CS raw conversion question

[J. Cobble]

does anyone have both cs and capture1 software? Is the raw sharpening of the cs as good as the capture1? I have a new 1ds and the capture1 software to support it is almost $500 where as the upgrade to cs is only about $160. I have the trial version of capture1 and the sharpening function is awesome. If someone knows a comparision I would appriciate it. I would love to save $350 if cs is as good in sharpening.

[J. Cobble]

also, is genuine fractal software a raw converter? Does anyone have the the sharpening add on for that software? how does it work? does the enlargement feature of the GF work as well as the website says it does?

[CyberDyneSystems]

I can't compare C1 to CS for 1DS files.. but C1 does a better job than CS on 10D files to my eye. As far as sharpening goes C1 blows CS away for sharpening during raw convesion.. but then with CS.. I don't use the RAW sharpening at all ....I do all my PS sharpening with the USM filter.



Fractals has nothing to do with RAW file conversion.. you would need to convert your files then use Fractals to enlarge them.

[Scottes]

I agree with CDS. I think C1 does a better job overall, and I think the interface is much faster to use, and overall faster since you can develop in the background.

[slejhamer]

There have been a couple of recent posts on an apparent problem with the way CS handles high ISO noise. Here's one:
http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=26596&highlight=

I also prefer C1 because of the workflow, and like the "soft" sharpening option. Then again, I have the "LE" version which supports the 10D but not the 1Ds ... cost would be a consideration for me.

[Jesper]

I also have both C1 and PS CS and a 10D. I haven't done comparisons between the RAW conversion results, but they both do a good job on my 10D files and if I would have to choose between C1 for $500 or a PS CS upgrade for $160, I'd certainly go for PS CS.

[Whaler]

I think I'm in WAY over my head but, can I chine in? Isn't RAW sharpening quite different than that of PSCS? Isn't sharpening in PSCS the pixel edges are being sharpened and in RAW format other file manipulations occur? Okay, stop laughing. . . . you guys were dumb $hits once too. :oops: Also doesn't the C1 Rebel for $49 have basic features that would augment/inhance the PSCS workflow?

[mcneguy]

This bring up a question I had. Capture One has a Digital Rebel version for something like $50, aren't RAW files from a 10d the same as a Digital Rebel? How would the software know what camera the file came from, AND why would the software be more expensive for the 10d...

Thanks

[Guillermo Freige]

This bring up a question I had. Capture One has a Digital Rebel version for something like $50, aren't RAW files from a 10d the same as a Digital Rebel? How would the software know what camera the file came from, AND why would the software be more expensive for the 10d...


Probably RAW files are the same, but camera ID is not, so you can´t open 10D files in C1Rebel (I tried).
Regarding price, really now it´s a moot question because C1Rebel is being discontinued :(

[lcoleman]

There are some extensive reviews of both C1 and CS at Digital Outback. I think these guys are very good at RAW conversion. Note that both software packages have had improvements to them since these reviews were written.

Capture One review:

http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw/raw_02/essay.html

Photoshop CS review:

http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw/raw_12/essay.html

[Loekito]

Do somebody realize that the JPEG output (set to the highest/maximum quality) from C1 is not as sharp as in the C1 preview window? is that because of the JPEG compression?

I agree, that C1 gives us more productive environment than PS-CS Raw Converter, but one that I miss from PS-CS Raw Converter is the ability to realtime preview the image. Different with C1 that takes about half to one second to render the preview when we change any parameters. (is that true? or it's only happend on mine?)

regards,

Loekito

[ajmcdo]

J. Cobble, I've used GF for a few years now. It does exactly what it is supposed to do. It's actually a PSCS plug-in which saves it's own file format and then does a very good job of enlarging without loss of resolution.

Now that I have a 10D with its 6.4 Mpix I find I don't need GF which is not cheap. I wouldn't rush out to buy it if I were you.

Wombat

[slejhamer]

Do somebody realize that the JPEG output (set to the highest/maximum quality) from C1 is not as sharp as in the C1 preview window? is that because of the JPEG compression?



The C1 preview is an approximation. The focus tab window (which can be resized larger) is an exact preview, showing the true effect of your sharpening settings. Generally you will find that the preview overstates the sharpening effect, and you should use the focus tab window if this is critical. It is not real-time, however, though on a good computer only takes a couple of seconds to adjust.

[slejhamer]

Probably RAW files are the same, but camera ID is not, so you can´t open 10D files in C1Rebel (I tried).

Guillermo is right about camera ID. Also, the cameras have different profiles used by C1 for conversion and, if desired, embedding. And as he said, C1-Rebel is going away.

[J. Cobble]

Yes CS has a rebel software package for 50 bucks. I have it. I have used it and really like the results. The problem is that now that I have the 1ds, the CS software to support it is 500 bucks...the program is essentially the same( I have the free trial version of the full blown 1ds supporting CS) And I have tried to fool the rebel version into processing the 1ds format. Interestingly enough, the rebel will preview on its display images on a cf card taken on the 1ds and put into the rebel. However, even if I use the rebel to read the cards to the rebel CS program, it wont recognize them. Guess that would have been too easy. I guess my question, with genuine fractals, how big could I blow up an 11 meg file from my 1ds, does anyone know?

[scorp888]

does anyone have both cs and capture1 software? Is the raw sharpening of the cs as good as the capture1? I have a new 1ds and the capture1 software to support it is almost $500 where as the upgrade to cs is only about $160. I have the trial version of capture1 and the sharpening function is awesome. If someone knows a comparision I would appriciate it. I would love to save $350 if cs is as good in sharpening.

Another couple of things for you to consider.

1/ Breeze browser.
2/ C1 has a limit on how many images you can process. For me, a copious amatuer, this was a problem, as I would have had to do a days shooting in about 10 batch jobs with the C1, or 1 go with either Breeze, or PSCS.

[slejhamer]

2/ C1 has a limit on how many images you can process. For me, a copious amatuer, this was a problem, as I would have had to do a days shooting in about 10 batch jobs with the C1, or 1 go with either Breeze, or PSCS.

Scorp, there is no batch limit with the Pro version, which is what J. Cobble is considering. But given the speed of background processing in C1-LE, I rarely have a problem with the batch limit anyway. (Like you, I tend to process a few hundred images at a time.) On my computer it takes about 15 seconds to convert a file while I am working on the next one.

But you are right that BreezeBrowser is a good (if slower) alternative. In some cases, I find Breeze's "combined" conversion (a blend of normal and linear) to be superior to either C1 or CS.

[jrm]

With all this workflow talk, I am surprised no one has mentioned the free "Dr.Brown's Image Processor" automation tool for PSCS. Available at:

http://www.russellbrown.com/body.html

I have tried C1, and was _very_ unimpressed with the interface. It was so cumbersome and unintuitive, that I was gave up before I figured out how to convert any files.

Using the above "script" in PSCS, you can set up all your adjustments in the PS file browser and then automate the entire conversion process. It will generate PSD, TIFF, JPEG files (all at once or any combination) with several options for each. This is a great batch tool that gives you as much creative control as you like over each image.

I already have PSCS, and am working on a Mac (for which C1 doesn't have a low-cost option). "No extra cost" vs. "several hundred dollars" was a factor in my decision to go PSCS.

From what I have read, C1 probably does a better job of converting most images "out of the box." It also seems that PSCS can end up delivering the same quality through user adjustments after the image conversion. This same point gives PSCS an advantage, since it offers considerably more in the way of image editing/image manipulation tools.

If you can afford both, more power to you. If can only get one, I would say PSCS. The quality of the two tools is comparable, and PSCS offers more creative tools for post-processing - at a lower cost.

[J. Cobble]

Thanks for the imput. Gives me something to think about.

[J. Cobble]

also, i think i will download the free trial of breeze browser

[Saturn]

Hello:

I've found C1 to be so much better than CS in keeping noise levels low and increasing shadow detail, and detail in very saturated colors (especially reds) that to me, it's worth the somewhat cumbersome interface. My only complaint is that on my Mac, C1 takes a lot longer to process a file.

Thanks.

[ombra]

I have both, and have used them a lot.
I prefer the raw conversion of C1. From a purely subjective standpoint, I feel it does a better job with color reproduction and contrast. I also highly prefer C1's 'soft' mode of sharpening over anything PSCS can do with respect to sharpening. In addition, importing many raw files into PSCS is excessively tedious, since you must choose all conversion settings _first_, for each shot, before you can go on to the next one.

That said, there are a lot of things that PSCS can do that C1 doesn't.

My workflow is like this: (i only shoot raw)
Go through all pictures in C1, trashing bad ones, cropping and adjusting others for conversion. If they are fine as is, convert right to jpeg and I'm done. For shots that need other work (noise ninja, rotation, or other enhancement) I generate 16b TIFF's of those and then take them through the other tools and then to jpeg.

An additional note: I have used C1 on the Mac and Windows. the Windows version is far superior in many ways, most notably speed. If you only have a Mac, I can't fully recommend C1.