LCC with Capture One Questions

[GrahamWelland]

Agreed, as it sits the LCC storage protocol is borderline stupid. there is no good reason it should not be inside the sessions. Then we should have an option to store a GENERIC LCC library in the existing fashion.

It is absurd to open up the LCC you want to apply and have a list of several hundred to sort through. My current workaround is I leave the image name as the LCC name, and in this way, my most recent LCC is always at the bottom of the list.

Jack,

I agree that a two tier approach to LCCs would work well. I have to do the same as you and gave up on labeling my LCCs in favor of just using the file name instead. With the file name approach I know that the LCC will be close to my original image vs sorted in the list. However, it would be useful to have a global set of LCCs available.

Let us store LCCs with the session only and then have the open of storing a global set for all sessions as well.

I don't shoot an LCC for every shot but I do shoot one for each setup (I.e. each rise/fall setting or stitch pairs). You very quickly end up with an LCC list with hundreds of images in it which becomes unmanageable and a poor user interface for such a fundamental step in technical camera workflow.

I need to create the feature request for this as well, along with an FR for the ability to have each digital back use a different filename prefix. (If you upgrade your PhaseOne back or have more than one then you run into filename overlaps and there's no clean way to fix it other than rename on import).

 

[dougpeterson]

So Doug, could you please have a word with the Phase dev guys for us would you.

Indeed I had the chance to sit down with the leads of the Dev team for C1 in Denmark and told them - in no unclear terms - that faster and more efficient workflow for our customers that use LCC on every frame (i.e. tech camera shooters) was Capture Integration's #1 request (though obviously not our only request). They were extremely attentive and took notes on the specifics of my specific ideas/suggestions; they immediately acknowledged they were aware of the inefficiencies as-is and it was great to see that they didn't just brush it off with "o yeah we know" but rather they enthusiastically gathered opinions on specifically what should be done and were arguing (in the positive sense of the word) with me on where the inefficiencies were and how they should be improved. These are passionate guys who are both professionally and personally very interested in improving C1.

I've found that Phase, as a smaller and more accessible company that most software giants, is extremely responsive to such user input. The frustration usually comes that it often takes 12-18 months for them to implement such input. That can make them feel unresponsive whereas the reality is simply that the roadmap for complex software is laid out significantly in advance and features are not (and should not) be thrown in last minute - so suggestions usually don't make it into the next release but rather the release after.

Tech camera use has (from my exposure to the markets that Capture Integration is involved in) exploded in the last 18 months and accelerated further in the last 6 months (stimulated by the availability of the IQ Series and less expensive Leaf/Mamiya backs). So hopefully we'll see some advancement in LCC workflow in the next version. I know Phase One is very aware that LCC could be a faster/easier workflow, so it's more an issue of resources and time than anything else. From this point of view the more users make support cases with such feature requests the more priority it will be given.

I don't want to sound like a shill, but I think it is worth noting that the LCC tool in C1 is the fastest, highest quality, most versatile color cast tool I am aware of in any software. That's no reason they shouldn't work hard to make it faster, easier, and more efficient - especially for high-volume-LCC-users. But it is worth saying.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

 

[GrahamWelland]

I don't want to sound like a shill, but I think it is worth noting that the LCC tool in C1 is the fastest, highest quality, most versatile color cast tool I am aware of in any software. That's no reason they shouldn't work hard to make it faster, easier, and more efficient - especially for high-volume-LCC-users. But it is worth saying.

Doug,

Thanks for this. I think we'd all agree that the LCC processing works extremely well (absolutely no complaints there!) but the file organization leaves, erm, a little to be desired!

Being in the software game myself I recognize the dev and release time for big product features that affect the UI in particular. What would be nice though would be the occasional sharing of roadmap information by Phase One so that when features are requested we don't feel like we're howling into the wind. :thumbup:

 

[gazwas]

I don't want to sound like a shill, but I think it is worth noting that the LCC tool in C1 is the fastest, highest quality, most versatile color cast tool I am aware of in any software. That's no reason they shouldn't work hard to make it faster, easier, and more efficient - especially for high-volume-LCC-users. But it is worth saying.

I don't think any tech camera user would disagree with you on that one as C1 is a brilliant, high quality tool for LCC use and the main reason why I chose Phase One backs over Hasselblad.

Being in the software game myself I recognize the dev and release time for big product features that affect the UI in particular. What would be nice though would be the occasional sharing of roadmap information by Phase One so that when features are requested we don't feel like we're howling into the wind. :thumbup:

Hi Graham, Phase did used to give a road map of feature release on their user support forums but after a spate of missed deadlines resulted is a number of unhappy and angry users they stopped giving out that information. We all loved C1 version 3 but remember waiting for version 4Pro and Canon 1Ds3 support? I recall that as my painful and trying Lightroom period!