Capture one 3.7.1 to support Epson R-D1 Officially

K

krimple

Guest
Wow! I was floored! Acrobat link here:

http://www.phaseone.com/upload/co3_7_1_240605.pdf

This is a big step for us Epson users. I've been a big fan of Capture One's user interface and workflow from the start. I used it exclusively on the EOS 20D, and was looking for something like it on the R-D1, but found nothing. Its' color renditions, especially with the ESC profiles, were terrific.

I'm looking forward to trying my Epson RAW files with this converter. Very psyched. They state it will be delivered sometime in July, so I'll let everyone know once I get the update and have given it a test drive.

Ken
 
Hey,
This sounds great. Could you explain a little more about the user interface and the workflow, and what makes it better than other products? I'm still trying to get comfortable with using Raw for all of my shooting and dealing with the files and conversions. How much does it cost to purchase Capture One?

Regards,

Larry
 
Capture One just knows how to process those RAW files - yyiiiiiiiihhhaaaa ... download the trial and try and you will soon forget about Epson Raw plugin and ACR
 
I was waiting eagerly for this upgrade, as C-1 features prominently in my DSLR workflow. First conversion results from ERFs are promising: sharpness and detail extraction are excellent, noise is not increased, tonality and microcontrast are elegantly rendered and no more strange colour shifts as they even occured in Adobe Camera RAW in CS2.
 
Sorry, gang--I've been at work all day and just downloaded the (now released) 3.7.1 version.

In answer to a few questions:

1. The user interface for C1 is very easy to use, once you get the hang of it. You have thumbnails to the left, click on one and you see a very quick preview, then you can adjust color balance, brightness/contrast/curves/etc., and then sharpness. You can then generate any kind of output you want, scaled up, down, JPEG, TIFF 8 or 16 bit, etc., and it all works asynchronously. Simply the BEST user interface there is for RAW manipulation.

2. The problem with B&W is that you have to create a de-saturated profile for the camera--there are already ones out there for the EOS 20D, but I think someone will soon put together a few of them for the R-D1 that would do B&W in various ways. I don't think this tool is a serious contender for creating beautiful R-D1 B&W output yet.

If you already have C1 for another DSLR, this is a great upgrade. It is expensive, but well worth it if you go through a fair # of raw images in a week. If you can wait for it, the Epson converter is still the one to beat for quality on B&W, but for color I'm going to do a lot of testing.

The cool thing is that 99% of the changes you'd do with Adobe Photoshop can be done with C1 instead. And you can do the same adjustments to many images with a single click. It's still faster than Adobe Bridge and it works more efficiently in the background.

Ken
 
Re: B&W

The color rendition with C1 is likely to be great. In my conversations with Phil Amato at Epson I strongly encouraged them to get sample cameras to C1 for testing so that C1 could support those files. He said he would make that a priority and apparently he did (Kudos Phil, if you're reading). Uwe Steinmuller of Digital Outback Photo developed a good B&W workflow for C1 (and I added some tweaks to it that are on his site) *but* I suspect that PhotoRAW will still be my tool of choice for RAW to B&W conversions. I'm on the road now but look forward to testing this out when I get back next week.

Cheers,

Sean
 
Ken , Sean

Thanks for your first thoughts on the B&W workflow with C1 .... !
I'll stay with the Epson converter for now and wait for your tests.

For colorwork .. what i notice lately is that white balance is often way off in ACR compared to the Epson Converter. Hope C1 is a lot better in this respect
I like pastel colors .... not the saturated Velvia Look .. but more the look of colorwork from the 70's (Eggleston, Shore, Levitt). Are there profiles or actions for colorprocessing like that ?? There are digital film simulators .... never found a similar action for simulating different color films .... with the exception of Digital Velvia??
The R-D1 with Leica lenses already got me a lot closer to that look when i compare it to the Canon DSLR's ... but i'm still not there ....



Han
 
Last edited:
I have always like C1 for Canon, and I am delighted it now does the RD1. The key points for me are (i) excellent white balance by default, and (ii) the control you get over tonality using the levels and curves before you export to TIF. I do all my b/w conversions in Photoshop using Power Retouche B/W Pro (reviewed on Outbackphoto).

Attached is a first colour sample (from Tanzania).

Cheers,
Kirk
 
J. Borger said:
Ken , Sean

Thanks for your first thoughts on the B&W workflow with C1 .... !
I'll stay with the Epson converter for now and wait for your tests.

For colorwork .. what i notice lately is that white balance is often way off in ACR compared to the Epson Converter. Hope C1 is a lot better in this respect
I like pastel colors .... not the saturated Velvia Look .. but more the look of colorwork from the 70's (Eggleston, Shore, Levitt). Are there profiles or actions for colorprocessing like that ?? There are digital film simulators .... never found a similar action for simulating different color films .... with the exception of Digital Velvia??
The R-D1 with Leica lenses already got me a lot closer to that look when i compare it to the Canon DSLR's ... but i'm still not there ....


Han
Click to expand...

J.


Eggleston, Stephen and Helen all have a different look to their color and the lenses play a big part in this. Stephen's work (from Uncommon Places) was done with a Schneider APO lens on an 8 x 10 Deardorf. Helen's lenses are mostly the older Leica lenses. I don't know Eggleston (I know his work but not him) so I don't know his lenses. So...try a Canon 28/2.8 or 35/2.8 on the R-D1 and convert with PhotoRAW and you may find yourself to be very close to the color you're looking for. Also, try older Leica lenses, of course. The older lenses weren't as well corrected for color as the newer lenses, so their color is less "perfect", a desirable trait sometimes.

Cheers,

Sean
 
Sean,

Yes different colors with all 3 of them but all 3 very different from "todays colors".
Thanks for pointing me to the lenses ................ It's perhaps silly to look for "imperfect" colors ..... but somehow i'm tired of the "perfect" colors (if they exist).
Levitt's colorwork is awesome ..... looking forward to her new book strictly focussing on her color work!

THe Canon 28/ 2.8 and 35/2,8 are in screw mount is not it? So i need an adapter.
I think i know a place where i can get one ..... there is only one or are there different versions?

For the older Leicas ..... Would a 35mm/2.8 summaron fit the bill ..... compared to the canon?

Han
 
Last edited:
The screw mount adapters are coupled to various framelines -- there is a 28/90, a 35 and a 50 that I know of (Cosina / Voigtlander), and I know Leica had similar ones. However, if you are only shooting on the R-D1, you select the framelines by hand anyway with the top plate switch, so it isn't that big of a deal to get the wrong one (unless you shoot M cameras as well with the same lens).

One thing I've done a few times last night was play with the Color space of the camera. I was getting nice, deep saturated reds by switching the camera profile to the Nikon D2h profiles. If you purchase C1 Pro, you can adjust the color profile yourself and store it as another variation (in fact, that's how the B&W profile came about if I recall correctly. Sean stated above that he knows the guy who did it.

Ken
 
J. Borger said:
Sean,

Yes different colors with all 3 of them but all 3 very different from "todays colors".
Thanks for pointing me to the lenses ................ It's perhaps silly to look for "imperfect" colors ..... but somehow i'm tired of the "perfect" colors (if they exist).
Levitt's colorwork is awesome ..... looking forward to her new book strictly focussing on her color work!

THe Canon 28/ 2.8 and 35/2,8 are in screw mount is not it? So i need an adapter.
I think i know a place where i can get one ..... there is only one or are there different versions?

For the older Leicas ..... Would a 35mm/2.8 summaron fit the bill ..... compared to the canon?

Han
Click to expand...


Hi Han,

I don't think it's silly at all to be going after that kind of palette. Many like it. I can't, this morning, seem to remember how Helen's color prints are usually made (it's a special process that has its own look) but the lenses are likely going to be the missing piece of the puzzle for you. As far as that specific lens goes, shoot in RAW and try it out. Try out a bunch of lenses in a store and then see what you have in the RAW files.

I'm in Nova Scotia right now and carrying the R-D1 with 28/2.8 with me (because its so compact)...so my color has an "older" look to it. Some of the palette comes from a lower level of contrast and saturation. Also, the older lenses weren't quite optimized for color - leading to a good kind of imperfection.

Cheers,

Sean
 
Is there a big difference in features comparing the Capture One Pro edition to the LE edition? The price difference is really huge. Are the extra features essential or very helpful?


Thanks,

Derrick
 
sreidvt said:
Hi Han,

I don't think it's silly at all to be going after that kind of palette. Many like it. I can't, this morning, seem to remember how Helen's color prints are usually made (it's a special process that has its own look) but the lenses are likely going to be the missing piece of the puzzle for you. As far as that specific lens goes, shoot in RAW and try it out. Try out a bunch of lenses in a store and then see what you have in the RAW files.
Click to expand...
Hi Han & Sean,
Although I know what you mean in general terms with regard to the Shore, Levitt, Eggeston color pallet it does have to be viewed as a package including the printing and the artist can and does change the interpretation with time (if only forced to by a change in materials). I see quite a change in colour in Shore's work from the early vintage 10 x 8 (Kodak paper?) C type contacts to the present 20 x 24 (and larger) C type (Fuji paper?) enlargements. Both are good colour, but I much prefer the orginals, but memory of viewing these from the 70's will be (rose) coloured :) and I suspect there must be some deteriation with age now to the originals I have seen fairly recently, although they still look good.

Egglestone has prints made in C type and Dye Transfer (I believe he has brought up all the remaining Dye Transfer materials). His Dye Transfers are some of the best colour prints I have ever seen and of course are very permanent, but are quite different from the C types. A lot of his work is shot on early Leica's (111F, 111G with early Leitz screw lenses) & also a Rollieflex, so this is also part of the package.
A lot of Egglestones original C types that I have seen recently now look to a a distinctive yellow colour cast from age.

I have only seen a very few original Levitt colour prints so can't really comment, but they are good and there does seem to be something process specific.

The pallet finally output from an R-D1 is still going to vary according to how the prints are finally made Inkjet, C type, Lambada etc. no matter how well your screen is calibrated and how good your profiles and raw conversion, as well as from the specific attributes of the lenses used. As always its a case of using all the available tools to try to match your intentions.

Cheers
Jim
 
Last edited:
Shore's older work is 8x10 contact prints - the enlargments you'll see now are fuji archival (lambda prints), digitally remastered.
Recent Eggelston work are c-prints.
 
DerrickC said:
Is there a big difference in features comparing the Capture One Pro edition to the LE edition? The price difference is really huge.
Click to expand...

According to the info on Phase One's
website, ONLY the pro version supports the R-D 1.

So, that'll be 500 Federal diplomas, please.

Of course, if you've also got a DSLR, medium-format back, etc., which you also can use with the software, it might make a lot more economic sense. But if not... sheesh! I know the R-D 1 is expensive, but for now I'm going to stick with Raw Developer.

I'll be very interested in reading about the experiences of Capture One users, though, and (ideally) seeing some side-by-side conversion examples that demonstrate why it's superior. At least that way I'll know what I'm missing!
 
Well, I just downloaded 3.7.1 LE, using a license I got last year (cost $99) and at first glance it looks fine with ERF files. I'm breathing a huge sigh of relief, as I use C-1 with the 20D. I'll have to do some comparisons to see which rendering I like best...

Anyway, thanks to Ken for pointing this upgrade out.

Phil

ps it says on the P-1 website that LE does R-D1 files a bit further down.
 
Last edited:
pfogle said:
Well, I just downloaded 3.7.1 LE, using a license I got last year (cost $99) and at first glance it looks fine with ERF files.
Click to expand...

Wow, that'll be lucky for you (and the rest of us) if the LE version DOES work with R-D 1 files! So please do keep us posted!!

(You're certainly entitled to a stroke of good luck, after all the bad luck you had with duff R-D 1s!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom