Capture One Screen Rendering of the GFX 100

[MGrayson]

Odd problem. When viewing a RAW sized "to fit" from the GFX100 in C1 v.20, the rendering is visibly different than a processed version. At any other magnification, the two views are identical. Since "to fit" is useful for judging the impact of a photo, this difference is disturbing.

Here are the RAW and jpeg at 200%. They are indistinguishable on my laptop, iMac, or NEC calibrated monitor.



Here's the "view to fit". The difference shows up on the same screens as above. 16 bit TIFF is the same.



Any ideas?

Thanks,

Matt

 

[Ben730]

Maybe you have to change the preview size in the preferences.
Regards,
Ben

 

[MGrayson]

Maybe you have to change the preview size in the preferences.
Regards,
Ben

Ben,

Thank you for the suggestion. When generating the new preview, the image would change. After some resizing, it looked as it did with the 2560px preview. At no size did the effect vanish. Still, it's something to experiment with on a larger monitor. Final processing shouldn't happen on this laptop!

Matt

 

[MGrayson]

I heard back from Capture One.

Sigh.

I remember now. The first three back-and-forths consist of convincing them that I DO know how C1 works, and that I'm reporting something that actually IS a problem.

I'll summarize the response. "This is how we do it. It's the best way. Deal with it."

Dear C1. You are not the only software that generates previews. You ARE the only software whose previews look so materially different from the final product throughout the editing process that image selection/rejection is materially affected. This is a rare event, but really annoying when it happens.

I am not going to win this one - just have to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the tools and move on.

Disappointed, but not surprised,

Matt

 

[Paul2660]

Matt,

I just saw this post, and did want to comment, that I believe the issue is common with all C1 previews, and I have opened cases with both my dealer CI and Phase One on this and got basically the same answer from Phase. Everyone has a different requirement for images, but I prefer to push up shadows/blacks and felt with the 3100 CMOS back, I would be able to get a lot of shadow relief in post.

The more the image has push, i.e. exposure push, shadow push etc, the more the preview will not fully reflect the actual image and you need to view it at 100%.

I first ran into this with 3100 files where I was trying to push up the shadows 2 stops. In the preview fit to screen, you see a different look to the image than at 100%. The fit to view part of the view seems to not show all the noise and or at times colors.

Ever since my conversations with P1 on this I just make it a point to make sure I view the image at 100% and move around the image to make sure things are the way I want them. If you export the image to CC (edit with CC option in C1), the image will always look as it does at 100%. This is how I first caught the issue.

Phase One's response to me was pretty much the same, (don't push the shadows as much, expose your images more evenly).

One note, I am now seeing a slight issue with the dual exposure option on the 4150, where at 100% view vs the actual exported file will have slight color changes, (only in areas of extreme shadow push).

Paul C

 

[Christopher]

Has been around for ages. Phase one doesn’t care. Or let’s say it happens to seldom....

I had a support case for it and it was ended with, it works as intended.

 

[John Black]

Raised a ticket on this about a year ago and asked Phase One if they are happy with the previews. Their answer - yes... That was a depressing response... What's really frustrating is that the preview is sharp for a brief moment, then some sort of rendering is done, and that subsequent render is soft looking. I've tried every size of preview and nothing made a difference. Frankly, C20 is so eff'd up right now, this is the least of my concerns.

 

[chbenard]

Odd problem. When viewing a RAW sized "to fit" from the GFX100 in C1 v.20, the rendering is visibly different than a processed version. At any other magnification, the two views are identical. Since "to fit" is useful for judging the impact of a photo, this difference is disturbing.

Here are the RAW and jpeg at 200%. They are indistinguishable on my laptop, iMac, or NEC calibrated monitor.



Here's the "view to fit". The difference shows up on the same screens as above. 16 bit TIFF is the same.



Any ideas?

Thanks,

Matt

Hi Matt,

Unfortunately I have to agree with others; this has been happening for ever in C1. I mostly notice it when bringing back .TIFF files from Photoshop into C1: the highlights of the "view to fit" preview always look faded in comparison to the original RAW file's preview. As soon as I zoom in a bit on the image, the highlights render properly in the preview window, and so do they in the processed image (.TIFF, .JPEG, etc.). I am unsure why it is happening but it has been a frustration for a long time. Sadly as many users I have learned to live with it as it represents a minor flaw in an otherwise outstanding software. Note that the issue is not specific to the GFX as it happens with both my Sony and Phase One files.

 

[MGrayson]

Hi Matt,

Unfortunately I have to agree with others; this has been happening for ever in C1. I mostly notice it when bringing back .TIFF files from Photoshop into C1: the highlights of the "view to fit" preview always look faded in comparison to the original RAW file's preview. As soon as I zoom in a bit on the image, the highlights render properly in the preview window, and so do they in the processed image (.TIFF, .JPEG, etc.). I am unsure why it is happening but it has been a frustration for a long time. Sadly as many users I have learned to live with it as it represents a minor flaw in an otherwise outstanding software. Note that the issue is not specific to the GFX as it happens with both my Sony and Phase One files.

The sad thing is that I really WANT it to look like the preview. If there were a way to do that, I would be delighted. I tried enlarging the preview and then using it as a mask in photoshop, my skill was not up to the job.

 

[tjv]

I've noticed this a few times too and when it happens it drives me crazy!

I don't want to have to micro-analyse the image at 100% (= more time I don't have!) to make sure it matches the full screen preview – in every other piece of software I use this is not an issue.

Perhaps Steve and Doug may be able to chime in here to comment on whether they've ever bought this up with Phase directly?

 

[Ed Hurst]

Sounds like something they need to learn to care about and get fixed (along with one or two other priorities the company may have...)

 

[MGrayson]

Sounds like something they need to learn to care about and get fixed (along with one or two other priorities the company may have...)

I wrote them a concise reply about the value of previews that resemble the final image. I got the "we will pass along your suggestion" response. It's odd that they say, and I quote:

"Please note that 100% view is the only supported resolution for viewing correct colors and resolution."

How many of us have a monitor big enough to see the entire image at 100%? I'm guessing zero, unless you regularly shoot at under 10MP.

To state their position in a more neutral light: They do not render and then resize. They render to whatever size you're viewing. View 100%? Render 100%. View 33%? Render to 33%. That sounds like a fine philosophy, but what does it really get you? Exactly how the image would render if you wanted, say, a 4"x6"* image at screen resolution? Because 100% is 100% at screen resolution, or 5' to 10' wide. :facesmack:

Matt

*That's on a laptop. On a big monitor, it's *maybe* 25" wide if you view on a large second monitor. But who makes 25% renders unless for a website? Ok, that's a stupid question. A lot of people render for websites. So how about a proofing mode for "how will my file look if I render it 100%, or print it." Remember printing?

 

[MGrayson]

I just sent them this:

Actually, I do have a constructive recommendation. I understand the philosophy of “View at 33%? Render to 33%.” But proofing is about seeing how your output will look without actually printing it. So how about a “100% resized to screen” proofing mode, where the user could see what their image would look like printed at, for instance, 8”x10” without going through the export-import cycle. Or, worse, having to print a test copy. In other words, make “render at 100% and resize” an option akin to proofing. Several people on the getDPI forum, where we have been discussing this, would appreciate this functionality.

Best,

Matt