Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Non Phase / Leaf users Why do you use C1 instead of other RAW processors ?  (Read 3171 times)
Dennis Carbo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 163


WWW
« on: November 14, 2010, 06:59:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi All,

I periodically try new RAW converters as technology improves....I just tried C1 for my Sinar .DNG files and was very pleased with my first attempt. Compared to ACR 5.7 i think it produced a better file in terms of clarity and color.  I was curious what others found superior about C1 VS. other RAW converters, particularly those of you not using a PHASE/LEAF product.


Happy shooting

Dennis
Logged
Chris_Brown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 15, 2010, 08:34:17 AM »
ReplyReply

I use Capture One, Raw Developer, ACR and Canon's DPP for processing images from all my Canon cameras (1Ds series, 10D-50D, 5D). What I use depends on the subject matter (and my mood   Roll Eyes  )

I don't have the latest version of ACR, I'm still running v5.x (hosted by Photoshop CS4) so I'm not familiar with their latest implementation.

For image sharpening, Raw Developer wins. Hands down. It also handles the widest variety of input profile methods (ICC camera profiles, DNG camera profiles, & its own color matrix). What's even more surprising: it's developed & maintained by one guy. It's downside is its file management, which becomes burdensome when working with hundreds of images.

For out of the box color and tonal accuracy, DPP wins. It's weak link, IMO, is the "Picture Style" used to generate color and tone. The Picture Style Editor could be much more precise, but it's interface is surprisingly elementary. DPP's file management is okay, similar to Adobe Bridge but without easy-to-use EXIF controls and easy sorting methods (it's there, but it's not obvious how to implement them to the beginner).

Capture One, when used with accurate ICC camera profiles, delivers outstanding color and tone. It's level of tonal control is accurate and the program is obviously written (i.e., coded) very well. Its latest implementation of selective color control is very good, and I think its interface is better than ACR's (the color wheels vs. the sliders). If Capture One had the same gradation feature and local adjustment feature as ACR, it'd be the best raw processor on the market, IMO. Capture One handles large quantities of images fairly well by using proxy images. At first (v. 2?) it seemed like a lame idea, but it allows the program to refresh the screen almost instantly.

Now that Phase One owns Expressions Media (aka iView MediaPro), I have hopes that its management of large image libraries will be improved. To me, Expressions Media competes with Adobe Bridge on the level of file cataloging and organizing. I think Bridge's caching function is its Achilles' heel.

How Phase One integrates Capture One with Expressions Media is a big concern for users. Capture One uses sub-folders to maintain image proxies and settings, and that could be burdensome when trying to integrate it with Expressions Media.
Logged

~ CB
robgo2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 344


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2010, 07:18:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I shoot Pentax DSLRs.  I have used and tested quite a few raw converters over the years, but none can match the image quality that I get from Capture One 5.  It's not simply a matter or detail or color accuracy (at which C1 excels,) but rather the overall rendering of images that have great presence and depth.  I am madly in love with the Clarity tool, which is almost magical in its ability to bring images to life.  I have spent a great deal of time working with ACR and DxO, and it is my opinion that they are not in the same league as C1.  I have tested Bibble and SilkyPix but found nothing about them that would make me want to switch.

Capture One is like a well kept secret in the imaging world.  If it had all the bells and whistles of Lightroom, it might enjoy much greater popularity.  With Phase One's purchase of Expression Media, I would not be surprised to see them take C1 in that direction, i.e. an all-in-one program that can manage most images from start to finish.  Personally, I only care about great conversions and an elegant user interface. 

Rob
Logged
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3636


« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2010, 07:49:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi All,

I periodically try new RAW converters as technology improves....I just tried C1 for my Sinar .DNG files and was very pleased with my first attempt. Compared to ACR 5.7 i think it produced a better file in terms of clarity and color.  I was curious what others found superior about C1 VS. other RAW converters, particularly those of you not using a PHASE/LEAF product.

Hi Dennis,

C1, because of the quality of the default 1Ds3 camera profile and the detail it can extract from the files, without major (mazing, and false color) artifacts. The moiré reduction can be useful at times, and frankly I like the per folder storage of previews (which is more efficient for backups than a central humongous repository of metadata).

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad