Phase One Releases Capture One 11

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I spent more time this morning, trying difficult cr2 images with detail in deep shadows. I had to learn the various controls by trial and error, but found that they correlate pretty well to the Lightroom controls. I thought at first that they were doing a better job, but then took the same image into Lightroom and got identical results.

For a person like me who has little dexterity in my hands, I quickly noticed the lost time moving the cursor all over the screen to select a tool, rather than being able to use the scroll wheel to move thru the various editing panels. I did not like the way one panel sometimes closed when I selected another. So, while its very powerful, I don't think my hands are up to it, even though I did quickly remember the location of the commonly used tools.

The export process was particularly confusing, and the print dialog was very lacking, watermarks were vertical only, unless there is another setting to change that.

 

[Aaron D]

This is probably a dumb question but with Capture One do you HAVE to put your photos in libraries or collections (or whatever) like you do LR? I use Bridge because I really dislike the whole "libraries" idea--I put things in folders. And the filters in Bridge work about perfectly. But I use DPP for conversion from CR2 to TIF because it yeilds an almost magical 3-dimensional quality that I can't get from Adobe RAW. OK magical is overstating, maybe.

 

[GammyKnee]

This is probably a dumb question but with Capture One do you HAVE to put your photos in libraries or collections (or whatever) like you do LR? I use Bridge because I really dislike the whole "libraries" idea--I put things in folders. And the filters in Bridge work about perfectly. But I use DPP for conversion from CR2 to TIF because it yeilds an almost magical 3-dimensional quality that I can't get from Adobe RAW. OK magical is overstating, maybe.

You can avoid the whole import process as follows (going from memory):
[list type=decimal]
[*]During installation, choose the "session" option instead of the collection option

[*]Create a single "master" session somewhere; when you delete images from within C1, they'll end up in here
[/list]

After that, just browse to any folder containing images and get straight to work. A "CaptureOne" subfolder will be created inside there, holding the sidecar files that record your changes. You're free to move image folders anywhere you want, so long as the contents stay intact.

 

[privatebydesign]

This is probably a dumb question but with Capture One do you HAVE to put your photos in libraries or collections (or whatever) like you do LR? I use Bridge because I really dislike the whole "libraries" idea--I put things in folders. And the filters in Bridge work about perfectly. But I use DPP for conversion from CR2 to TIF because it yeilds an almost magical 3-dimensional quality that I can't get from Adobe RAW. OK magical is overstating, maybe.

You don’t have to put images anywhere to work in Lightroom. It is just like bridge in that if you point it somewhere it will ‘see’ what’s there.

The “”libraries”” idea” is misunderstood, the library does not contain your images, it just reminds LR what you want the images in your folders to look like when it opens them.

So you import a RAW file to a custom folder on your desktop, open LR and point it to the image. In LR change it to B&W. If you open that RAW file in Photoshop or via your finder or any photo viewer via that folder the image is still color, open it in LR and the library file tells LR to show you the image in B&W, the library file doesn’t contain the RAW file, just your editing preferences along with a preview, the location of the file etc.

 

[ecqns]

while CP1 attempts to guess what would work for each photo so sometimes it gets you closer to your end point (or even to your end point) straight away, although sometimes it's not at all what you are looking for. I have never tried to investigate further though.

Capture One has default camera profiles for each camera, maybe this is what you mean? You can use it to start with or use something totally different or nothing at all. I have to say (as a C1P user since v3) its color profiles are what sets it apart from anything else. Once in awhile I load up Lightroom (when it gets updated) and I can't believe people want to use that program to convert their files. I don't use the C1P catalogs, masking, brushes, whatever - just tethering in sessions and its raw profile conversion.

 

[jd7]

while CP1 attempts to guess what would work for each photo so sometimes it gets you closer to your end point (or even to your end point) straight away, although sometimes it's not at all what you are looking for. I have never tried to investigate further though.

Capture One has default camera profiles for each camera, maybe this is what you mean? You can use it to start with or use something totally different or nothing at all. I have to say (as a C1P user since v3) its color profiles are what sets it apart from anything else. Once in awhile I load up Lightroom (when it gets updated) and I can't believe people want to use that program to convert their files. I don't use the C1P catalogs, masking, brushes, whatever - just tethering in sessions and its raw profile conversion.

I'm not sure if that is exactly what the article was saying or not. I have found the article though - it is the Martin
Evening article you can find on this webpage
https://lightroomkillertips.com/brilliant-article-martin-evening-lightroom-vs-capture-one-pro/

I would be interested to hear from those who are familiar with both programs whether you agree with the article.

 

[ecqns]

while CP1 attempts to guess what would work for each photo so sometimes it gets you closer to your end point (or even to your end point) straight away, although sometimes it's not at all what you are looking for. I have never tried to investigate further though.

Capture One has default camera profiles for each camera, maybe this is what you mean? You can use it to start with or use something totally different or nothing at all. I have to say (as a C1P user since v3) its color profiles are what sets it apart from anything else. Once in awhile I load up Lightroom (when it gets updated) and I can't believe people want to use that program to convert their files. I don't use the C1P catalogs, masking, brushes, whatever - just tethering in sessions and its raw profile conversion.

I'm not sure if that is exactly what the article was saying or not. I have found the article though - it is the Martin
Evening article you can find on this webpage
https://lightroomkillertips.com/brilliant-article-martin-evening-lightroom-vs-capture-one-pro/

I would be interested to hear from those who are familiar with both programs whether you agree with the article.

Without reading it yet I can say that Martin Evening is a full on Adobe guy, he writes books on Photoshop and Lightroom so I'm not sure his view is unbiased. His big Photoshop book is one of the best overall sources for learning Photoshop.

 

[privatebydesign]

while CP1 attempts to guess what would work for each photo so sometimes it gets you closer to your end point (or even to your end point) straight away, although sometimes it's not at all what you are looking for. I have never tried to investigate further though.

Capture One has default camera profiles for each camera, maybe this is what you mean? You can use it to start with or use something totally different or nothing at all. I have to say (as a C1P user since v3) its color profiles are what sets it apart from anything else. Once in awhile I load up Lightroom (when it gets updated) and I can't believe people want to use that program to convert their files. I don't use the C1P catalogs, masking, brushes, whatever - just tethering in sessions and its raw profile conversion.

I'm not sure if that is exactly what the article was saying or not. I have found the article though - it is the Martin
Evening article you can find on this webpage
https://lightroomkillertips.com/brilliant-article-martin-evening-lightroom-vs-capture-one-pro/

I would be interested to hear from those who are familiar with both programs whether you agree with the article.

Without reading it yet I can say that Martin Evening is a full on Adobe guy, he writes books on Photoshop and Lightroom so I'm not sure his view is unbiased. His big Photoshop book is one of the best overall sources for learning Photoshop.

Nevertheless it is a results driven point and when you look at his results, and follow the easy to create develop and or import presets, it is very easy to get C1 and LR default ‘looks’ within a hairs breath of each other. Which kinda puts comments like ‘the differences are night and day’ into context, they are a limitation of the user not the software. He also rounds out with a few pros and cons of each software, some things C1 does slightly better, some things LR has more control, but after reading the article and seeing the results I lost all interest in a trial of C1 and have lost respect for those with the opinion that C1 does a markedly ‘better’ job of working our RAW files.

I can understand people preferring one over the other, but they are not radically different in capabilities.

 

[ecqns]

have lost respect for those with the opinion that C1 does a markedly ‘better’ job of working our RAW files.

That's a funny statement.

Anyway I come from a professional photography background - started working with fashion photographers in NYC. 99% of that world is shooting tethered C1P and Canon or a Phase back, LR doesn't exist.
Again I wouldn't say that Martin Evening is an unbiased source, trust your own eyes and try out both applications. That's what I do whether its Sony/Canon or C1P/LR.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

This is probably a dumb question but with Capture One do you HAVE to put your photos in libraries or collections (or whatever) like you do LR? I use Bridge because I really dislike the whole "libraries" idea--I put things in folders. And the filters in Bridge work about perfectly. But I use DPP for conversion from CR2 to TIF because it yeilds an almost magical 3-dimensional quality that I can't get from Adobe RAW. OK magical is overstating, maybe.

The advantage of using a library is that the edit control settings are saved for each image along with a reduced size image that goes away after the time you set. The library contains the key words and data about a image, so you can search by subject, faces, camera, lens, many different parameters. When you get 100K images, it becomes very important.

Capture one gives you the choice, use a library, or a sidecar. If you want to find a image, you will have to search by name.

Most editing software now uses libraries, or is heading in that direction. It makes editing speed much faster, and provides photo management tools.

If you don't need a library, check out some of the other software that uses sidecars instead, or DPP which can update the original file.

The library is there in Lightroom because it was a elegant solution for professional photographers who need to track and find hundreds of thousands of images.

For the first year, I was puzzled about the library and finally bought a book on how to use Lightroom 2. After I read thru it and understood why the library was there, I realized what I'd been missing and now use it extensively.

 

[privatebydesign]

This is probably a dumb question but with Capture One do you HAVE to put your photos in libraries or collections (or whatever) like you do LR? I use Bridge because I really dislike the whole "libraries" idea--I put things in folders. And the filters in Bridge work about perfectly. But I use DPP for conversion from CR2 to TIF because it yeilds an almost magical 3-dimensional quality that I can't get from Adobe RAW. OK magical is overstating, maybe.

The advantage of using a library is that the edit control settings are saved for each image along with a reduced size image that goes away after the time you set. The library contains the key words and data about a image, so you can search by subject, faces, camera, lens, many different parameters. When you get 100K images, it becomes very important.

Capture one gives you the choice, use a library, or a sidecar. If you want to find a image, you will have to search by name.

Most editing software now uses libraries, or is heading in that direction. It makes editing speed much faster, and provides photo management tools.

If you don't need a library, check out some of the other software that uses sidecars instead, or DPP which can update the original file.

The library is there in Lightroom because it was a elegant solution for professional photographers who need to track and find hundreds of thousands of images.

For the first year, I was puzzled about the library and finally bought a book on how to use Lightroom 2. After I read thru it and understood why the library was there, I realized what I'd been missing and now use it extensively.

You can choose to get LR to use sidecar (XMP) files too.

 

[privatebydesign]

have lost respect for those with the opinion that C1 does a markedly ‘better’ job of working our RAW files.

That's a funny statement.

Anyway I come from a professional photography background - started working with fashion photographers in NYC. 99% of that world is shooting tethered C1P and Canon or a Phase back, LR doesn't exist.
Again I wouldn't say that Martin Evening is an unbiased source, trust your own eyes and try out both applications. That's what I do whether its Sony/Canon or C1P/LR.

Why?

Comments like

I can't believe people want to use that program to convert their files.

used in the context of higher quality RAW conversions via C1 is demonstrably false.

As for being a pro, I now you are, so what? The first few times I saw New York pros demoing C1 it crashed in every single session. Joey L, Peter Hurley, Susan Stripling, Felix Kunze et al all had crashing issues every time they demoed it, meanwhile I've never had tethered sessions crash in LR, even when you have to jump hoops to get the files in via a watched folder.

The reason C1 got the New York pro market penetration is because for years the only way you could tether Phase One digital backs was via C1. When they opened the software up to enable Canon tethering it was trendy to imply you shot Phase One as well.

 

[ecqns]

The reason C1 got the New York pro market penetration is because for years the only way you could tether Phase One digital backs was via C1. When they opened the software up to enable Canon tethering it was trendy to imply you shot Phase One as well.

Yes C1P used to crash a lot and can still - nothing is perfect. I've seen the program pushed really hard over the years though. Actually using a Phase back or a Sony camera I've almost never had a tether connection drop - Canon is another story altogether. In the early days it wasn't about being "trendy", working photographers couldn't care less I'm sure you know, its just that LR was such crap back then in comparison.

You know C1P has hundreds of ICC profiles you can start with (not just the ones recommended for your camera) and then each of those has other contrast curves you can select. There's even linear response which is totally flat to start with, maybe that's what starting in LR is like. Actually the only time I've come across LR professionally is when someone relies on certain VSCO presets to give that Instagram filtered look.

I'm tired of arguing with you, its too stressful. You will use LR, I will use C1P (unless something better comes out) and others should try everything and see what works for them. But for my work and those of others that I work with and trust (and probably every image in any fashion magazine) its C1P without a doubt.