Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: fredjeang on October 20, 2010, 01:43:19 pm
-
Hi,
I wonder if it's possible to dowload the software Focus permanently even if not buying but renting backs.
I'd like to try Hasselblad, so far I've used Phase and C1. I don't own a back but just rent them when needed.
Thank you.
-
You're right, sorry. I wrote Focus, thinking spanish, like fotografía.
Thanks Keith
-
;D You're right. I wrote Focus, thinking spanish, like fotografía.
Thanks Keith
Fred, you think that's confusing? What about photographe and photographie?
It confused me for years when I started reading French PHOTO!
Now that I don't get confused with it anymore, I don't buy magazines. C'est la vie.
;-)
Rob C
-
Haaa...the french mute "e".
Well, I've just downloaded it and installed, I'm extremely pleased by what I'm seeing so far and by the img3 sample provided by the company.
-
and at least it does not run like a dog...
on my 3-years old 2GB iMAc Capture One runs painfully slow, Phocus runs happily without any speed issues
-
and at least it does not run like a dog...
on my 3-years old 2GB iMAc Capture One runs painfully slow, Phocus runs happily without any speed issues
I'm betting we could find a source of slowness if you're finding that to be the case. Not the beefiest computer out there but should be enough for most uses of Capture One.
-
I found both softwares pretty much the same to be honest in terms of speed. No issue with Phocus, no issue with C1.
Also, I quite felt immediatly "at home" with both, wich is not the case for my personal taste with lightroom that I never ended to feel comfortable with.
JV, you might have something weired with C1. Wich version are you runnin?
Have you desinstalled previous C1 versions?
-
I'm betting we could find a source of slowness if you're finding that to be the case. Not the beefiest computer out there but should be enough for most uses of Capture One.
The iMac would work fine but 2gig may not be enough
-
JV, you might have something weired with C1. Wich version are you runnin?
Have you desinstalled previous C1 versions?
I am running the latest and greatest. I never deinstalled previous versions. With each new version I download the Mac disk image and when copying to the Applications folder I say I want to overwrite. You are probably right though that there might be something wrong with my installation because it runs noticeably faster on my MacBook Pro (also 2GB).
-
Well, I don't know if Doug or a Capture specialist will comment but it seems that desinstalling previous versions is recommended. Don't ask me the oscur reason, I have no idea.
I had something weired when first installed the latest, some unexpected crashes, then I read that desinstalling previous version could stabilized it, I did it and since that it's rock solid, fast and obedient.
I forgot to mention, maybe it has importance: I run it on a window 7 64 bit platform.
Another wired point (not weired but commercial I guess) is that Phocus seems to ignore the DNG (correct me if I'm wrong on that), like C1. In fact C1 don't ignore the DNG, it magicmushrooms them up.
So no chance to read a Leica S2 or Pentax 645D dng file with those softwares. Or the so call "official" DNG because it seems that everybody has its own DNG (standard...??)
Also, Phocus has 2 modes to open, a light and a full one. very good! This has been asked before in the Capture wishes by some users, me included, and I trully think Capture could copy the idea.
-
I de-installed Capture One and re-installed. Better.
I noticed that I had Session Favorites that were no longer available. Removed them. Better again.
Still significantly slower than Phocus though.
Thank you!
-
Latest Phocus can open all sorts of Raw files, not only Hasselblad, albeit not with all abilities.
On my 1 year old top of the line MacBook Pro, it is ... slow.
CS5 on the other hand seems to be finally nearing the state of a decent Raw converter.
Edmund
-
I de-installed Capture One and re-installed. Better.
I noticed that I had Session Favorites that were no longer available. Removed them. Better again.
Still significantly slower than Phocus though.
Thank you!
Did you follow the procedure on Phase Ones website to uninstall C1?
There are a few files in your preferences folder and a couple of other files you need to manually deleted to get a full clean install or the new install will reference these old files.
-
Did you follow the procedure on Phase Ones website to uninstall C1?
There are a few files in your preferences folder and a couple of other files you need to manually deleted to get a full clean install or the new install will reference these old files.
I probably did not. Where exactly can I find that procedure?
-
If I understand well, the window's version of Phocus is not yet capable of reading third party raws but will be in a close future. All this seems a little confuse to me.
What I like about Phocus is its simplicity. We have to end in photoshop anyway for serious retouching so too much options inboard a devellopper is IMO not specially a good path.
-
What I like about Phocus is its simplicity. We have to end in photoshop anyway for serious retouching so too much options inboard a devellopper is IMO not specially a good path.
Fred
Phocus is a very nice piece of software, especially in its most recent version. However, if you work in B/W like me, it really does not have the sophisticated control over colour to B/W conversion that Lightroom has. For that reason alone I would always choose LR for any B/W work.
John
-
I probably did not. Where exactly can I find that procedure?
See link below
http://www.phaseone.com/en/search/article.aspx?articleid=1164&languageid=1 (http://www.phaseone.com/en/search/article.aspx?articleid=1164&languageid=1)
Doing this at every update I have never had any stability or performance issues with my Mac Pro or UMBP.
-
I de-installed Capture One and re-installed. Better.
I noticed that I had Session Favorites that were no longer available. Removed them. Better again.
Still significantly slower than Phocus though.
Thank you!
Each software excels some places and is slower other places and show pretty big differences depending on what kind of machine you're running on. Zoom to 100% on a 39 megapixel raw on a 27" iMac in both software packages on as a dramatic example. C1 really wants more than 2gb of ram and benefits tremendously from multiple cores (I'm not saying Phocus doesn't - I'm not a Phocus super-guru). Phocus benefits from a faster GPU where C1 does not (currently).
Also note that C1, when first accessing a folder of images builds a cache of those images. You can see it is doing this by the rotating circle in the top middle or by going to Window > Activities. During this time operation is significantly slower which often leads users to feel C1 is much slower than it is - for instance if you browse to a folder of 200 images for the first time it might take 3-10 minutes (depending on how big the files are and how fast your computer is) for the cache/previews to build during which time it will feel very sluggish. Similar operation here to Aperture which likewise builds previews during imports. When shooting tethered the image cache files are built while you're shooting, so you rarely notice them.
The benefit of this process is (once the cache is built) that you can select 200 images, and push one keyboard shortcut and have all 200 images bumped up a fraction of a stop in exposure and it will adjust all 200 images (including thumbnails and previews) nearly instantly. Also with the cache files built if you want JPG previews (up to 2400px in size) they can be generated at around 100 per minute (again depending on the speed of your computer).
I would be curious what sorts of operations you're talking about being faster though: startup time? processing time? zoom to 100%? Copy/Apply adjustments?. You can PM if you want to keep the thread clean since we're drifting off topic.
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me) (doug@captureintegration.com)
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/") | RSS Feed (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/")
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/")
-
Also, Phocus has 2 modes to open, a light and a full one. very good! This has been asked before in the Capture wishes by some users, me included, and I trully think Capture could copy the idea.
In Capture One: Window > Workspace > Simplified. No relaunch required, and if there is a specific advanced tool that you want to add just right click in the tools area and add it.
-
If I understand well, the window's version of Phocus is not yet capable of reading third party raws but will be in a close future. All this seems a little confuse to me.
What I like about Phocus is its simplicity. We have to end in photoshop anyway for serious retouching so too much options inboard a devellopper is IMO not specially a good path.
Scenario: you have a shoot with 20 selects all of which involve a model with a particular pair of shoes on which are rendering in a slightly off color (according at least to what the client wants/expects)
At the Photoshop Stage
1. Open the first image (twiddle thumbs while 16 bit 30+ megapixel file opens)
2. Create Adjustment Layer and make changes
3. Save the first image (twiddle thumbs while 16 bit 30+ megapixel file saves)
4. Repeat 1-3 for each of the 20 images
OR
At the Raw Stage
1. Select one image and adjust it
2. Select all images (Apple-A) and push the Local Copy and Apply button
The same goes for exposure tweaks, contrast, clarity, lens correction (huge time saver versus manually or script-based distortion correction).
Plus for the majority of adjustments the resulting file will have more quality/fidelity if the adjustments are made prior to processing rather than after. So for instance pulling up the shadows in C1 vs. processing strait and then lifting them in Photoshop will result in much better shadow quality (tonality, noise, saturation accuracy etc).
That's not to say that most final image won't go to Photoshop at the end, but simply that the more you can do in raw as a batch adjustment the more time you save. This is true regardless of whether you are using LR, Aperture, Phocus, or Capture One.
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me) (doug@captureintegration.com)
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/") | RSS Feed (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/")
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/")
-
Scenario: you have a shoot with 20 selects all of which involve a model with a particular pair of shoes on which are rendering in a slightly off color (according at least to what the client wants/expects)
LIke it or not 90% of all images for commerce are probably processed in photoshop.
You can give the retoucher a close approximation of the image from any raw convertor, but the retoucher is still gonna process out a few different images and blend them.
Now, C-1 does a good fast job and it's great for processing "close" to the final look in the proofing stage, but even if you process out to final from c-1 most people that are expert at post production are going to process out the finals flatter than normal so they can work them deep in photoshop.
Tiwddling thumbs or not.
Though if you have a fast machine, PS doesn't use up that much time in waiting.
Still, C-1 is good for capture, good for proofing, ok for close to finish.
IMO
BC
-
Scenario: you have a shoot with 20 selects all of which involve a model with a particular pair of shoes on which are rendering in a slightly off color (according at least to what the client wants/expects)
At the Photoshop Stage
1. Open the first image (twiddle thumbs while 16 bit 30+ megapixel file opens)
2. Create Adjustment Layer and make changes
3. Save the first image (twiddle thumbs while 16 bit 30+ megapixel file saves)
4. Repeat 1-3 for each of the 20 images
OR
At the Raw Stage
1. Select one image and adjust it
2. Select all images (Apple-A) and push the Local Copy and Apply button
The same goes for exposure tweaks, contrast, clarity, lens correction (huge time saver versus manually or script-based distortion correction).
Plus for the majority of adjustments the resulting file will have more quality/fidelity if the adjustments are made prior to processing rather than after. So for instance pulling up the shadows in C1 vs. processing strait and then lifting them in Photoshop will result in much better shadow quality (tonality, noise, saturation accuracy etc).
That's not to say that most final image won't go to Photoshop at the end, but simply that the more you can do in raw as a batch adjustment the more time you save. This is true regardless of whether you are using LR, Aperture, Phocus, or Capture One.
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me) (doug@captureintegration.com)
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/") | RSS Feed (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/")
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/")
Doug, I fully agree with what you just said. When working in a set of multiple images that have to be corrected the same way, I also do that step in Capture because it's way faster and reliable.
But we have to end on layers anyway at one stage or another.
Scripts in PS are really powerfull but not user friendly. (and more scripts...)
About the lauching, I was refering to the option to load the C1 or full or simplify for the very beginning. That is interesting for tether (I now refuse to tether but a lot do) or when you want the program for very basics adjustments. In C1 as you pointed you can choose but you first need to open the software, so the idea is to quit that step and ask the user from the very beginning.
C1 can insipre itself from the competition and the competition from C1 of course, like the very good styles that all raw devellopper should have IMO.
About the speed, I must join Doug's view. Phocus is rather faster at first, but then C1, and specially if you have a lot of volume, because of its arquitecture is really fast and efficient.
John, I have a Lightroom and hardly (now never) use it. This is not because I think that Lightroom is bad, it's because I find it too integrated. It might seems a paradox but the powerfull way Lightroom deals with folders is a step to learn and I'm not ready to cross the Rubicon because there are so many softwares to master that adding another learning curve on the yet very long list just repulses me.
On the contrary, I find the Capture idea much more interesting to associate with a separate software to do those tasks, a software that is capable to read any kind of extention included the layers, videos and sound. So for B&W convertions I use PS with Silver Effex that is great because it works on layers and therefore is non intrusive.
About Phocus, I don't want to start a war between the big boys, I downloaded it in the case I rent a Blad back, and it's never bad to have the choice. To be honest, I find both Phocus and Capture 1 very good. Each has its own strengh. C1 is without hesitation more complex (didn't say more complicated) and therefore more heavy, but when it runs in cruise speed it runs. Phocus seems to me in a slightly different spirit, maybe more minimalist but very efficient too. 2 nice tools.
The only thing I'd like is to understand this DNG stuff. Why not a common format in the end? Is that because manufacturers want to keep their secret sauce for their backs?
Then, why Leica choosed the DNG for its S2 ? (and the Pentax will do too, but Pentax has been a strong supporter of DNG. Honestly, I shooted both on the Pentax and I'm unable to see any difference between the native raw and the DNG version. If you guys can find where are the differences I'd like to know where I should look). If there is a Pentax engineer that read those lines he's very welcome to bring the light on the 2 formats.
-
LIke it or not 90% of all images for commerce are probably processed in photoshop.
You can give the retoucher a close approximation of the image from any raw convertor, but the retoucher is still gonna process out a few different images and blend them.
Now, C-1 does a good fast job and it's great for processing "close" to the final look in the proofing stage, but even if you process out to final from c-1 most people that are expert at post production are going to process out the finals flatter than normal so they can work them deep in photoshop.
Tiwddling thumbs or not.
Though if you have a fast machine, PS doesn't use up that much time in waiting.
Still, C-1 is good for capture, good for proofing, ok for close to finish.
It's very hard to disagree with you given your level of experience... but I do.
I think your 90% estimate significantly underestimates the percentage of working photographers who do their own post.
One Man Shops
Many of our DB customers, and even more of our dSLR customers do most or all of their gigs on their own from start to finish. Meaning they do the raw processing, retouching, and delivery themselves. A lot of the architecture/interior/still-life/product guys fit into that category. I really think this is something that varies based on region, pay-scale, and genre of photography. If you're doing the entire process yourself it just makes a lot more sense to do most of your adjusting at the raw stage.
Big Production Shops
Most of our big production house clients (e.g. multiple-bay furniture studios in High Point) do process in Capture One*. They do it for the quality, and also because they can have the photographers make minor adjustments on-set and the retoucher can start with that adjusted raw (making changes like making it more flat) prior to processing. This is enormously helpful if for instance the retouchers are locked in the bat cave and never see the actual products that are being shot. It also reduces the volume/size of the files going from the photographer to the retoucher since raw files are often 1/5th the size of a 16-bit TIFF.
It might be an interesting poll to ask who does most of their own finishing and of those who process in something other than ACR some or most of the time.
*to be fair to the thread here it's likely if they shot Hassy backs they'd be using Phocus for processing, or Sinar sw with Sinar backs for the same reasons
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me) (doug@captureintegration.com)
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/") | RSS Feed (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/")
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/")
-
Scenario: you have a shoot with 20 selects all of which involve a model with a particular pair of shoes on which are rendering in a slightly off color (according at least to what the client wants/expects)
At the Photoshop Stage
1. Open the first image (twiddle thumbs while 16 bit 30+ megapixel file opens)
2. Create Adjustment Layer and make changes
3. Save the first image (twiddle thumbs while 16 bit 30+ megapixel file saves)
4. Repeat 1-3 for each of the 20 images
OR
At the Raw Stage
1. Select one image and adjust it
2. Select all images (Apple-A) and push the Local Copy and Apply button
The same goes for exposure tweaks, contrast, clarity, lens correction (huge time saver versus manually or script-based distortion correction).
Plus for the majority of adjustments the resulting file will have more quality/fidelity if the adjustments are made prior to processing rather than after. So for instance pulling up the shadows in C1 vs. processing strait and then lifting them in Photoshop will result in much better shadow quality (tonality, noise, saturation accuracy etc).
That's not to say that most final image won't go to Photoshop at the end, but simply that the more you can do in raw as a batch adjustment the more time you save. This is true regardless of whether you are using LR, Aperture, Phocus, or Capture One.
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me) (doug@captureintegration.com)
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/") | RSS Feed (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/")
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/")
Naturally you are exaggerating to make your point. If you have to do a repeated job in PS you best create an action or a droplet. Really easy and fast. PS is much more powerful in post processing, especially automated, than any raw converter. (yes there are tasks in PS that are impossible or hard to automate but these are probably totally impossible in raw converters)
I hardly twiddle thumbs in PS. I adjust one image, create an action (or a droplet). Let it run over 200 images. Go down and make myself a cappuccino and relax a bit (or do other things like forum chatter :)).
All in all I do agree with your statement that you should get the most out of any raw converter before heading for PS.
edit; I convert everything through Phocus before heading to PS. I only touch ACR with my Nikon files and only via LR (I would like to use C1 for that though).
-
Naturally you are exaggerating to make your point. If you have to do a repeated job in PS you best create an action or a droplet. Really easy and fast. PS is much more powerful in post processing than any raw converter. (yes there are tasks in PS that are impossible or hard to automate but these are probably totally impossible in raw converters)
I hardly twiddle thumbs in PS. I adjust one image, create an action (or a droplet). Let it run over 200 images. Go down and make myself a cappuccino and relax a bit (or do other things like forum chatter :)).
All in all I do agree with your statement that you should get the most out of any raw converter before heading for PS,
Am I exaggerating?
There are a LOT of tools/effects that are ONLY possible in PS. Just to pick one - a low opacity blurred overlay is a neat effect (when used in moderation) and can really only be achieved in Photoshop. For these scripting a droplet is a great time saver.
However, when a tool IS available in the raw processor as well as PS it is without a doubt an order of magnitude faster to do it at the raw level.
- exposure/contrast/curves/saturation
- lens corrections (chromatic aberration, distortion, fall-off)
- dust removal
- crops (especially aspect ratio crops like taking a folder of 3:2 dSLR files to 4:3)
- universal color adjustments
So if you have 40 files and you want to reduce saturation and pump contrast a droplet is faster than opening each file but will still take 10-40 minutes (computer/file-size dependent) versus literally 15 seconds at the raw stage.
One thing to keep in mind here is that I work for a company that sells digital backs so I work with a lot of big files - a 16-bit TIFF from a 65+ with no extra layers is already 360 megabytes. So to me "opening" a file can be a 20 second wait in Photoshop and after adding a layer for retouching it might take 60 seconds to save.
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me) (doug@captureintegration.com)
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/") | RSS Feed (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/")
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/")
-
Am I exaggerating?
There are a LOT of tools/effects that are ONLY possible in PS. Just to pick one - a low opacity blurred overlay is a neat effect (when used in moderation) and can really only be achieved in Photoshop. For these scripting a droplet is a great time saver.
However, when a tool IS available in the raw processor as well as PS it is without a doubt an order of magnitude faster to do it at the raw level.
- exposure/contrast/curves/saturation
- lens corrections (chromatic aberration, distortion, fall-off)
- dust removal
- crops (especially aspect ratio crops like taking a folder of 3:2 dSLR files to 4:3)
- universal color adjustments
So if you have 40 files and you want to reduce saturation and pump contrast a droplet is faster than opening each file but will still take 10-40 minutes (computer/file-size dependent) versus literally 15 seconds at the raw stage.
One thing to keep in mind here is that I work for a company that sells digital backs so I work with a lot of big files - a 16-bit TIFF from a 65+ with no extra layers is already 360 megabytes. So to me "opening" a file can be a 20 second wait in Photoshop and after adding a layer for retouching it might take 60 seconds to save.
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me) (doug@captureintegration.com)
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/") | RSS Feed (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/")
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/")
Yes, I think you are exaggerating.
Try exposure/contrast/saturation/curves/color adjustment on things as highlights or shadows only or based on specific channel information in a raw convertor ?
Lens corrections, definitely in the raw converter same as dust removal.
Cropping to a ration or resizing, C1 might be different but this is something I prefer doing from the Bridge with the image processor. Phocus is simply weak in this area.
I know about the big files. I routinely work with files that are in between 1 to 4gb and sometimes bigger.
Again, I agree there are things better suited for the raw converter. You should use whatever tool is easiest & fastest to get you where you want to be with the highest level of quality. That will often be the converter but not always.
-
Again, I agree there are things better suited for the raw converter. You should use whatever tool is easiest & fastest to get you where you want to be with the highest level of quality. That will often be the converter but not always.
Well at least we agree in general if not some of the specifics :-). I respect your view.