Capture One: Customer needs feedback

[John Hollenberg]

I just started using Capture One 9.3.  My main concern is Capture Sharpening and Sharpening for Output, which appear to be weak links.  Also, is there any way to softproof like LR can do?  I haven't been able to find anything.

[N80]

I just started using Capture One 9.3.  My main concern is Capture Sharpening and Sharpening for Output, which appear to be weak links.  Also, is there any way to softproof like LR can do?  I haven't been able to find anything.

What specifically is the weakness you see in CO's general sharpening? Is it the number of variables available or is it the actual image quality? Output sharpening is done at the time of printing. To me it seems as much of a black box as most of the others. I've used Sharpener Pro which takes paper type and image size into consideration but can't say I see a big difference in the print compared to simple output sharpening when printing from CO.

You can Soft Proof in CO. I do not remember how it compares to LR. I have been satisfied with it.

[myotis]

I just started using Capture One 9.3.  My main concern is Capture Sharpening and Sharpening for Output, which appear to be weak links.  Also, is there any way to softproof like LR can do?  I haven't been able to find anything.

Softproof is in the view menu, but it also works by selecting an output recipe, the image then matches the output settings.

Cheers,

Graham

[hubell]

Allow for a history of steps, as in LR,  that would be a nice feature for those that use a lot of the tool sets in C1, as undo is pretty much worthless, especially if you are going between more than one image.  C1 bounces back and forth and within a few steps, it's very confusing. 

I know that I am a voice in the wilderness on this, but it's just something I use a lot in LR and find it most helpful, and another reason I don't use ACR.

Paul C

I fully agree.

[John Hollenberg]

Softproof is in the view menu, but it also works by selecting an output recipe, the image then matches the output settings.

Thanks, but after studying the user manual for 30 minutes I still have no idea how to do what I want:  have the softproof image next to the original image so I can adjust the softproof to match the original as closely as possible before printing.  One of the worst manuals I have ever seen.  Is there any other written material that would explain how to use Capture One?

[myotis]

Thanks, but after studying the user manual for 30 minutes I still have no idea how to do what I want:  have the softproof image next to the original image so I can adjust the softproof to match the original as closely as possible before printing.  One of the worst manuals I have ever seen.  Is there any other written material that would explain how to use Capture One?

Ah, not sure how you do that. C1s comparisons are all done through variants and I'm not sure if you can assign different process recipes to different variants.

I agree the manual isn't the best, and I have relied on the many training videos Phase One put out, and available on Youtube or through their web site. https://www.youtube.com/user/PhaseOneDK

There is a relatively recent one (not the best video it has to be said) that covers B/W printing that also talks about soft proofing and there is an older one on printing, but I can't remember the content.

The only books on Capture One I am aware of are:

https://www.rockynook.com/free-ebook-on-capture-one-pro-9/

This is free and aimed at helping the transition from LR and Aperture to C1 and

https://www.rockynook.com/shop/photography/capture-one-pro-9/

Which is paid for, but if you get the free one first there is a 40% off voucher in it for this one. The latter, I think is pretty good, but could do with a bit more depth. I have just looked and there is nothing helpful about soft proofing other than explaining why you should do it and pointing you towards the menu.

Sorry I can't be of more direct help.

Cheers,

Graham

[Jeff Griffin]

" Ah, not sure how you do that. C1s comparisons are all done through variants and I'm not sure if you can assign different process recipes to different variants. "


I also tried that and it appears that the profile is global and different ones cannot be applied to variants of the same image.

As you state comparing images side by side is not possible.

[N80]

This would be worthy of a feature request. I never really thought of doing it that way. I just get close to what I want, then go into soft proof and adjust it the way I want it. But, I can see the utility of a side-by-side.

[myotis]

" Ah, not sure how you do that. C1s comparisons are all done through variants and I'm not sure if you can assign different process recipes to different variants. "


I also tried that and it appears that the profile is global and different ones cannot be applied to variants of the same image.

As you state comparing images side by side is not possible.

Yep, since my post I have also tried, and failed.

Cheers,

Graham

[John Hollenberg]

Yep, since my post I have also tried, and failed.

Thanks for the feedback.  I guess you can see why I consider softproofing weak in C1.  This seems like a pretty basic task that LR got right around version 4.  However, I must say that the tools in C1 for adjusting images and the colors look better to me than LR, which is why I persist in spite of the interface oddities.

[myotis]

Thanks for the feedback.  I guess you can see why I consider softproofing weak in C1.  This seems like a pretty basic task that LR got right around version 4.  However, I must say that the tools in C1 for adjusting images and the colors look better to me than LR, which is why I persist in spite of the interface oddities.

I think C1 still suffers from its roots as a fairly simple, but high quality, Raw Processor (using sessions) sitting between a Phase 1 camera and Photoshop.  Its only relatively recently that they have started to move into Aperture and Lightroom territory, and they are still catching up on features and capabilities. 

When I used it first, there was no interest in cataloguing or using it for anything other than outputing to Photoshop. Like you, I think it will be worth the wait :-)

Cheers,

Graham

[N80]

I kind of wonder if Phase One saw an opportunity when Apple abandoned Aperture. For me Aperture was, and still is more elegant and intuitive, and even better looking than LR. Like myself, many Aperture users just never felt at home in LR. To me it is ugly, clunky and seems pieced together. Now, do Aperture orphans make up a significant enough market to have inspired PO to expand CO? I don't know. But for me, despite evidence that CO is an evolving app and despite the fact that LR has some distinct advantages (particularly in the printing and proofing department...and the vignette too) I have no intention of going back to LR. I used to enjoy working in Aperture. I used to dread working in LR even after I learned it and developed a work flow. Now, I enjoy post processing again in CO. Maybe some of it is GUI stuff, appearance and other intangibles, I don't know.

Also, I'm an amateur and have low volume, which certainly impacts my outlook compared to a high volume pro who needs extensive cataloging and batch processing features.

[myotis]

I kind of wonder if Phase One saw an opportunity when Apple abandoned Aperture.

Also, I'm an amateur and have low volume, which certainly impacts my outlook compared to a high volume pro who needs extensive cataloging and batch processing features.

I think a few things happened to encourage the move to being more than a raw processor.  Adobe subscriptions, demise of Aperture and the maybe surprising success of Fuji X-trans cameras and the apparent inability for  Adobe to sort out how to process them.

C1 is very popular with professionals due to the quality of its raw processing: not all pros work in high volume or need extensive cataloguing. As always its horses for course.

Cheers,

Graham

[ronaldnztan]

Hello Jim,

Long time C1PRO user, since 3.7.8 and I have happily upgraded and never skipped a version. I'd like to know the follow suggestion I provided in my survey. What is the practicality of making the "Image Core" the "brain" and processing instructions in C1PRO to be modular. I got the idea from the C1PRO Sony version, where I understand—it ONLY contains instructions and processing for SONY cameras and lenses.

With the modular approach, the user can select camera and lense combination and their installation of the Image Core would ONLY contain those the user selected.

From the developer's point of view—if cameras are released, the modular approach could be pushed to be updated on-demand. The user won't have to wait until the next point-release update to feature the new camera and/or lense.

I also got this idea from my biochemistry studies background on the idea of the enzyme-substrate complex. Depending on what binds at the active site of the enzyme (Image Core), the result is different. That way, the user's computer ONLY gets install the ONLY camera/lense instructions and nothing else extra is loaded, not even into any background processes.

Anyone who's versed in programming architecture can provide practical feedback to my idea. How practical is this modular approach? How resource intensive? Will it cost the Phase One more money internally to research and develop?

Thank you,

Ron

Hey gang,
 
As part of our continued efforts to make Capture One the go to app for Professional Photographers, we are running a short Q+A survey to see how we are meeting your needs. Find the survey in the link below:
 
https://www.anpdm.com/survey-public/414558477041405F477940/4446594B71494B5E4071
 
By completing the survey, you will be automatically entered into a draw to win 1 of 3 Capture One Pro Licenses free of charge!