release is expected in early 2007. No firm date as yet.
It is only recently that Windows has started to conform with the ICC standard with a proper colour engine.
PC systems also have a lot more variables than Macs: graphics cards, FireWire cards, power output etc., making it more difficult and time consuming when it comes to development and QA.
Leaf RAW files are (and have been for some time) compatible with several RAW converters (ACR/ LightRoom/ Bibble/ ACDSee) on both Mac and PC, providing a reliable solutions for those who do not shoot tethered.
Best
Yair
-
Okay. While we're putting Thierry and Yair on the mat, here's one more. Why haven't Sinar and Leaf come up with software for the PC? I know Leaf says Capture for Windows will be out "soon", and Sinar has had a beta for Windows out for a number of years.
What exactly seems to be the problem?
Cheers,
Kumar
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91525\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think someone else wrote earlier in another thread about the Leaf software that 'tongue in cheek' Leaf are hoping Lightroom will take over where they have left off.
As much as I like Lightroom and ACR - for me I get the best conversion from the Leaf software so I am hoping they realise that it is worth investing more in their software writing department.
I get the impression that either the buget in this department is low or the priority is low.
If the priority is low then that is a crazy mistake as many people are attracted to PhaseOne for example because of their software and workflow. An easy and well designed workflow is becoming more and more of a priority.
But if that budget is low because they cannot afford to pay for top-notch programmers then I guess that leaves us with either using software that converts well but is annoying to use - or using an inferior conversion software that has a better workflow... not great either way.
I hope it changes soon guys.
Andrew
-
Thierry and Yair,
I know the stock answers about the variables in PC hardware, and ICC in Windows. So do Phase, Imacon and the DSLR makers know something that Sinar and Leaf don't? Or do those guys have more problems on Windows than on the Mac? Any PC users here? Or am I the only one??
As James keeps pointing out, it's all about workflow. While I don't have to contend with thousands of images a shoot, I'm not sure I want to learn the camera software and another operating system at the same time! And, (touch wood!), my three laptops and two desktops work without a hiccup.
Cheers,
Kumar
-
I use both PC as well as Mac. I would have liked LC for Windows much sooner
The Leaf Windows software is coming that is for sure but Yair I cannot believe it has taken this long because Windows has not conformed to ICC standards?
The second reason I find a lot more plausible. Yes, Windows development is harder and just wait until you have to really start supporting it as well. On the other hand the Windows market is 10 times as big although probably not in this specific market but the question is why, because Mac is better suited or because of the lack of options (that's another discussion).
Yes, there are several other RAW development programs that can work with Leaf files however none of them generate the same quality of files as does Leaf Capture. No, I have not yet tested RD, according to many this program generates comparable quality to LC.
Basically with Leaf you are now in between a rock and a hardplace. When you want the best quality go for LC, when you need to process many files LC is completely inadequate and you have to revert to other programs.
My personal opinion is that Leaf is taking too long with their software development and promises too soon that stuff will appear. Having said that, naturally they are not the only ones with issues and everything is not that horrible as some people want to make you believe.
Kumar, the Windows version is getting there. The Beta version is tricky to use commercially, it stil has too many bugs to be relying on completely. MacOs is very easily learned as are the applications that you need. Either route you want to go can work, PC or Mac. Both aren't perfect but both can be made to work to your satisfaction.
-
Oooppss... double post.
-
Kumar, the Windows version is getting there. The Beta version is tricky to use commercially, it stil has too many bugs to be relying on completely. MacOs is very easily learned as are the applications that you need. Either route you want to go can work, PC or Mac. Both aren't perfect but both can be made to work to your satisfaction.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91544\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm sure I can. I'm not sure I want to.
Okay, I'll confess. I got a Blue and White PowerMac a couple of weeks ago, to get the feel of it, in case I buy a Sinar or Leaf back. The one thing I learned is that Apple restricts you in a thousand ways. It came with 10.2.8 loaded. The original OS was 9.2.2. I wanted to load 10.3. There is no one standard MacOS X 10.3. There's OS for eMacs, iMacs, PowerBooks, PowerMacs... In addition, some OS versions are machine-specific!! There are a hundred different kinds of Macs with exotic names - Blue and White, Bronze Keyboard, Mirror Drive Doors. I learned that you can't modify things like you can with PCs. You can't load an earlier version of the OS. If I want to, I can use Win95 on my PC laptop!
I went to the various Mac forums. People writing about similar things that Windows users are familar. And as far as the snazzy looks are concerned, I couldn't care less - my Windows computers have the classic Windows environment, and the box stays in its rightful place - under the table!
Instead of locking out competitors through hardware, Sinar and Leaf could have gained market share by simply developing PC software. I'm sure it would have been cheaper!
Cheers,
Kumar
PS: Please don't tell me to buy a CoreDuo MacBook Pro! I got the G3 only to get a feel of the OS.
-
I'm sure I can. I'm not sure I want to.
Totally sympaphise with this - looked at Leaf earler this year but one of the deciding factors against was the lack of tethered PC options. I've got a small Fujitsu 10.4" laptop which is great for shooting tethered on location (good screen, small, light, good battery life). I don't want to go down yet another computer hardware route - all I want to do is to be able to link up to my existing system which works great.
-
The one thing I learned is that Apple restricts you in a thousand ways. It came with 10.2.8 loaded. The original OS was 9.2.2. I wanted to load 10.3. There is no one standard MacOS X 10.3. There's OS for eMacs, iMacs, PowerBooks, PowerMacs... In addition, some OS versions are machine-specific!! There are a hundred different kinds of Macs with exotic names - Blue and White, Bronze Keyboard, Mirror Drive Doors.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=91548\")
The bundled operating systems only work on the mac they shipped with in many cases (in some they don't.) Mostly to prevent copying and use on other machines.
If you purchase a Mac OSX system with it's own box, it has all the neccesary components for all machines.
There are of course the same exeptions in the Mac and Windows world, where some operating systems no longer function due to changes in the hardware making older systems unusable on new machines, and new systems run very slow or not at all on very old machines.
When it comes to Mac OSX compatibility between the newest and slightly older machines, I have understood that this has to do with the change from Openfirmware/Openboot to Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI.) This is the bit that loads the operating system (Most windows systems use the outdated BIOS type ) and therefore new OSX systems can be used on older machines, but not the other way around.
See: [a href=\"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Firmware_Interface]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Firmware_Interface[/url]
I learned that you can't modify things like you can with PCs. You can't load an earlier version of the OS. If I want to, I can use Win95 on my PC laptop!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91548\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You can load a lot of older systems, the installer will detect the new system if its there and "deny" a downgrade, so you have to erase the old system first (backup!) In some cases there are the aforementioned hardware upgrades making some older systems unusable. There are a lot of ways to modify a Mac OSX system... what do you want to do (besides using an older o-system...)
Good luck with your foray into the Mac world, and if you are uncertain, I have installed windows as a second operating system on a couple of Macbooks and Macbook Pro's recently, and it works well using the boot-camp beta, so there is no need to choose one or the other. (Windows even picked up the iSight camera, bluetooth modules, and all the other bits and pieces...)
regards
-axel
-
I don't want to tell you go buy an Intel Mac but if you do, you have the option of using both operating systems natively. I am using Windows since 92 (version 2.0) and have switched to Intel Mac about 6 months ago. I have owned, build and maintained more Windows machines than I care to remember. The MBP (Macbook Pro) I currently own is one of the most stable Windows machines I ever owned!
As I said. You don't need to go the Mac route. If you wish you can continue to use Windows machines but for the moment you cannot use a Leaf back tethered in that case. That will be different when Leaf Capture for Windows comes out.
My advice, I would not be bothered by any Mac that is not capable of running both Windows as well as MacOS natively.
Yes, MacOS is more restrictive in many ways than XP (at first sight). Both are equally stable. I find MacOS more fun to use and spend more time on actual work with it. MacOS does get used to very quickly. I still use Windows as well a lot since I own a lot of Windows applications, there is also a lot more choice in applications for Windows.
-
Totally sympaphise with this - looked at Leaf earler this year but one of the deciding factors against was the lack of tethered PC options. I've got a small Fujitsu 10.4" laptop which is great for shooting tethered on location (good screen, small, light, good battery life). I don't want to go down yet another computer hardware route - all I want to do is to be able to link up to my existing system which works great.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91552\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Phil,
Great work on your site. I do want to shoot tethered - unlike many photographers. I guess the Betterlight spoiled me
Which Fujitsu do you have? I get around 3~4 hours with my Gateway.
Cheers,
Kumar
-
I know that Fujitsu machine. It is nice (I believe they only carry one 10,4" mini laptop model). I always used the Sony Vaio variant which is also a very nice machine until I got my MBP. My MBP does about 4 hours (in MacOS) and 3 (in Windows). The Ibook which is significantly smaller I have been told 5 and 4 (no personal experience with these).
Naturally it is unwanted when you have to totally redo your machinepark. On the other hand. I invest in new hardware about every 2 (max 3) years. Using computers in a professional environment it is not that expensive, certainly not when you take in consideration all the other costs. I have paid about 5 times more for various software which I also need to upgrade every 2 to 3 years.
When this cycle comes don't forget to have a look at the Intel Mac machines. They appear more expensive but when you start comparing on a component level they are not that much expensive anymore. Furthermore, they are the only machines that do both OS's (so no need to buy separate machines) unless you want to toy around with OSX86.
-
If I buy a Sinar or Leaf back, I will certainly buy a MacBookPro. As I said earlier, I got the G3 just to get the feel of the OS - not to run CS3 or OS8.6!
If, and that's a very big if, Sinar/Leaf do get the PC versions out, I don't see any particular reason to switch. Both of them have had PC versions "under development/beta testing" for a long time.
Cheers,
Kumar
-
Kumar hi,
.....
It is only recently that Windows has started to conform with the ICC standard with a proper colour engine.
.....
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=91540\")
[a href=\"http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/display/color/icmwp.mspx]http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/displ...olor/icmwp.mspx[/url]
-
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/displ...olor/icmwp.mspx (http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/display/color/icmwp.mspx)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91622\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This document is dated December 4, 2001. It says Microsoft first implemented ICM 1.0 in Win95. ICM 2.0 was implemented in Win98 and Win2K. Both conform to ICC specifications. Five years, and still beta/under development?
All this does not answer the question: How have Phase One, Imacon and dSLR manufacturers managed to release PC versions of their software, while Sinar and Leaf claim that it's too difficult?
Cheers,
Kumar
-
PC systems also have a lot more variables than Macs: graphics cards, FireWire cards, power output etc., making it more difficult and time consuming when it comes to development and QA.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91540\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
So why not specify the cards and other hardware that do meet Leaf specifications? We PC users can put together our own machines, and if you say use ATI 2007 WonderSuper Card, we'll use that. Why delay the software development? In the context of a 10~30K$ back, we wouldn't mind spending $100 for a card. But we do mind asking us to buy a new computer and learn a new OS!
Cheers,
Kumar
-
all macs have always shipped with the current OS at the time specific to that machine...if you want a newer os, go and buy the disc, it will work for all machines....
leaf has a looooong history of not delivering software..for mac as well...if you follow the posts here you will see that most leaf shooters still use the version that works V8 and it is 4?5? years old...V10 the latest is a joke.....i used to have a leaf back, i had the same experiences...always waiting for the next release....anyway , i think that leaf is so far behind at this point, that they should just scrap all further software development anyway...LR, CS,...all support leaf files and leaf cannot compete with these guys in the long run anyway...so why even bother with a (serious)PC version? the only problem is shooting tethered and after investing 10000s in back and camera i guess a macbook for 800 isn't so bad.....considering that leaf sold the ipaq solution for more then that...
if you want a back with a perfect software, tethered, workflow solution for the PC.....get a phase
-
Which Fujitsu do you have? I get around 3~4 hours with my Gateway.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91566\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Kumar,
It's a Fujitsu Lifebook P7010 with RAM upgraded to 1Gb and hard drive to 100Gb. Shot today all tethered on battery pretty much non stop for 4 hours using C1 Pro. Battery was down to about 15% at the end of the shoot. Had Sony Vaio TR1MP before this which was pretty good but this is just a bit more solid.
I'm not holding my breath for Leaf PC support - I was told by rep that PC version would almost certainly be available within 6 months at demo......last February! It doesn't give me a sense of security when you're thinking of spending $20000+.
Phil
-
I'm intrigued by people who feel that LC generates better output than ACR and Lightroom. I don't find that to be the case at all. Certainly where it comes to Lightroom, I seem to get better results than with any other converter. This is partly due to the curve controls (which are in the new ACR Beta as well) but mainly due to the way LC handles sharpening and noise reduction. I just don't like the look of the files so much.
Raw developer probably delivers the best results in the area of sharpening as it has a wider variety of algorithms and tuning parameters. Its B&W conversions are very good, but Lightroom gives it a run for its money. Its almost worth getting a Mac just to have access for Raw Developer as it does a few things particularly well... don't like the UI much though personally.
-
I'm intrigued by people who feel that LC generates better output than ACR and Lightroom. I don't find that to be the case at all. Certainly where it comes to Lightroom, I seem to get better results than with any other converter. This is partly due to the curve controls (which are in the new ACR Beta as well) but mainly due to the way LC handles sharpening and noise reduction. I just don't like the look of the files so much.
Raw developer probably delivers the best results in the area of sharpening as it has a wider variety of algorithms and tuning parameters. Its B&W conversions are very good, but Lightroom gives it a run for its money. Its almost worth getting a Mac just to have access for Raw Developer as it does a few things particularly well... don't like the UI much though personally.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91757\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
For the A-22 files LC10 is better at high iso than the other convertors as it works the noise in shadows a little better, with RD and lightroom a close second. PSCS is the noisiest of the group. Leaf V-8 doesn't allow for high iso.
PSCS also produces a "brighter" file than lc10 by nearly a 1/2 stop.
The only stable and fast way to batch Leaf files is in CS1 and CS2, with Raw Developer a close third. The only issue I have with RD is the thumbnails do not reflect changes made to the file so keeping up on a large job is difffiuclt.
For detail RD pulls the most and holds the best highights of any of the convertors for the Leaf and the P-30 files.
Lightroom I like but it's still buggy and disconnected. Setting corections and batching in Lightroom is about twice to three times the effort of C-1 or pscs.
For the Phase P-30 files there is a bug in Lightroom that crops part of the horizontal frame and if you adjust a P-30 file in C-1 then later try to use it in Lightroom it won't work as you just get a pink screen.
Of course we all know that lightroom is in beta.
When it comes to large jobs and batching, or correcting tethered on set C-1 is miles and miles ahead of anyone else.
JR
-
Taking too long indeed..
Just google Leaf Capture 10..
Press Release Dated September 28 2004
http://www.printondemand.com/MT/archives/004116.html (http://www.printondemand.com/MT/archives/004116.html)
And still basically in beta..
My personal opinion is that Leaf is taking too long with their software development and promises too soon that stuff will appear. Having said that, naturally they are not the only ones with issues and everything is not that horrible as some people want to make you believe.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91544\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Certainly where it comes to Lightroom, I seem to get better results than with any other converter.
I'm also finding that I use Lightroom more and more, as I get used to it.
The difference between Lightroom and LC10 is quite minimal really, I thought LC10 was better, but that's because I was used to it.
In fact, you can't really argue that one is better than the other in terms of final quality (used at 50 ISO) and Lightroom has far better controls on individual colors.
Lightroom scrolling settings are a right pain, very impractical, although you can limit how many settings appear in the scroll. All I know is that with LC10, I always become fidgetty, bordering on the insane at how long it takes for things to happen, it's leaves you feeling irritable during the shoot.
Lightroom is miles faster and save for a few annoyances, the shooting session tends to be more relaxing. It's looking very promising indeed! I can't wait for the final release to come out.
Edward
-
Well, although others may feel it must be just my imagination, (although I know it isn't), I can see more detail in a file rendered by Leaf Capture than a file rendered by ACR... or Lightroom exported to Photoshop.
Im talking about pixel-peeping here... both files side by side onscreen at 100 - 200% manification.
No matter what sharpening methods I use in Photoshop it does not bring out the detail for me like I can get in LC10. Sure, LC takes a lot longer to process the file, but I do see a part of where all that time goes to.
Actually I think a lot has to do with the "Grain" feature in LC10.
It is like adding detail and sharpness in addition to a sharpening filter... Don't know how it works or what is doing exactly but I like it.
I may end up using Lightroom (or Aperture if/when it supports MOS) for cataloging and selecting files and at times the extreme sharpness will not be necessary, but if I really want that detail - unless ACR improves, I will probably end up using LC for certain occasions.
I hope you all have a great holiday time.
Andrew
-
One last time.
I'm sure we all can use different programs to open Leaf files. That is simply a matter of preference - and that's why those programs exist, in the first place.
I still have no answer why Sinar and Leaf claim it's too difficult to get PC versions of their software out? Other back manufacturers do it. Software only companies do it. What is the technical problem that seems to be unique to these two companies?
Cheers,
Kumar
-
One last time.
I'm sure we all can use different programs to open Leaf files. That is simply a matter of preference - and that's why those programs exist, in the first place.
I still have no answer why Sinar and Leaf claim it's too difficult to get PC versions of their software out? Other back manufacturers do it. Software only companies do it. What is the technical problem that seems to be unique to these two companies?
Cheers,
Kumar
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91848\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Dear Kumar,
The fact that Sinar did not have a full PC version of the CaptureShop application has nothing to do with being a technical challenge and we have never claimed that it is too difficult to do it!
The majority of the image industry working on a Mac platform, from commercial photography through editing, pre-press and printing, we have concentrated our efforts for a Mac OS.
Decision has been taken now to propose as well a PC version with the next coming Exposure software.
Best regards,
Thierry
-
One last time.
I'm sure we all can use different programs to open Leaf files. That is simply a matter of preference - and that's why those programs exist, in the first place.
I still have no answer why Sinar and Leaf claim it's too difficult to get PC versions of their software out? Other back manufacturers do it. Software only companies do it. What is the technical problem that seems to be unique to these two companies?
Cheers,
Kumar
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=91848\")
I did not claim that it was too difficult, because it isn't.
However, the imaging-creative-photographic industry, historically, is dominated by Apple computers.
Being part of Scitex/ Creo/ Kodak since 1992, we've "grown" in a Mac environment with most resources coming from MacOS programming etc.
In the mid-80's, when Leaf was still a small American company, the first products were actually run by a Windows software (LeafScan 35 and 45, Leaf Lumina...).
In the last 3-4 years, the demand for a Windows version has indeed started to grow. Still we are looking at a minority that is mostly coming from the corporate, education, military and architechture sectors, along with the social-wedding sector.
LeafCapture 10 is written as a cross-platform software, meanning it looks and functions similiarily on both Windows and MacOS platforms.
Other companies indeed have Windows versions, although from my experience they are not as fully featured as the relative Mac vesrions. You will also notice that these softwares are rarely demonstrated on Windows machines.
As I mentioned before, our Windows version is currently at a Beta stage.
I had a Sony Vaio T2300 laptop for a few weeks recently, which I was using for testing and demonstrating the Windows version with our Aptus backs in both tethered and portable modes with good results. For tethering I used a $20 PCMCIA FW card and a $25 FW booster from [a href=\"http://tinyurl.com/vhvnz]HERE[/url] with no problems at all.
I hope this helps
BR and Happy Holidays
Yair
-
I find the same thing. I usually end up doing the final conversions in LC10. The files are much better than other converters I have tried. So as far as file quality goes I feel LC10 is the best.
The new update 2 for Lc10 seems a bit more stable and "snappier".
For a long time I thought LC8 made the best conversions, but at some point it seems Lc10 startet to perform better.. Might just be me. Now I prefer the LC10 files..
however I tend to use other software for all other purposes.
Roumors has it that Aperture will support MOS files. If Leaf could supply the MOS convertor routines and Apple make the software.. I do miss curves in Apterture though..
Lasse
Well, although others may feel it must be just my imagination, (although I know it isn't), I can see more detail in a file rendered by Leaf Capture than a file rendered by ACR... or Lightroom exported to Photoshop.
Im talking about pixel-peeping here... both files side by side onscreen at 100 - 200% manification.
No matter what sharpening methods I use in Photoshop it does not bring out the detail for me like I can get in LC10. Sure, LC takes a lot longer to process the file, but I do see a part of where all that time goes to.
Actually I think a lot has to do with the "Grain" feature in LC10.
It is like adding detail and sharpness in addition to a sharpening filter... Don't know how it works or what is doing exactly but I like it.
I may end up using Lightroom (or Aperture if/when it supports MOS) for cataloging and selecting files and at times the extreme sharpness will not be necessary, but if I really want that detail - unless ACR improves, I will probably end up using LC for certain occasions.
I hope you all have a great holiday time.
Andrew
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91838\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Dear Thierry and Yair,
I am certainly very glad to hear that it isn't difficult to do a PC version.
But Yair said: PC systems also have a lot more variables than Macs: graphics cards, FireWire cards, power output etc., making it more difficult and time consuming when it comes to development and QA.
So, it's simply a case of marketing priority, rather than any other reason. On this topic itself, photographers have said that they chose not to go with Leaf or Sinar because of the lack of a PC version. Strange marketing priorities, indeed!
I believe both companies have had beta PC programs for at least five years. Hey guys, we're NOT doing clinical trials
And if you want some programmers from Bangalore, call Seetha at Adobe
Cheers,
Kumar
-
Anybody have any new info on this topic since Leaf just came (or not sure really when it came out) with 11.1 and Windows version?
I see there is only an XP version.... why is this when Vista is now well over a year old?
Does anyone know how to get Leaf Capture 11 it to work on Vista?
I've tried running and installing the program in Compatibility mode (as you need to do with CaptureOne 3.7.x) but no luck.
Amazing that 2 years later they still haven't paid much attention to PC users.
-
Anybody have any new info on this topic since Leaf just came (or not sure really when it came out) with 11.1 and Windows version?
I see there is only an XP version.... why is this when Vista is now well over a year old?
Does anyone know how to get Leaf Capture 11 it to work on Vista?
I've tried running and installing the program in Compatibility mode (as you need to do with CaptureOne 3.7.x) but no luck.
Amazing that 2 years later they still haven't paid much attention to PC users.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217495\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm still using XP, leaf capture 11.1 runs fine except for some bug that prevents the computer from shutting down after I've used leaf capture 11.1
Also, firewire on XP has a problem that's been widely noted online that throttles the speed down to 100mbps instead of 800mbps for firewire800
Also the maximum that windows xp will run is firewire 400 speeds even if you use firewire800.
-
At ICC meeings I inquired why Microsoft does not attend. I was told something like "It's against Microsoft internal policy to be part of standards organisations". On the other hand, Adobe only sends someone who works in the digital motion side of things, not photography.
Canon, Nikon etc attend, but they don't want to document the raw to colorimetric conversions.
Interoperability is the last thing camera companies and software companies want. One exception appears to be Leaf who are fairly open.
Edmund
This document is dated December 4, 2001. It says Microsoft first implemented ICM 1.0 in Win95. ICM 2.0 was implemented in Win98 and Win2K. Both conform to ICC specifications. Five years, and still beta/under development?
All this does not answer the question: How have Phase One, Imacon and dSLR manufacturers managed to release PC versions of their software, while Sinar and Leaf claim that it's too difficult?
Cheers,
Kumar
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=91642\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]