1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Capture One (C1) Pro 7.01 Challenge - Warning - VERY Large Files Embedded

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by Amin Sabet, Dec 16, 2012.

  1. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Okay, as mentioned in another thread, I've been giving the Capture One (C1) Pro 7.01 RAW conversion software trial a chance, and I'm thinking of switching to it from Lightroom.

    A couple people commented that Lightroom and other software like Aperture have the ability to give the same results as C1 and that it comes down to knowing how to get the best out of the software, so I'm here to issue a challenge.

    Here are the rules:

    1) You use the RAW file which is attached to this post (P8270257.orf) and process it in your RAW processing software of choice

    2) You can use 3rd party plugins. Let us know which ones you used.

    3) As far as noise reduction and sharpening goes, you may only use the global sliders for NR, sharpening, masking, etc. No painting over regions to apply selective sharpening or noise reduction by hand to specific areas like the sky or specific structures.

    4) You may use selective tools that don't involve labor intensive painting and apply global changes. For example, feel free to use the Fringe Color Selector inkdropper tool in Lightroom.

    5) Host your full-res processed JPEG offsite (eg Flickr, Smugmug, Zenfolio, Picasaweb) and embed it at 100% size in this thread.

    That's it. The more detail you can give about what you did, the more helpful it will be.

    The sample file is an Olympus E-M5 ISO 200 file taken at 1/800s using the Rokinon 7.5mm fisheye.
     
  2. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    The version I'm embedding in this post is the 100% default version in C1 after Auto Adjust (Ctrl L). Notice how C1 has removed nearly all the color fringing by default and how the overall level of detail is high while the sky is kept fairly clean.

    8278723675_e1ffa8d497_o.
     
  3. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Gordon (flash) said that "-25 contrast +15 clarity" would emulate the C1 results. Below you can see my Lightroom 4.3 conversion using that exact recipe. Who's next? :smile:

    8278768567_c4b6f33259_o.
     
  4. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    Aperture 3.4.3... just the Autoenhance button... not seeing a capture one magic


    P8270257 by kevinparis, on Flickr

    K
     
  5. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    ha ha... got very confused when you threw in the flash version... thought i was going really mad :)

    still sticking with Aperture

    K
     
  6. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Thanks, Kevin. In case anyone is wondering, here is Lightroom 4.3 after Auto Tone with all others at defaults:

    8279853886_4b92f7da47_o.
     
  7. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Thanks for that. Not a bad showing by the Aperture default.

    Clearly C1 has the most default local contrast, sharpening, and noise reduction. I know that doesn't prove superiority in any way. However, I look forward to seeing whether someone else can chef up a Lightroom or Aperture version that sharpens up to the extent of the C1 version without a bunch of accentuated noise/artifacts.
     
  8. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    so far it looks that lightroom is the crap one :)

    as I have said before.. they all can get the same result... had a quick look at the latest C1... all the tools are there... but a way way fussier interface... sorry aperture still has it..
    K
     
  9. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Here's an attempt to get the C1 look in Lightroom 4.3.

    +50 Clarity
    +26 Saturation
    +50 Sharpening (Radius 1.0 Detail 25 Masking 0)

    +50 Luminance NR (Detail 50 Contrast 0)

    All others at defaults.

    The overall look is much more similar to C1 now, but there are odd artifacts in the pavement and elsewhere. C1 is more "organic" and pleasing.

    8278838433_8aa8d0d654_o.
     
  10. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Can you show me an Aperture-processed version that looks like my C1 auto-adjusted version (as sharp, as little noise, with the same amount of detail)?
     
  11. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    care to point out these 'srtifacts'?... really amin... do you need to descend into this level of nerdishness?... what i like about this forum is the lack of this level of pixel/navel gazing. Its about the fun of photography.. the image processing tool of your choice wont make better photographs... they all do the same thing... its all down to choice of interface

    K
     
  12. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    anyway here is an aperture version with a little sharpening... and some NR... thought i struggled to see any noise in your original.


    P8270257 by kevinparis, on Flickr

    I will dump my shots from Flickr in the next 48 hours... as this seems a slightly pointless arugment... I respect your position... but stand by mine that all of the big players in PP do the same stuff... oh and nobody really needs to use photoshop if they are a just a photographer :)

    K
     
  13. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Dara
    I can get fairly close with my default and bump of exposure (+0.25). I think the C1 version looks a tad nicer, but having had another gander at the C1 interface, I can't say I feel like I'm missing out.

    Default:

    Saturation: +10
    Tone Curve: Medium Contrast
    Blue Channel Saturation: +10
    Sharpening - A: 50, R: 0.7, D:60, M: 16
    Len Correction - Color: Remove Chromatic Aberration
     
  14. So I notice that the C1 example in particular displays a tendency to turn lighter areas of the sky to cyan, although in my own use I find that Lightroom is not immune to doing this either. Neither are anywhere near as bad the Olympus "Vivid" jpeg setting, thankfully. I'd love to know where this particular look became popular because I find it to be totally unnatural looking (I usually isolate the cyan colour channel and desaturate it significantly on any image containing blue sky).
     
  15. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    941
    Oct 20, 2011
    c1 seems to have the shadow detail loss out of every image presented especially on the shadowed right side of the street. Apeture and LR seem to give a more workable basic image to start from shadows to highlights. Although I will say the immediate image from c1 is the most balanced assuming I would stop there. Once a full workflow is given it is hard to say what the best one would be, it maybe a silly question they are all quality products that will hopefully force each other to improve.
     
  16. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Gordon
  17. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Gordon
    Hmmmm. What is Flickr doing to my image? Looks like cr@p here. Looks sensational when processed out to a jpeg file locally.

    Gordon
     
  18. F1L1P

    F1L1P Mu-43 Veteran

    388
    Jan 2, 2010
    Europe
    I too do not see the magic of C1 :confused:

    Here's what I dislike about C1 processing:
    - White balance seems way off on the warm side.
    - Image looks punchy, but details in shadows are destroyed
    - blue fringe quite noticable on tower on the upper left part of the image

    Here are my 2 takes in Camera RAW. One is "normal", other one is more "vibrant":

    normal:
    [​IMG]

    vibrant:
    [​IMG]

    Lemme know what you think.
     
  19. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Pixel peeping and gear are distinct hobbies from photography.
    Everyone is free to enjoy one or more of them in this forum,
    and no one is forced to enjoy any of them. I like all 3.

    That's been stated several times.
    The point of this thread is to demonstrate it.

    C1 on the left, LR with clarity boost on the right. Looks to me like LR has false details in the pavement.

    8280982666_051a875530_o.
     
  20. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    There shouldn't be a difference unless your color profile is something other than sRGB.


    The main thing I like about C1 is that the images are by default very clean (free of noise) with lots of detail still apparent
    and relatively free of sharpening/NR artifacts (none which would be apparent in a print).
    I agree that it's too warm with too much cyan and a bit too contrasty by default,
    but all of that is super easy to adjust, whereas it's not so easy to get the
    clean and detailed look in Lightroom, at least for me.,

    Here are two more C1 versions addressing some of the WB/color issues
    mentioned by others. The first has a moderate shadow lift, and the second
    has a big shadow lift.

    8281007886_e1ca45049c_o.

    [​IMG]