Reading mode: Light Dark

C1LE Plastic Image Definition Example

Go to last post
I looked at the original RAW image and could not find any area in the picture that was actually sharp in focus. No matter what you do in any program, you would not get a good result from an out of focus image.

Considering the waterfall... I am assuming this was a long exposure. Was the camera on tripod? Was there a lot of wind blowing the leaves around? etc..

I would suggest taking a sharp frame of some foliage and redoing your test.
David Bostock said:
I've really struggled with C1. I really like the software, the
workflow, and the color balance. What I can't seem to deal with
though is the loss of detail in the image. I'll call it image
definition. Take a look at the examples...These are full size crops
from a raw 10D image.

The first one was done using BreezeBrowser, no sharpening applied



The second one is with C1, As shot settings with Sharpening
disabled in preferences, and noise reduction at low.



I tried to get them as close as possible, I know the color is a bit
more robust in the C1 image. But aside from the color, do you see
the difference in the leaves, the brush, and the tree trunk? I
think it's that plastic look people have been describing. I've
tried all different settings with C1 and had zero luck improving
the image. The BB image is soft, but the detail in the leaves is
clearly there.

For those who want to play around, here's a link to a ZIP file that
contains the RAW file, full size JPGs of the C1 & BB versions and
these two crops:

http://davidbostock.com/files/BBvC1.zip

Let me know what you all think. I'd like to use C1, but not with
this look.

--
db
Click to expand...
--
A. Barnas
 
David

Just out of interest I ran your RAW image through SharpRaw with the following result. This was processed with high resolution interpolation and sharpening. You can draw your own conclusions.

I like many aspects of Capture 1 LE except the way it handles areas of similar color. This is a major defect for me. It reminds of the way that Kodak 26X cameras used to "smear" anything green into a formless blob.


David Bostock said:
I've really struggled with C1. I really like the software, the
workflow, and the color balance. What I can't seem to deal with
though is the loss of detail in the image. I'll call it image
definition. Take a look at the examples...These are full size crops
from a raw 10D image.

The first one was done using BreezeBrowser, no sharpening applied



The second one is with C1, As shot settings with Sharpening
disabled in preferences, and noise reduction at low.



I tried to get them as close as possible, I know the color is a bit
more robust in the C1 image. But aside from the color, do you see
the difference in the leaves, the brush, and the tree trunk? I
think it's that plastic look people have been describing. I've
tried all different settings with C1 and had zero luck improving
the image. The BB image is soft, but the detail in the leaves is
clearly there.

For those who want to play around, here's a link to a ZIP file that
contains the RAW file, full size JPGs of the C1 & BB versions and
these two crops:

http://davidbostock.com/files/BBvC1.zip

Let me know what you all think. I'd like to use C1, but not with
this look.

--
db
Click to expand...
 
Do you know if these internal parameter problems also exist for the D60 or is Phase One only concentrating on newer cameras?
MichaelT said:
Michael Singewald said:
Maybe it is the resolution and compression, but that picture looks
like a watercolor drawing.
Click to expand...
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=5045947

There is a problem with some of the internal parameters for the 10D
in this pre-release version of C1. It will be optimized in the
Official release version.

--
Regards,

Michael Tapes
(Capture One - YarcPlus - Archive Creator)
http://www.PictureFlow.com
http://www.michaeltapes.com
Click to expand...
--
Leo R
 
MichaelT said:
David,

I have been following this post and did not want to respond until
we had something based in research and fact. Sorry for the delay...

The Noise Reduction in C1 is based on many parameters including
camera, ISO, exposure time, etc. There was a flaw in some of the
10D parameters that caused excessive NR to be applied on this 5
second exposure.

These parameters are now in the process of being optimized for the
final relase version of 1.2.

I have seen some preliminary test results which lead me to believe
that when the 10D parameters are finalized in the Release version
of V1.2 (both Pro and LE) that you will be extremely pleased.

Sorry for this problem in the RC version and we thank you for
brining this to our attention.

Of course the Final Release version 1.2 of both LE and Pro are free
upgrades to current or future users of the RC versions.

Thanks again for the feedback..

--
Regards,

Michael Tapes
(Capture One - YarcPlus - Archive Creator)
http://www.PictureFlow.com
http://www.michaeltapes.com
Click to expand...
--
db
 
Leo Reinhard said:
MichaelT said:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=5045947

There is a problem with some of the internal parameters for the 10D
in this pre-release version of C1. It will be optimized in the
Official release version.

--
Regards,

Michael Tapes
(Capture One - YarcPlus - Archive Creator)
http://www.PictureFlow.com
http://www.michaeltapes.com
Click to expand...
--
Leo R
Click to expand...
I am not aware of similar issues for the D60.
--
Regards,

Michael Tapes
(Capture One - YarcPlus - Archive Creator)
http://www.PictureFlow.com
http://www.michaeltapes.com
 
David Bostock said:
I've really struggled with C1. I really like the software, the
workflow, and the color balance. What I can't seem to deal with
though is the loss of detail in the image. I'll call it image
definition. Take a look at the examples...These are full size crops
from a raw 10D image.

The first one was done using BreezeBrowser, no sharpening applied



The second one is with C1, As shot settings with Sharpening
disabled in preferences, and noise reduction at low.



I tried to get them as close as possible, I know the color is a bit
more robust in the C1 image. But aside from the color, do you see
the difference in the leaves, the brush, and the tree trunk? I
think it's that plastic look people have been describing. I've
tried all different settings with C1 and had zero luck improving
the image. The BB image is soft, but the detail in the leaves is
clearly there.

For those who want to play around, here's a link to a ZIP file that
contains the RAW file, full size JPGs of the C1 & BB versions and
these two crops:

http://davidbostock.com/files/BBvC1.zip

Let me know what you all think. I'd like to use C1, but not with
this look.

--
db
Click to expand...
--
CP995 Macro gallery:
http://www.2morrow.dk/75ppi/coolpix/
Digital Deluxe Toolbox - Photoshop Actions for digital photographers:
http://www.2morrow.dk/75ppi/coolpix/actions/
 


30 sec exposure, no wind, tripod, ISO100, Sigma 15-30@6,7

I thought this one was bad. NR off in prefs. No sharpening.

No sharpening in the world would retrieve detail from those trees.

I should try this in another RAW converter, shouldn´t I?

Mathias
David Bostock said:
I've really struggled with C1. I really like the software, the
workflow, and the color balance. What I can't seem to deal with
though is the loss of detail in the image. I'll call it image
definition. Take a look at the examples...These are full size crops
from a raw 10D image.

The first one was done using BreezeBrowser, no sharpening applied



The second one is with C1, As shot settings with Sharpening
disabled in preferences, and noise reduction at low.



I tried to get them as close as possible, I know the color is a bit
more robust in the C1 image. But aside from the color, do you see
the difference in the leaves, the brush, and the tree trunk? I
think it's that plastic look people have been describing. I've
tried all different settings with C1 and had zero luck improving
the image. The BB image is soft, but the detail in the leaves is
clearly there.

For those who want to play around, here's a link to a ZIP file that
contains the RAW file, full size JPGs of the C1 & BB versions and
these two crops:

http://davidbostock.com/files/BBvC1.zip

Let me know what you all think. I'd like to use C1, but not with
this look.

--
db
Click to expand...
--
CP995 Macro gallery:
http://www.2morrow.dk/75ppi/coolpix/
Digital Deluxe Toolbox - Photoshop Actions for digital photographers:
http://www.2morrow.dk/75ppi/coolpix/actions/
 
It depends which browser you are viewing the RAW file with. This type of image exposes the limitations of the interpolation routines in the likes of C1 and anything using the Canon SDK. I believe the image is sharp, based upon my view of it with SharpRaw.
Ard-Jan Barnas said:
Considering the waterfall... I am assuming this was a long
exposure. Was the camera on tripod? Was there a lot of wind
blowing the leaves around? etc..

I would suggest taking a sharp frame of some foliage and redoing
your test.
David Bostock said:
I've really struggled with C1. I really like the software, the
workflow, and the color balance. What I can't seem to deal with
though is the loss of detail in the image. I'll call it image
definition. Take a look at the examples...These are full size crops
from a raw 10D image.

The first one was done using BreezeBrowser, no sharpening applied



The second one is with C1, As shot settings with Sharpening
disabled in preferences, and noise reduction at low.



I tried to get them as close as possible, I know the color is a bit
more robust in the C1 image. But aside from the color, do you see
the difference in the leaves, the brush, and the tree trunk? I
think it's that plastic look people have been describing. I've
tried all different settings with C1 and had zero luck improving
the image. The BB image is soft, but the detail in the leaves is
clearly there.

For those who want to play around, here's a link to a ZIP file that
contains the RAW file, full size JPGs of the C1 & BB versions and
these two crops:

http://davidbostock.com/files/BBvC1.zip

Let me know what you all think. I'd like to use C1, but not with
this look.

--
db
Click to expand...
--
A. Barnas
Click to expand...
 
Mishkin said:


This was an example given by iirc John Davis to illustrate C1's
sharpness. Well, by applying a simple USM 100/1/0 in PS to FVU
image, I got the same sharpness and detail as C1's image. Which
proved that C1 DOES NOT HAVE ANY EDGE IN SHARPNESS.

But look at that plastic look of leaves! So flat and plastic as if
a shot from Mavica or something.

--
Mishkin
Click to expand...
Mishkin:

If you have something to say that makes sense fine.... but stop this nonsense. I know the scene and you are dead wrong. The C1 rendering is actually accurate... maybe the reality is plastic...

And... stop using my copyrighted images and hosting those in your site. Take this as a warning.

John
 
The 10D profile, like the D60's and the D30's and probably all the others, does reduce the contrast a bit and thus reduces tonal separation. Hopefully that will be addressed. But if the same profile is applied to the Canon-processed image you don't see any loss of detail. So my guess, and it is just a guess at the moment, is that the actual conversion is doing something. The are converting the raw data to actual 16-bit (if selected) and maybe there lies the problem,...I don't know.

As MichaelT remarks, it is recognized and being looked into.
Don Lashier said:
  • DL
DigitalDreamland said:
I noticed that this is a 5 second exposure and wondered if that may
have something to with the obvious lack of fine details.
I have noticed that C1 do a similar thing on the 1D on longer
exposure times but with a lot more success. In any case, I think this
is an issue Capture One needs to address.

Forget about Mishkin, he just hates capture one :-) … but apparently
he has bought the software, since his trial must be long overdue
now (!)
Don Lashier said:
Mishkin said:
This was an example given by iirc John Davis to illustrate C1's
sharpness. Well, by applying a simple USM 100/1/0 in PS to FVU
image, I got the same sharpness and detail as C1's image. Which
proved that C1 DOES NOT HAVE ANY EDGE IN SHARPNESS.
Click to expand...
My gawd Mishkin, do you really believe this? Get a grip ;-)
  • DL
--
http://www.lashier.com
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
http://www.lashier.com
Click to expand...
 
John Davis said:
John Davis said:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
John Davis said:
Mishkin:

If you have something to say that makes sense fine.... but stop
this nonsense. I know the scene and you are dead wrong. The C1
rendering is actually accurate... maybe the reality is plastic...
Click to expand...
If what I say doesn't make sense to you, it's fine. It perfectly makes sense to others.
John Davis said:
And... stop using my copyrighted images and hosting those in your
site. Take this as a warning.
Click to expand...
Huh? What's wrong to illustrate my point? "Copyrighted images"? Are you out of your mind? The image is yours, you shared it here to illustrate your point, I just applied USM to it to illustrate mine. If you can host it on your site, it'll be even better, I'll free some space on pbase.

How did critiquing software offend you so deeply?

--
Mishkin
 
Mishkin said:
John Davis said:
Mishkin said:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Mishkin said:
Mishkin:

If you have something to say that makes sense fine.... but stop
this nonsense. I know the scene and you are dead wrong. The C1
rendering is actually accurate... maybe the reality is plastic...
Click to expand...
If what I say doesn't make sense to you, it's fine. It perfectly
makes sense to others.
Mishkin said:
And... stop using my copyrighted images and hosting those in your
site. Take this as a warning.
Click to expand...
Huh? What's wrong to illustrate my point? "Copyrighted images"? Are
you out of your mind? The image is yours, you shared it here to
illustrate your point, I just applied USM to it to illustrate mine.
If you can host it on your site, it'll be even better, I'll free
some space on pbase.
Click to expand...
I warn you again. Remove my image and any change thereof from your site. All images are copyrighted and you have violated mine. You could have asked to use it, but you did not.
Mishkin said:
How did critiquing software offend you so deeply?
Click to expand...
No offense. Grow up!

John
Mishkin said:
--
Mishkin
Click to expand...
 
...not to read my posts from now on, it's obviously not good for your nerves :)
John Davis said:
Mishkin said:
John Davis said:
John Davis said:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
John Davis said:
Mishkin:

If you have something to say that makes sense fine.... but stop
this nonsense. I know the scene and you are dead wrong. The C1
rendering is actually accurate... maybe the reality is plastic...
Click to expand...
If what I say doesn't make sense to you, it's fine. It perfectly
makes sense to others.
John Davis said:
And... stop using my copyrighted images and hosting those in your
site. Take this as a warning.
Click to expand...
Huh? What's wrong to illustrate my point? "Copyrighted images"? Are
you out of your mind? The image is yours, you shared it here to
illustrate your point, I just applied USM to it to illustrate mine.
If you can host it on your site, it'll be even better, I'll free
some space on pbase.
Click to expand...
I warn you again. Remove my image and any change thereof from your
site. All images are copyrighted and you have violated mine. You
could have asked to use it, but you did not.
John Davis said:
How did critiquing software offend you so deeply?
Click to expand...
No offense. Grow up!

John
John Davis said:
--
Mishkin
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Mishkin
 
John Davis said:
And... stop using my copyrighted images and hosting those in your
site. Take this as a warning.
Click to expand...
John, with all due respect, while you are correct that he should have asked, my own view is that if you throw a comparision into a forum (or example of a problem) then it's only reasonable to allow and expect others to take a stab at it without asking permission.
  • DL
--
http://www.lashier.com
 
LOL, Mishkin, I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusion - just that you could base it on a a sharpened image from FVU and an unsharpened image from C1. Using this perverted logic I could 'prove' that any converter was sharper, simply by sharpening its output in PS whilst not sharpening the one I'm comparing to.
  • DL
Mishkin said:
Don Lashier said:
Mishkin said:
This was an example given by iirc John Davis to illustrate C1's
sharpness. Well, by applying a simple USM 100/1/0 in PS to FVU
image, I got the same sharpness and detail as C1's image. Which
proved that C1 DOES NOT HAVE ANY EDGE IN SHARPNESS.
Click to expand...
My gawd Mishkin, do you really believe this? Get a grip ;-)
  • DL
--
http://www.lashier.com
Click to expand...
--
Mishkin
Click to expand...
--
http://www.lashier.com
 
Al Pacheco said:
The 10D profile, like the D60's and the D30's and probably all the
others, does reduce the contrast a bit and thus reduces tonal
separation. Hopefully that will be addressed.
Click to expand...
Al, C1 doesn't simply 'reduce contrast', it just doesn't distribute it the same as FVU, nor does ACR distribute it the same as FVU (or C1). Nor do any two films normally distribute it identically. This is a design choice, and I like C1's design. Any choice of distribution is somewhat arbitrary in the sense that it may suit one particular image or set of images better than another. That's why they provide us with tweaking tools.
Member said:
But if the same
profile is applied to the Canon-processed image you don't see any
loss of detail. So my guess, and it is just a guess at the
moment, is that the actual conversion is doing something.
Click to expand...
Probably a good guess.
  • DL
Member said:
As MichaelT remarks, it is recognized and being looked into.
Click to expand...
--
http://www.lashier.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top