Quantcast

Capture One 4

Discussion in 'Computers & Technology' started by PatBranch, Feb 2, 2008.

  1. PatBranch

    PatBranch Turbo Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    8 / 7
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Messages:
    10,461
    Location:
    wine country
    I was going to 'upgrade' from c1 3 for the HDR feature as well as other things, but I've heard 4 is a huge downgrade from 3. You can't even choose to have only raw files, not jpegs load into it. Here's one of the many threads about it...

    Transcend, have you tried it?
     
    #1 -   Feb 2, 2008

    Please register to disable this ad.

  2. Quo Fan

    Quo Fan don't make me kick your ass

    Rep/Likes:
    38 / 36
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,959
    Location:
    Here. I'm just not sure where "here" is.
    I've never tried Capture One, but I use Lightroom and Photoshop CS3. I find there is nothing I can't do with both of these.
     
    #2 -   Feb 2, 2008
  3. Transcend

    Transcend My Nuts Are Flat

    Rep/Likes:
    5 / 0
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2002
    Messages:
    18,062
    Location:
    Towing the party line.
    C1 4 is a complete mess. I used to LOVE 3.7, then switched to lightroom and will not be going back. LF offers better control and better organization.

    C1 a disaster compared to c1 3.7.

    Quo Fan: for the longest time c1 was the absolute BEST processor, hands down. The results out of it are fantastic (still are in version 3.x.). 4 sucks. Lightroom output is a slight step down from c1 3, but due to the overwhelming control it offers, you can get the same results with about 60 seconds more work, and save hours due to the organizational features.

    Oh also, HDR is lame.
     
    #3 -   Feb 2, 2008
  4. PatBranch

    PatBranch Turbo Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    8 / 7
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Messages:
    10,461
    Location:
    wine country
    How does the workflow in lightroom compare to C1 3? Is it much slower? I'm going to try a 30 day trial.

    Blowing out things to get other things exposed good is lame.
     
    #4 -   Feb 2, 2008
  5. Quo Fan

    Quo Fan don't make me kick your ass

    Rep/Likes:
    38 / 36
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,959
    Location:
    Here. I'm just not sure where "here" is.
    I've seen good HDR, but mostly bad HDR. Maybe someday when I get really bored, I'll try and do an HDR.

    The only RAW processor I've really worked with is Lightroom. I downloaded the trial, and haven't looked back. I started with 1.0, and now it's at 1.3.
     
    #5 -   Feb 2, 2008
  6. narlus

    narlus Eastcoast Softcore
    Staff Member

    Rep/Likes:
    17 / 21
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2001
    Messages:
    24,678
    Location:
    behind the viewfinder
    the raw converter in lightroom is the same in CS 3. it kicks ass.

    there's only so much dynamic range to a sensor...
     
    #6 -   Feb 2, 2008
  7. Transcend

    Transcend My Nuts Are Flat

    Rep/Likes:
    5 / 0
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2002
    Messages:
    18,062
    Location:
    Towing the party line.
    The lightroom/cs3 converter isn't as good as the Phase one converter, especially for light skin tones. However, the level of control LR offers more than makes up for the difference. You also save hours if you work with large file libraries due to the organizational abilities of lightroom.

    I have a 75 000 image library from last year and i can find specific images in 10 seconds. It also didn't take 10 hours to catalog each shoot as it did with Iview. Much more handy.

    Also, I have seen maybe 1 TRUE HDR image that worked. The rest were either badly done, or not even HDR but tone mapped files. Tone mapping looks horrendous each and every time. Layers of the same image is not HDR, it is tone mapping.

    You can't pull more information from a file than exists in that file, no matter how hard you try.
     
    #7 -   Feb 2, 2008
  8. PatBranch

    PatBranch Turbo Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    8 / 7
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Messages:
    10,461
    Location:
    wine country
    Lightroom works so well. I've set up two catalogs, one for sports and one for everything else. After keywording lots of images, I read you should separate them with commas. Is there a reason for that? They come up in searches fine.

    Transcend, are those 75,000 images in one or multiple catalogs?