C1LE Plastic Image Definition Example

[David Bostock]

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

 

[Bartek #104258]

You are absolutely right! Damn it!

I have also Adobe Camera Raw (which I don't like) and the difference is even bigger that with BB.
I love C1 but now I have to seriously reevaluate my opinion…
It is so disappointing; the loss of detail is dramatic!

(BTW – I am running the C1 1.2 RC2 Beta 3)

Thanks for the post or actually... go to hell! I was happy before, what am I supposed to do now?
Ignorance is a bliss.

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

 

[pschia]

Why did you use examples of conversions done at default settings with everything turned off to prove your point that C1LE gave worse results than BB? It's like saying that if C1LE cannot give perfect results at their default settings, it cannot give perfect results.. period.. no matter how much you fine-tune the parameters.

How about showing examples of conversions that were fine-tuned to the best of your abilities together with the parameters that you had used instead.

From my experience, I had found that 99% of the time (actually I had not found 1 file that did'nt come out better in C1LE, but I'm a perfectionist at heart and can't accept that a software can be that good; hence the markdown), my conversions came out better in C1LE than from BB, with better color accuracy, white balance, more details and less noise. all these I found when I went back and converted RAW files that I did earlier with BB before I got C1LE. I like the results so much that now I felt that I had to go and reconvert all my earlier RAW files using C1LE !

geez.. Ignorance IS Bliss !

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

--
My Canon EOS D60 Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/cichlids
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/canon_cats

 

[BobAtlGa]

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.

You may be right. Your full size crop may be telling us something. But, I never get images that look this good from Breezebrowser:

http://www.cybervitamins.com/images/daisy.jpg

This photo from my D60 almost looks 3d and I never get that effect from any other conversion program. I have not purchased C1LE yet, but I'm close. If you have other photos, I'd love to see them.

 

[BobAtlGa]

I just downloaded your files and looked at them side by side. The colors (the greens in the leaves) to me look better in C1LE than BB.

I have myself seen other examples where colors looked better in BB (especially reds). I honestly could not see any difference in your photos in the fine details looking at it subjectively.

Both are great programs. I feel C1 has the best interface and workflowl I've ever seen, and the images look better to me than BB in most cases. I will probably buy it and use both.

 

[mini-me]

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

 

[guy gagnon]

I done lot of precise tests with C1 and BB, and definitively,
C1 is unusable with foliage. Too much details are lost.

I keep C1 only for buildings pictures, for the rest of the processings i use BB and sometimes Adobe raw converter.

guy

How about showing examples of conversions that were fine-tuned to
the best of your abilities together with the parameters that you
had used instead.

From my experience, I had found that 99% of the time (actually I
had not found 1 file that did'nt come out better in C1LE, but I'm a
perfectionist at heart and can't accept that a software can be that
good; hence the markdown), my conversions came out better in C1LE
than from BB, with better color accuracy, white balance, more
details and less noise. all these I found when I went back and
converted RAW files that I did earlier with BB before I got C1LE. I
like the results so much that now I felt that I had to go and
reconvert all my earlier RAW files using C1LE !

geez.. Ignorance IS Bliss !

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

--
My Canon EOS D60 Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/cichlids
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/canon_cats

 

[John Davis]

I'm not sure that this is a C1 issue. I think this is a CMOS issue (all sensors 10D/D60/D30). It just happens that FUV hides it better. Also... I found out that this issue of green in the shadow is better rendered if you fully disable sharpening in C1 and then sharpen in PS.

John

guy

How about showing examples of conversions that were fine-tuned to
the best of your abilities together with the parameters that you
had used instead.

From my experience, I had found that 99% of the time (actually I
had not found 1 file that did'nt come out better in C1LE, but I'm a
perfectionist at heart and can't accept that a software can be that
good; hence the markdown), my conversions came out better in C1LE
than from BB, with better color accuracy, white balance, more
details and less noise. all these I found when I went back and
converted RAW files that I did earlier with BB before I got C1LE. I
like the results so much that now I felt that I had to go and
reconvert all my earlier RAW files using C1LE !

geez.. Ignorance IS Bliss !

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

--
My Canon EOS D60 Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/cichlids
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/canon_cats

 

[Don Lashier]

A lot of what you're seeing here is due to C1's better shadow detail. In this particular image it works against it because it provides less local contrast in the foliage, and hence the perception of less detail. I'm not saying that's all that's at work here, but certainly a significant factor. Just pulling down the toe of the curve makes them a lot closer.

Here's a C1 version with only tonality adjusted. I've perhaps overdone it a bit to illustrate the point, but all I did was adjust BP slightly and apply a slight curve.

NICE image btw! It's beautiful, nicely composed, exposed, etc. etc.

• DL

• Dl

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

--
http://www.lashier.com

 

[DigiDaan]

... to put the DSLR noise suppression and banding suppression (both found under 'preferences' > 'develop settings') at their lowest values?

--
DigiDaan
[email protected]
http://www.DigiDaan.nl

 

[Tom Crowning]

the things described above were the first things I've noticed when testing C1: the photos are very pleasing to the human eye, but very fine structures like gras or leaves loose detail.
And as I see other second my (not scientific) findings.
tc

John

guy

How about showing examples of conversions that were fine-tuned to
the best of your abilities together with the parameters that you
had used instead.

From my experience, I had found that 99% of the time (actually I
had not found 1 file that did'nt come out better in C1LE, but I'm a
perfectionist at heart and can't accept that a software can be that
good; hence the markdown), my conversions came out better in C1LE
than from BB, with better color accuracy, white balance, more
details and less noise. all these I found when I went back and
converted RAW files that I did earlier with BB before I got C1LE. I
like the results so much that now I felt that I had to go and
reconvert all my earlier RAW files using C1LE !

geez.. Ignorance IS Bliss !

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

--
My Canon EOS D60 Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/cichlids
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/canon_cats

--
Some digital cameras, some lenses, 2 eyes

http://www.tom-crowning.com

 

[Don Lashier]

the things described above were the first things I've noticed when
testing C1: the photos are very pleasing to the human eye, but very
fine structures like gras or leaves loose detail.

So what do you think of my C1 version below?
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=5036783

• DL

--
http://www.lashier.com

 

[David Bostock]

Pschia, I've tried every setting/sharpening I could with C1LE and still get a loss of definition. I guess I couldn't win, if I had sharpened them at all then someone like you would say, well the dope oversharpened them. But sharpening's not the issue.

So, if you think you can get a perfect image out of this, then download the raw file I've provided and show us! But please don't insult someone you know nothing about.

David

How about showing examples of conversions that were fine-tuned to
the best of your abilities together with the parameters that you
had used instead.

From my experience, I had found that 99% of the time (actually I
had not found 1 file that did'nt come out better in C1LE, but I'm a
perfectionist at heart and can't accept that a software can be that
good; hence the markdown), my conversions came out better in C1LE
than from BB, with better color accuracy, white balance, more
details and less noise. all these I found when I went back and
converted RAW files that I did earlier with BB before I got C1LE. I
like the results so much that now I felt that I had to go and
reconvert all my earlier RAW files using C1LE !

geez.. Ignorance IS Bliss !

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

--
My Canon EOS D60 Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/cichlids
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/canon_cats

--
db

 

[David Bostock]

... to put the DSLR noise suppression and banding suppression (both
found under 'preferences' > 'develop settings') at their lowest
values?

--
DigiDaan
[email protected]
http://www.DigiDaan.nl

--
db

 

[David Bostock]

Don, this looks better, but I still see some loss of detail.

Here's a C1 version with only tonality adjusted. I've perhaps
overdone it a bit to illustrate the point, but all I did was adjust
BP slightly and apply a slight curve.

NICE image btw! It's beautiful, nicely composed, exposed, etc. etc.

• DL

• Dl

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

--
http://www.lashier.com

--
db

 

[David Bostock]

The colors do look better in C1LE, which is why I keep going back to it. If I could get the definition out of it like BB or FUV, then It would be my only choice.

Thanks Bob,

David

I just downloaded your files and looked at them side by side. The
colors (the greens in the leaves) to me look better in C1LE than BB.

I have myself seen other examples where colors looked better in BB
(especially reds). I honestly could not see any difference in your
photos in the fine details looking at it subjectively.

Both are great programs. I feel C1 has the best interface and
workflowl I've ever seen, and the images look better to me than BB
in most cases. I will probably buy it and use both.

--
db

 

[Scot Perry]

I tried C1 and it does amazing things for D60 it makes it like a new camera on the other hand I was less than impressed at what it did for my 10D and found little improvement. As far as workflow call me crazy but I like BB just wish it did 100% view with modifications like C1.

Scot

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.

You may be right. Your full size crop may be telling us something.
But, I never get images that look this good from Breezebrowser:

http://www.cybervitamins.com/images/daisy.jpg

This photo from my D60 almost looks 3d and I never get that effect
from any other conversion program. I have not purchased C1LE yet,
but I'm close. If you have other photos, I'd love to see them.

 

[dab63]

could u please post just the raw file (should be half the size of current zip)?
tnx

----------------------------
daniele borghi
http://www.casaborghi.it

 

[dab63]

Hi, I've done a similar test using BB and C1 DSLR.
Four samples.
First, BB vs C1 with default settings.
Second, BB vs C1 with my standard USM (radius 2, amount 100).
IMHO, C1 is always superior.
ps: I know it's out of focus, the subject (my daughter) is not included
-
BB no USM



C1 no USM



-
BB w/ USM



C1 w/ USM



ciao
-----------------------------------
daniele borghi
http://www.casaborghi.it

 

[pschia]

I'm sorry if I came across as insulting to you. I really did not mean it that way. What I like about C1LE is the way it reduces my post-processing workflow. Therefore I would'nt give 2 hoots about what the default picture looked like in C1LE (or BB for that matter) and would proceed to adjust all the settings (including sharpness) until I get an image that I liked best. That's what I meant when I asked that you compare the best images that both converters could achieve instead of those produced at their respective default settings. I'm sure few users of both software would be completely happy with the images converted at their respective default settings in the first place.

With C1LE, I find that I need to do much less post-processing like color correction, white balance correction, USM, noise reduction, etc than when I was using BB. In fact, most of the time, I found that I did not need to carry out any more USM if I had carried out sharpness adjustments within C1LE.

I had downloaded your RAW file and gave it a try on C1LE the way I would do my own RAW files with EC, contrast, grey balance, curve, BP/WP, sharpness adjustments, etc. Here's the result against your original BB conversion:



Perhaps now you might say 'hey, the dope oversharpened them' but that is subjective and depends much on personal preferences. But my point is that I could sharpen it during raw conversion with C1LE and save myself the trouble of carrying out further sharpening afterwards; and C1LE give the user much better control over the degree of sharpening than BB.

Pschia, I've tried every setting/sharpening I could with C1LE and
still get a loss of definition. I guess I couldn't win, if I had
sharpened them at all then someone like you would say, well the
dope oversharpened them. But sharpening's not the issue.

So, if you think you can get a perfect image out of this, then
download the raw file I've provided and show us! But please don't
insult someone you know nothing about.

David

--
My Canon EOS D60 Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/cichlids
http://www.pbase.com/pschia/canon_cats