The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Capture One ver 4 and the M8.2

mwalker

Subscriber Member
I was reading the Leica press release of the M8.2 and part of it addressed the raw data converter C1 ver 4. It says this:

"Use of raw data in DNG format using Capture One 4 software The Capture One 4 professional raw data converter ensures that raw data supplied by the CCD sensor and saved in the in the future-proof Adobe® Digital Negative (DNG) format is “developed” in the best
possible quality. Leica worked in conjunction with the Danish software company Phase One to create the sophisticated camera profiling and make the necessary software modifications. The results are quality-optimized algorithms for digital color processing, allowing
exceptionally low-noise photography with incredible resolution. The development of the finest tonal value steps from the 16-bit image delivered by the CCD sensor is comparable to the picture quality achieved by a professional combination of film and specialist laboratory
development. The logical functions for adjusting the quality and the clear user interface allows the user to quickly master the use of Software Capture One 4 to create outstanding results."

My question is I'm currently use LR almost exclusively, occasionally round tripping to CS3. To get the maximum out of my m8.2 files should I first do my RAW conversions out of C1 v4, then import to LR for local corrections, tweaking and printing?
 

woodyspedden

New member
Here we go again with the 16 bit thing. Is it or is it not an 8 bit file that is delivered from the sensor to the output?

Woody
 

robertwright

New member
better, maximum, different.

Despite what Leica is saying it does come down to preference. Certainly C1 has "effective" or you might say "aggressive" noise reduction algorithms that Lr cannot really match. Also C1 delivers noise reduction and sharpening based on ISO, whereas Lr applies the same defaults across all ISO's unless you modify that (and you can).

C1 has a very "detailed" look compared to Lr, but Lr, especially the 2.0 version has advanced a lot and can provide great output, and now has camera profiling, and with CS4 has great roundtrip support to Ps.

It comes down to workflow, I use C1 for trouble files, and Lr for 99% of what I do, but then I need captioning and am outputting for FTP, not working individual files as much. That said, Lr 2.0 allows you to massage individual files so much and so quickly that it makes C1 look like a stone age tool, regardless of quality issues.
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Here we go again with the 16 bit thing. Is it or is it not an 8 bit file that is delivered from the sensor to the output?

Woody
C1 vs Lightroom is not a 16-bit issue. There are about 12 bits of interesting information in an M8 or M8.2 file, mapped into 8 bits with a table that is reasonably easy for any raw file developer to use in retrieving a good approximation to the original 12 bits. This hasn't changed.

scott
 

mwalker

Subscriber Member
I really wasn't after a technical discussion but a comparison between the two. Is there a quality difference in the output......... a print?
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
I have asked this question a half dozen times in the past and am still unsure that I understand conventional wisdom. (from those that use C1 and Lightroom).

No question that anyone using C1 feels that the result is superior....but...

Is this because the C1 raw process produces a better conversion

OR

Is this because C1 has a better profile for the M8 file(implying that if you develop a custom profile for your M8 you could match the output

If you believe its a better raw process ..this implies that a knowledgable skilled person could not duplicate the algorithm in Lightroom.

I think this is the case and you find similar advantages the manufacturers software using Canon , Nikon, Hasselblad. The question is it necessary for the type of photographs you want to produce.

To cloud the issue more.....I saw that ADOBE will be issuing a new release of LR2 and a new profile for the M8.
 

Chuck Jones

Subscriber Member
Ok, here's the rub. I use Lightroom for almost everything, as most of my shooing results in very large groups of files, most of which I will end up tossing out someday, whenever someday comes :eek: I am very good at digging my "hits" from my "swung and missed" collection. I've been at this as a profession for a long time, shooting primarily documentary and fine art. This means events, which mean a ton of images to process and sort. Most often over 2,500 and often as many as 5,000. This is a ton of work. I don't care what RAW processor you prefer, it's still a ton of work even with the best of them. I also shoot multiple formats, primarily the M8 for this type of work, but often I will also shoot several medium format files with my Aptus that fit along with the subject. C1 does not support my Aptus back, since it is made by Leaf, who is a direct competitor to PhaseOne, the owners of C1.

So for myself, locking into ANYONE's proprietary software who is owned by a competitor of the manufacturer's product I am using will never happen. I would never trust it. Not that our good friends the Danes would ever deliberately sabotage or unscrupulously manipulate my Leaf images to resemble mud or anything like that :wtf: but lets just say that I would not expect them to take nearly the time nor the care developing that section of the program to excel any better than they absolutely needed to to claim "we support it." Any more that I would expect Leaf to ever provide support for anyone else's camera. Well, for a different reason also perhaps. Leaf has their hands full just trying to develop LeafCapture for their own products, and Leaf has some very talented people working for them. I've had the pleasure of both meeting them in person, as well as talking by phone and email when that would do.

Bottom line, it is an amazingly complex digital system that you hold in your hands. Nobody, not even the manufacturer, completely understands every part of it. It's just too big to tackle. Too complex. So Leica hires PhaseOne to do the software, figuring they knew what they were doing. And they do. They have an excellent product. Depending upon your needs. C1 sure isn't for everyone, just as Lightroom isn't for everyone, despite what both of those manufacturers may want you to think! The best RAW file processor in the world today by my own experimentation is RAW Developer from Irridient Digital. It blows everything else out of the water on the M8, Aptus, and yes, even PhaseOne digital backs. Brian is a positive genius when it comes to writing code that not only works, but works like his users need to work. He is a perfectionist when it comes to image processing. Just my kind of guy, as so am I. But Brian's product isn't going to let me buzz through even 2,500 images very rapidly. So it is a no-go unless I am processing just a small handful that I want the perfect adjustments to. My "Gold" collection. The real money shots. The ones I don't mind spending a couple hours working on just that one image file. The rest of them get Lightroom.

Whatever your camera platform, the software provided by the manufacturer is almost always the highest quality output file you will ever see. DPP for Canon (which I HATE), C1 for PhaseOne, Nikon for Nikon, C1 for Leica, and on and on and on.... But for a working professional who shoots a ton of images, Aperture and Lightroom have become the two standards. Pick the one that best suits your own style of working, learn it completely, and forget about it. Unless you are a total gear slut like Mancuso is :thumbup: your time is probably going to be much better spent out shooting rather than trying to learn the next generation of the next greatest digital RAW file processing software that just came along.
 

woodyspedden

New member
Chuck

Could 't agree more about Brian and Raw Developer. "Wonderful guy and wonderful product. And simple as can be. Wish he could work with my Hassy files
\
Woody
 

Chuck Jones

Subscriber Member
Chuck

Could 't agree more about Brian and Raw Developer. "Wonderful guy and wonderful product. And simple as can be. Wish he could work with my Hassy files
\
Woody
Woody! Great to see you! How you doing? As far as your Hassy files go, have you talked with Brian lately? I'd bet by now he has decoded what they're doing, and figured out how to improve it considerably :D:D:D
 

mwalker

Subscriber Member
I process a ton of files thats why I use LR....I spend a lot of time culling out my shots. I have not spent any time learning any other software. The last thing I enjoy is setting inside at the computer and processing files. I would much rather be out finding images. I just thought it was intriguing that Leica would say this..it must be optimized for the M8 ..right?

"Leica worked in conjunction with the Danish software company Phase One to create the sophisticated camera profiling and make the necessary software modifications. The results are quality-optimized algorithms for digital color processing, allowing exceptionally low-noise photography with incredible resolution."
 

jonoslack

Active member
snip the rest even though it's relevant
Whatever your camera platform, the software provided by the manufacturer is almost always the highest quality output file you will ever see. DPP for Canon (which I HATE), C1 for PhaseOne, Nikon for Nikon, C1 for Leica, and on and on and on.... But for a working professional who shoots a ton of images, Aperture and Lightroom have become the two standards. Pick the one that best suits your own style of working, learn it completely, and forget about it. Unless you are a total gear slut like Mancuso is :thumbup: your time is probably going to be much better spent out shooting rather than trying to learn the next generation of the next greatest digital RAW file processing software that just came along.
HI Chuck
I couldn't agree with you more - I also feel that thorough knowledge of a program will often get you better results than using another program which may be inherently better.

In my opinion, if you're using different camera systems then it's a no-brainer to rely on Lightroom of Aperture for your processing. However good Raw-Developer may be.
 

mwalker

Subscriber Member
Chuck, Jono, I appriciate your comments but what I'm looking for, has anyone made a print with each RAW converter and made a comparision? Is there a noticeable difference in the output? I understand that may be subjective based on how well you know one software program over another but I'm sure someone out there knows both. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here.
 
Last edited:

jonoslack

Active member
Chuck, Jono, I appriciate your comments but what I'm looking for, has anyone made a print with each RAW converter and made a comparision? Is there a noticeable difference in the output? I understand that may be subjective based on how well you know one software program over another but I'm sure someone out there knows both. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here.
Hi Mike
Generally speaking I find that prints are less telling than the terrible pixel peeping. To be honest I haven't done it with the M8 . . . really for the reasons Chuck gave, which is that the differences are so small, and the inconvenience of using different converters for each system are so large.

I think you ARE splitting hairs.

put it another way . . . is your current output from your M8 what you want?

it's also worth having a look at this (pinched from the small sensor forum)

Canon G10 vs Hassy39

have a look at the section about printing . . . if Mr Reichmann's mates can't tell a 19" print from a Hassy from one from a G10, I think it's pretty unlikely that many of use would be able to tell the difference between converters for the M8 (except possibly with respect to colour).
 

woodyspedden

New member
C1 vs Lightroom is not a 16-bit issue. There are about 12 bits of interesting information in an M8 or M8.2 file, mapped into 8 bits with a table that is reasonably easy for any raw file developer to use in retrieving a good approximation to the original 12 bits. This hasn't changed.

scott
Scott

I am reacting to Leica's own press release! They state how C1 is able to use the 16bit data coming off the sensor. Unless I misunderstand (not an unusual event LOL) C1 has no access to anything other than what is available to the rest of us and our raw converters of choice.

Woody
 

woodyspedden

New member
Woody! Great to see you! How you doing? As far as your Hassy files go, have you talked with Brian lately? I'd bet by now he has decoded what they're doing, and figured out how to improve it considerably :D:D:D
Hey Chuck

As of now Brian is not supporting the 3Fr files but hopefully soon.

Good talking to you again as well. I will get the cast off my hand in two weeks and begin the rehab process. We'll see then if I can handle the weight of the H3D system.............hopefully so!

Best

Woody
 

jonoslack

Active member
I will get the cast off my hand in two weeks and begin the rehab process. We'll see then if I can handle the weight of the H3D system.............hopefully so!

Best

Woody
Woody - I'm sorry, I didn't know you had a hand problem. I hope it's fixed, and that it gets better really quickly.
If you can't handle the H3D, then I'm afraid there is only one option open to you . . . . get an S2!
:)
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Scott

I am reacting to Leica's own press release! They state how C1 is able to use the 16bit data coming off the sensor.
That's been their story all along, and an unfortunate source of confusion. They even let LFI publish a long story confirming that the data is stored in 8 (carefully selected) bits, but apparently they can't convince their own marketing guys. The Kodak chip spec (which is not particularly easy reading) makes it clear that the most information that you can expect from the chip is around 12 bits of dynamic range. The other four bits "coming off the sensor" are just noise.

Get well soon,

scott
 

robsteve

Subscriber
What I noticed in the statement posted at the top of this thread is that they say Capture One 4 Professional. Does this mean they are now shipping the Pro version of Capture One 4 with the M8.2? Or is this just a typical "Lost in Translation" Leica statement.

I noticed on the Capture One website, there is a special upgrade offer for the original Capture One that shipped with the M8 to Capture One 4 Pro.

Robert
 

mwalker

Subscriber Member
Robert, I just got my .2 and the software is C1 ver 4.1. It does not say professional...lost in translation.
 
Top