Capture One, or the future of post-processing

Functionally Lr does not do the same as C1P. While both have raw converters, the comparison gets thin after that. Lr can not do layers, do a managed catalog (as opposed to referenced catalog) or do sessions.


Suggest anyone interested in C1P look at the videos on Youtube and do a 30 day trial. In Youtube search for "Capture One Pro 12".

The "Process" notation is the way Adobe names / catalogs their ACR versions. Process 5 is the latest (with the texture slider)

https://helpx.adobe.co​m …ing/process-versions.html

Process 5 ACR was released May 2019

(Edit: I will look at the videos. Thanks, that may help. All the references to Lightroom are useless to me because I don't use Lightroom.)

Picture North Carolina wrote in post #18883580
Does C1 do more than the latest (Process 5) Adobe ACR, or does it just basically (just) develop RAWs like ACR?

(I do not use Lightroom. I only use ACR to develop RAWs. I could get rid of the Adobe rental garbage if C1 could be used to develop and Aurora used to edit.)

One thing Process Version 5 did is correct blacks/shadows at very high ISO's. They tended to look purple. Not sure about other changes but I'll look it up later.

Picture North Carolina wrote in post #18884045
The "Process" notation is the way Adobe names / catalogs their ACR versions. Process 5 is the latest (with the texture slider)

https://helpx.adobe.co​m …ing/process-versions.html

Process 5 ACR was released May 2019

(Edit: I will look at the videos. Thanks, that may help. All the references to Lightroom are useless to me because I don't use Lightroom.)

Process 5 came out about a year ago. Texture about a month ago with version 8.3.

MCAsan wrote in post #18883921
Functionally Lr does not do the same as C1P. While both have raw converters, the comparison gets thin after that. Lr can not do layers, do a managed catalog (as opposed to referenced catalog) or do sessions

I agree.

Humans tend to like categorizing and compartmentalizing things, sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn't work so well.

I've only used Lr lightly, but don't really feel like its in the same category as C1. The differences are in the approach as much as the execution.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18884129
I've only used Lr lightly, but don't really feel like its in the same category as C1. The differences are in the approach as much as the execution.

I think the principle difference of LR and C1 is overrated. With both you can achieve very similar outcomes. And yes, C1 is stronger aligned with the needs of professionals - and you might want to label this as a different category. But fact is that both are no sloths in the raw-editing arena and are very capable pieces of software.

drmaxx wrote in post #18884154
I think the principle difference of LR and C1 is overrated. With both you can achieve very similar outcomes.

And that is what I was after. Thank you.

I just finished developing a bunch of RAWs with the latest ACR. Some were blown on both ends. I did not want to do LM nor did I want to do HDR. But with proper tweaking I was very able to produce some very good images - bright skies were not blown, deep shadows were not either.

I know the debate about Capture 1 vs. Adobe Camera Raw (as pertains to RAW development) has gone on forever, and will probably continue until our sun turns into a red giant. But right now I can get outstanding results out of ACR and I do not see another RAW development tool producing results so astonishing better I would pay premium bucks for it.

Picture North Carolina wrote in post #18884198
But right now I can get outstanding results out of ACR and I do not see another RAW development tool producing results so astonishing better I would pay premium bucks for it.

I can tell you what my main motivation was to switch from LR to C1:
* Speed (LR6 was painfully slow rendering the changes on my computer - C1 was just soo much more pleasant to work with)
* colour control is awesome in C1
* the base conversion of the raw files was more pleasing for me on C1; especially skin tones are rendered very nicely (at least to my eyes).
* Very nice flexibility to adapt the tools and workspace to your personal style and liking.
* And last but not least: I detested the way how Adobe nagged their customers to switch to the cloud.

Picture North Carolina wrote in post #18884198
And that is what I was after. Thank you.

I just finished developing a bunch of RAWs with the latest ACR. Some were blown on both ends. I did not want to do LM nor did I want to do HDR. But with proper tweaking I was very able to produce some very good images - bright skies were not blown, deep shadows were not either.

I know the debate about Capture 1 vs. Adobe Camera Raw (as pertains to RAW development) has gone on forever, and will probably continue until our sun turns into a red giant. But right now I can get outstanding results out of ACR and I do not see another RAW development tool producing results so astonishing better I would pay premium bucks for it.

I really wanted C1 to blow my socks in the key areas that I need because I didn't want to go subscription but it didn't. It is very good but just didn't do it for me.

digital paradise wrote in post #18884118
One thing Process Version 5 did is correct blacks/shadows at very high ISO's. They tended to look purple. Not sure about other changes but I'll look it up later.

Actually it last October - version 8

Process Version 5

The Process Version has been updated in order to improve Dehaze and purple noise.

Moving Dehaze to the left could have some unexpected results in earlier versions, like the strange yellow shown below, and high ISO photos could turn purple in the shadows in some circumstances, but these issues are fixed in PV5. You don’t need to update your existing photos unless they exhibit one of these issues.

Also, does anyone use C1 with dual monitors? I might go dual monitor in the future, wondering what people's experiences have been.

There is at least one recent video on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=K1w372DktPQ


"Create a dual monitor user interface
There are numerous ways to create a customized layout. Follow this suggested set-up to create a dual monitor user interface. This example has a Viewer on one monitor and the Browser on the other.

Select Window>Viewer to create an extra Viewer. (Move the Viewer to a second monitor if necessary).
Select View>Hide Viewer. The Viewer within the main user interface will disappear and the browser thumbnails will replace it.
Move your cursor to the side of the Viewer to access the default Tool Tabs. (More Tool Tabs can be added. Add another Tool Tab in the Viewer by right-clicking on the Tool Tab bar and select Add Tool Tab>Lens or Quick etc).
Individual tools can also be moved to float freely. Simply click on the bar at the top of any tool, then drag and drop it to a desired position. "

Thanks. However, I was specifically asking about experience using it with dual monitors, I'm sure it's possible.

I have been using Canon DPP, found it was getting the job done in my limited photographic ability. I have been looking to try another PP tool but like most, hated to get into a subscription with Adobe. Which C1 product are most using, Pro, studio? Maybe sticking with DPP as a hobbyist is better but even as a hobbyist, always searching for more...

Apricane wrote in post #18884264
Also, does anyone use C1 with dual monitors? I might go dual monitor in the future, wondering what people's experiences have been.

I must admit I could never figure out how to set up that second monitor. "BUT" if you look in the work-spaces area there is one already set up out-of-the-box you can choose. I chose that one and then modified it to my desire and saved it - works like a charm. .