Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 15, 2003, 3:14 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 69
Default Capture One Digital Rebel version is released

http://www.pictureflow.com

The Digital Rebel version of the Capture One RAW conversion program is now out. There is a 15 day trial which is nice because I'm not sure if I want to buy it.

I've read that it's supposed to be faster at conversion than Canons File Viewer Utility (FVU), but in a quick test it seemed to be about the same. I guess you can work on other shots at the same time it's converting, and the previews are probably faster, so Capture One is probably faster when making changes but maybe about the same speed when just doing a big batch at 'Shot settings'. I usually BLH (bracket like heck) so that I get at least one shot that doesn't need any adjustment.

I did a quick comparison test of a shot to see how the colors were. There was some difference, C1 skin tones were more pale and blown out and the red was different.

I'll have to do a big batch to see if I really want to buy C1. Other than being slow when making changes I've been happy with the picture quality I get from FVU. Maybe Breezebrowser would be better than C1 for me.

Anyone else tried Capture One Digital Rebel and have an opinion?
The Photo Tuell is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 15, 2003, 5:04 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I haven't use it, but I can make a few comments from all that I've read about it.

The workflow is always described as very different than other packages. I assume this means that if it fits you mental makeup it will work well for you and if not... it could be more difficult than it should be.

I've heard people say that it does a better job at RAW conversion. Some in speed, but more that they like the output and that its controls and flexability are better.

I don't believe I've heard a complaint about it. That is a rare thing. Do they kill their customers who speak badly of it?

Of course, this is all second hand... so take it with a grain of salt.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2003, 11:37 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 69
Default

Big thread on DPReview here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=6372080

Another here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=6377039

Seems I'm not the only one who is 'underwhelmed'.

It's not much faster if it requires more work.

Reds are funky, I'll post a good example later.
The Photo Tuell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2003, 6:26 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 69
Default

Here's the screwed up reds I was talking about. I tried many different settings, white balance, sharpness, etc, but nothing fixed it. It shouldn't be so much work to get a good looking picture, let alone so much work without getting a good looking picture.

One side is how it should look, the other is Capture One (Soft look sharpening, Amount: 43, Threshold: 3)...



Another thing I just noticed...Capture One doesn't keep the EXIF data...lame. That does it for me, too many reasons to not get it.
The Photo Tuell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2003, 10:11 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Sure sounds that way. Not good at all.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2003, 10:57 PM   #6
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default I've got both

Breeze Browser & Capture One for my D30 and (in my opinion), Breeze Browser is much more useful and intuitive. I probably haven't used Capture One as much as I could have but that's because Breeze Browser is so easy to use, I refuse to spend the time on Capture One learning something like Photoshop would require. :roll:

  Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2003, 11:29 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 69
Default

Quote:
The Canon FVU uses their SDK which is able to extract the EXIF information from the maker note data in the THM file. We do not use the SDK and so it is quite a task to find the full EXIF data (it is not documented by Canon, even within their SDK).

If the THM file (which holds the maker note data), is present, we maintain this information and transfer it to the output files 9TIF and JPEG).

We will hope to extract more EXIF in the future if we can. Each camera is different, so it drains a lot of R&D time.
http://www.pictureflow.com/forum/sho...&threadid=1654

My test conversion had very little EXIF info compared to a file converted with FVU (checked with two different programs). Hmm on Pbase it shows up the same, though. Guess it depends what program is used to view the EXIF data.

Reds aren't a problem with other converters I've used, just C1.

Here's a sharper example. Guess which is FVU and which is Capture One.




Larger sizes here:
http://www.pbase.com/image/22385751/original
http://www.pbase.com/image/22385781/original

I think my problem was that Capture One was so hyped up by most people that I thought it was going to be the perfect software. Some people are so blinded that they don't even try FVU and just assume that C1 has to be better...
The Photo Tuell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2003, 9:10 AM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 5
Default

Thanks for the evaluation P Tuell. I can see I wouldnt want C1. Kalipso has me curious about breesebrowser now though.
smshopper is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:11 AM.