Question about Capture One

[david_amberson1]

<p>Having a hard time with proper evaluation.</p>

<p>I've heard alot about how much detail Capture One keeps in RAW conversion compared to others. So I downloaded a trial version.</p>

<p>What I'm seeing is more detail in the colors. Where other programs smooth over colors, Capture One keeps these details and makes sharper images in all areas....even after Noise Reduction.</p>

<p>I do see Capture One has a set amount of default NR and sharpening. But even with the NR, it retains more detail than say DPP without any NR. IS this what to expect.</p>

<p>Also, I notice difference in color after processing between DPP and Capture. I cant find anywhere in Capture to set working color space etc. I see where to pick ICC profiles upon processing.</p>

<p>Thoughts welcome.</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>I found Capture One to treat both detail and color in my D200 raw files better than CS3, Lightroom or Aperture. It's noticable. Unfortunately, it's clumsy, but if the files are important I use it as my first step.</p>

[philfx]

<p>Capture1 is what I use for RAW. I have used a few, and find it working for me best. I can't place my finger on it, but I know what I see for me is better.<br>

When the program starts it will look for your screen ICC, if it finds one it will ask if you want to use it or override. As far as Color settings, you can white balance with the dropper, presets, and likely some other ways. The interface is simple and easy to get familiar with. There is no bulk to it, and I love that. It is a RAW processor, and that is what it does better than any of the select few that I have used(Lightroom,ACR,Canon, Kodak (2nd best), Aperture). I have also tried SilkyPix for a brief session, and at the time I was not looking for image quality in raw dev. I remember it being rather nice. I don't think I will bother. C1 is that good...you know you are not missing anything.</p>

[david_amberson1]

<p>Thanks. Thats what I thought. I took some jpegs made side by side from DPP and C1. Even with C1 applying set amounts of NR, the image still had more detail than DPP that had no NR at all.</p>

<p>I took a photo of a bank check box that had some deep blue, green and white on it. I did it at ISO 1600 to see how it handled the texture of the box and any nicks and scratches on it.<br>

What I noticed was a file I processed with C1 completely smoothed the color over. The file almost looked fake. The blue was smoothed like it was polished. Well the file looked great, but I was thinking it had lost its detail by heavy Chromiance NR.</p>

<p>I think I was wrong. What appeared as texture in the blue kept by DPP was in fact....chromiance noise. If you look at the box, the blue now appears just like I see it with my eyes. The white text on the blue is sharper than the DPP file as well.</p>

<p>Looking deeper, I am seeing all the little scratches in the blue where the white was showing through.</p>

<p>Man, if this works out, I'll soon be out $400 cause this will shorten my workflow heavily.</p>

<p>Right now, I shoot as folows:<br>

RAW then>16bit TIFF using DPP.<br>

Load TIFF into LR and add any additional NR+USM and let LR make the jpegs.</p>

<p>Capture could completely save a step and all that time makeing tons of huge tiffs etc.<br>

I will keep playing with it. Please keep the advice tips coming on Capture 1.</p>

[bill_mussett1]

<p>I've been using C1-4 since it was introduced for 98% of my RAW conversions but do keep DPP in reserve for the few images that DPP does a better job of processing. I found that C1 produced sharper images and deeper, brighter colors than DPP; the differences were slight, but noticeable. The prior update of C1 did overdo the auto NR and there was an uproar about it on a Phase One forum. The current update, 4.8, corrected that.</p>

<p>The profile I initially use is the generic profile for my camera and have found that depending on the image, switching to linear response from film response can correct lighting issues that otherwise are impossible to easily correct. These settings are on the Q (Quick) page under Basic Characteristics. When you process an image you do have a choice of a wide selection of ICC profiles. I'm using the standard version of C1-4.</p>

<p>Overall it's a great program and Phase One seems to be responsive to customer feedback.</p>

[david_amberson1]

<p>This is awesome. When I get ready for print, I usually start from scratch with the raws and process for print. I usually add more sharpening for print output than I do for web.</p>

<p>When I process the RAW using C1, should I select the output ICC profile to be the one that says, sRGB IEC61966-2.1? I always shoot in Adobe, process to TIFF in Adobe so LR shows colors correctly(it uses Prophoto) and output to jpeg for printing at say Wolf/Ritz as sRGB. This is why I asked should I select that particular profile. If it goes as an Adobe RGB file, Wolf will screw it up.</p>

<p>I really appreciate all the input from everyone. Keep it coming. If someone as a capture one tutorial link, feel free. So far this program looks like my one stop ticket....finally.</p>

[bill_mussett1]

<p>David,</p>

<p>It sounds like you may be trying-out the Pro version of C1-4. I have the standard version and on the Q page I set the ICC Profile based on my camera model which is set to record as sRGB. When processing files for output I set ICC Profile to sRGB Color Space Profile. I don't have the option of selecting sRGB IEC61966-2.1 so that's why I think you may have the Pro version.</p>

<p>Phase One is not up-to-date on their video or written tutorials online except for the Pro version. Check the Help file included with the program for how-to instruction.</p>

[david_amberson1]

<p>Its is the latest pro version. I went on the phase one website and found some tutorials, b ut most dont look anything like what I'm using. So I believe its outdated...maybe.</p>