Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Photoshop CS and Capture 1

  1. #1

    Default Photoshop CS and Capture 1

    Hi guys,

    was just wondering if anyone uses the photoshop raw plugin and compared it to the capture 1 raw conversion. which one would yield better quality?

  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bigfatfish
    was just wondering if anyone uses the photoshop raw plugin and compared it to the capture 1 raw conversion. which one would yield better quality?
    Detail extraction would be slightly better with C1 and standard profiles. If you get C1 + Magne's ETC camera profiles, no contest. It is that much better and I am speaking from experiences with prints like 10 x 12 straight out of C1.

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by freelancer
    Detail extraction would be slightly better with C1 and standard profiles. If you get C1 + Magne's ETC camera profiles, no contest. It is that much better and I am speaking from experiences with prints like 10 x 12 straight out of C1.

    can you explain more about the Magne ETC camera profiles? do you mean like for every different profile its a different set of color palette range , just like if film-days where you choose the colors you want by choosing the film or trans?

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bigfatfish
    can you explain more about the Magne ETC camera profiles?
    In a way yes. When you shoot with RAW and then select the camera profile later, it is like shooting first and then select the film you want to use.

    Magne's web link www.etcetera.cc

    You may find some more info here http://www.etcetera.cc/pub/index.php...leview/24/1/2/
    Click on the Examples 1, 2 ,3 for comparison of how the standard C1 camera profile is compared against ETC high sat and low sat profiles.

  5. #5

    Default

    thanks dude. i will check it out.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    how much is capture 1 and where to buy?

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nemesis32
    how much is capture 1 and where to buy?
    I was at the Beauty Photography Seminar organised by PSS, Ruby & Phase 1 last Saturday.

    Ruby has it. Was told at the seminar that the LE version costs $200 & the pro version $1K.

    You cld perhaps check with Ruby to confirm.

    Cheers!

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    www.whltelightphotographer.com
    Posts
    1,834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AixisOfJustice
    I was at the Beauty Photography Seminar organised by PSS, Ruby & Phase 1 last Saturday.

    Ruby has it. Was told at the seminar that the LE version costs $200 & the pro version $1K.

    You cld perhaps check with Ruby to confirm.

    Cheers!
    Ruby Imaging not Rudy Photo diffirent people

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bigfatfish
    Hi guys,

    was just wondering if anyone uses the photoshop raw plugin and compared it to the capture 1 raw conversion. which one would yield better quality?
    It depends on the camera really.

    IMHO, after using 4 different brands of DSLRs over the last 5 years, in terms of colour, tone and overall 'definition' (sorry can't think of a more appropriate word at this time), the camera manufacturer's own code tends to be the best if 'quality' is the only consideration.

    But apparently for a lot of people, quality is NOT the only consideration

    What alternatives like C1, Adobe Camera Raw, RSE, Bibble, Silkypix, amongst many others, give you are more flexibility, controls and features (none necessarily for the better towards the final outcome if you ask me). Often the manufacturers' own raw conversion applications are badly written, have flawed or terrible interfaces, are slow, or just don't take the working photographer's everyday workflow into consideration. If the manufacturer's themselves wrote better raw conversion apps, none of these other players would be necessary.

    Some quick anecdotal experiences:

    Oly E-1 - C1 teases out a fair bit more texture and details from some raw files than Oly's own app (subject dependent - I find C1 a lot better for pulling out details in objects that are distant or have very fine texture). This has largely to do with the more sophisticated sharpening algorithm available in C1. BUT the Oly colour and overall look is *much* better if you ask me. Would I give up Studio and run C1? Not all the time, depends on the subject matter but I'd say I'd use them maybe 70/30 in favour of Studio. ACR is so so. The big weakness with Oly's own converter is the sharpening algorithm. E-1 owners owe it to themselves to purchase the Photokit Sharpener script.

    Canon EOS 1Ds - The 1Ds is my main squeeze at the moment. I have played with countless no. of converters for this camera's files. I still find myself coming back to DPP, Canon's own humble little app. The latest incarnation of ACR holds no candle, especially so when you shoot at higher than ISO200. The colours and tone just look much more film like with DPP. I get artifacts with ACR that I don't get with DPP. DPP's thumbnail rendering speed is also very commendable with 11MP files. C1 is alright. Sometimes better and sometimes worse than ACR. I hate the C1 interface though.

    Fujifilm S2 - strictly on quality alone, there's no way ACR can ever beat Fuji's own converter. But whoever Fuji hires for their coding writes really nasty apps. Interface is not so good. It will be the same with the S3. However, I'd like to say that even when I had my S2, I only shot in 12MP jpeg because the camera is just too slow to shoot in RAW. The S2's jpegs are the best in-camera jpegs I have ever seen. Very nice and clean files. Stunning colour and tonal rendition.

    Nikon - my last ever Nikon DSLR was the D1x, which made me swear off buying a Nikon DSLR for a while after that. Such a dope of a camera - which is a real pity given it's excellent handling qualities. Things have improved tremendously after that model of course. With this one, ACR is alright, even preferable to Nikon's own converter then. Then again, I am not in touch with Nikon's converter now.

    Kodak 14n/SLRn - whilst Kodak's app is outstanding in terms of colour rendition, I prefer ACR for better tones, noise control and details. I think if you're using this camera everyday, you will better be able to live with ACR as your main converter.

    Now the thing is, all my comments are largely only valid for my way of working. Your own mileage may vary, and likely will.
    Last edited by kahheng; 4th July 2005 at 02:05 PM.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by singscott
    Ruby Imaging not Rudy Photo diffirent people
    yup, you're right, it's Ruby Imaging. I thought they were one and the same .. .. my mistake ..

    thanks bro!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •