This is almost certainly old news to many of you, but I figured that I would share my recent “discovery” of a raw developing software that is far superior to Adobe products (my life is all about rediscovering the wheel). Short story, I got fed up with Adobe’s shenanigans so I finally decided to try Capture One. For me, there is no going back, even if it turns out to be a bit more expensive than Adobe after all - it is worth every penny. There are a number of reasons why I feel this way, among which I would like to mention, in no particular order:
- The RAW developer. The amount and quality of detail that it extracts from raw files, as well as the dynamic range and color accuracy, are simply in a different league from Adobe. My only experience so far is with Sony ARW files and Leica DNG’s, I don’t know about other cameras but I suspect that results will be comparably good.
- Noise reduction is essentially automatic. You of course can adjust this as you please, but I have not yet found the need to do it. The automatic algorithm gives you noise-free images virtually every single time.
- Ditto for sharpening, both raw sharpening and output sharpening. I made a few minor tweaks to some of the in-built presets and saved them as my own presets. Once you get them right, two or three different presets would appear to cover all that you can possibly need. You can forget about output sharpening, Capture One gets it right every time.
- The very simple and effective tonal adjustments. Takes a bit to get used to, but once you do, it is VERY fast and intuitive.
- The mind-boggling number of different ways in which you can adjust color. Again, a bit of a learning curve, but once you learn to work with the possibilities, and with the many different ways of combining color and tonal adjustments, it is very fast and intuitive and POWERFUL.
- The excellent level of control on microcontrast and fine detail (needed given the amount of detail that it recovers from the RAW files).
- The very simple and user-friendly local adjustments, masks, etc.
- The straightforward, elegant (hey, it's Danish ) and infinitely customizable workspace.
- The several different ways in which you can organize your images. You can switch seamlessly between catalogs (similar to Lightroom) and sessions, and to exchange files between the different file organization procedures in a very intuitive way. It also provides for more complete and faster cataloging options than Lightroom.
- The SPEED! Adjustments are instantaneous, even on my five year old computer.
- The excellent instruction manual.
- It is supposed to be able to import adjustments made with other software, but I have not tried. Rather, I am saving my Adobe files as unsharpened full-resolution TIFFS in Adobe RGB, importing these files into Capture One, and then applying a bit of raw and output sharpening before exporting to sRGB jpgs. This appears to work very well, the final product looks better than the jpgs out of Lightroom.
Be careful, because if you try it you may get hooked. They know this, so you can try the full functional program for free for 30 days, no strings attached. I am about to pay, as my trial period ends in just a few days...
If you are interested in some examples I just uploaded two sets of images processed with Capture One from beginning to end:
Annual subscription, single user, 2 workstations: $20/month
12 month subscription, prepaid payment, single-user, two workstations: $180
It looks like a fine application. A little on the pricey side for me, anyway. I find that Adobe ACR and PS-CC does the job for me at present. However, I would not rule out Capture 1 if Adobe does something dumb.
--P
Posted by David Schoen on September 24, 2017 at 4:23 PM
While I have not tried out Capture One, two other raw converters that are considerably cheaper would be ON 1 Camera Raw about $100 and DxO Optics Pro Elite 11 which after discount is $100. And the Nikon View NX/Capture NX suite for Nikon users only which is free. Yes, Adobe is not perfect but I find it difficult to change habits after using Light Room and Photoshop for so many years. Adobe may not be as accommodating as it should be. As an example, for people who have the new Nikon D850, they have yet to release a seamless version of Adobe camera raw. There is no raw converter for that camera. One must first convert files to DNG format before importing them into Light Room and that requires several steps. They promise to eventually release a seamless version of Adobe camera raw for the Nikon D 850. As of now, if one wishes to use Adobe Light Room, there is absolutely no good way to get your files into the program regardless of which raw converter one uses. They all have disadvantages.
I've been using ON 1 Camera Raw for about six months and I have yet to see any advantages over Adobe camera raw. It is just different but does the same thing with a different approach. The ON 1 effects panel, which is an add-on included with ON 1 Camera Raw, is worth the price of admission for this software package. The people in Portland, Oregon who are developing ON 1 Camera Raw are however, making constant changes to this package on a monthly basis so there may be some value in the future that improves significantly upon Adobe camera raw.
I just started using a free 30 day trial version of DxO Optics Pro Elite 11 last week and similar to Capture One, it seems to do everything automatically at first and then allows manual corrections. All the automatic corrections can be turned on and off. This is also a European package. Their noise reduction engine, called Prime, has worked better than any noise reduction software I have used. I find it a little slow although they claim it is four times faster than the previous version. I have enclosed a sample of two images, one I processed with Adobe camera raw and Topaz Denoise and the other with Prime. Although I don't know the answer to this, the list price on this software package is $199 and the discount advertised with the package just increased from $50 to $100 if you purchase it before October 1, 2017. Perhaps that means version 12 is on the way?
DxO Optics Pro Elite 11 is an add-on to Light Room. It creates a separate nondestructive .DxO file in the Light Room catalog and retains the original Lightroom raw file. So one has a choice of using either file. I have started reprocessing some of my older noisy files just to see if I can save them using the software. So far the results are promising.
original image left above DxO image right above
Merganser image posted 9/24/17 in avian, a 30% of full frame crop with D500 also used Prime
Posted by Paul DeCesare on September 24, 2017 at 6:34 PM
It actually depends on the camera. I asked this question a couple years ago and Alain Briot answered it for me. He said basically if you’re using a Canon camera you want Adobe camera Raw. Nikon and others, yes capture one is great. I tried both and ACR definitely has it over Capture One on my former 5D3 and current 5D4. I’m talking overall image conversion quality and then adjustment, much of which I do in ACR before Photoshop, and even afterwards with the ACR filter which is huge part of my workflow. Just my $.02 to toss into the fountain... ;-)
I believe that Capture One supports the new Nikon: https://www.phaseone.com/en/Products/Software/Capture-One-Pro/Supported-Cameras.aspxalthough I don’t know what “12 bit uncompressed” is - this may be the sticking point? I tried DxO Pro a few years back (v. 8, I believe) and although I liked it quite a bit, at that point it did not have any useful cataloguing functionality and for that reason alone I decided to stick with Lightroom. I would have chosen DxO on the basis of image quality. Perhaps cataloguing in DxO has improved?
I don’t know what Capture One was able to do a couple of years ago, nor how it performs with Canon sensors. I do know from my own experience that with Sony ARWs, Leica DNGs, as well as my old Olympus ORFs and as a way of adjusting full resolution TIFFS, the current version of Capture One (v.10.2) is way ahead of ACR - it is not even close. Add all of the incredible functionality and flexibility of Capture One and it is game over as far as I am concerned. Perhaps the fact that Sony sensors routinely outperform Canon’s has something to do with this particular point...see the following table from DxO Mark (most of the missing slots are Nikons and Pentaxes, which I believe use Sony sensors, mostly). Note in particular the launch dates, and the scores for portrait and landscape, which measure color depth and dynamic range, respectively. Sonys also occupy the first three slots in terms of low light performance (sports score).
Discussion
4 repliesThis is almost certainly old news to many of you, but I figured that I would share my recent “discovery” of a raw developing software that is far superior to Adobe products (my life is all about rediscovering the wheel). Short story, I got fed up with Adobe’s shenanigans so I finally decided to try Capture One. For me, there is no going back, even if it turns out to be a bit more expensive than Adobe after all - it is worth every penny. There are a number of reasons why I feel this way, among which I would like to mention, in no particular order:
- The RAW developer. The amount and quality of detail that it extracts from raw files, as well as the dynamic range and color accuracy, are simply in a different league from Adobe. My only experience so far is with Sony ARW files and Leica DNG’s, I don’t know about other cameras but I suspect that results will be comparably good.
- Noise reduction is essentially automatic. You of course can adjust this as you please, but I have not yet found the need to do it. The automatic algorithm gives you noise-free images virtually every single time.
- Ditto for sharpening, both raw sharpening and output sharpening. I made a few minor tweaks to some of the in-built presets and saved them as my own presets. Once you get them right, two or three different presets would appear to cover all that you can possibly need. You can forget about output sharpening, Capture One gets it right every time.
- The very simple and effective tonal adjustments. Takes a bit to get used to, but once you do, it is VERY fast and intuitive.
- The mind-boggling number of different ways in which you can adjust color. Again, a bit of a learning curve, but once you learn to work with the possibilities, and with the many different ways of combining color and tonal adjustments, it is very fast and intuitive and POWERFUL.
- The excellent level of control on microcontrast and fine detail (needed given the amount of detail that it recovers from the RAW files).
- The very simple and user-friendly local adjustments, masks, etc.
- The straightforward, elegant (hey, it's Danish
) and infinitely customizable workspace.
- The several different ways in which you can organize your images. You can switch seamlessly between catalogs (similar to Lightroom) and sessions, and to exchange files between the different file organization procedures in a very intuitive way. It also provides for more complete and faster cataloging options than Lightroom.
- The SPEED! Adjustments are instantaneous, even on my five year old computer.
- The excellent instruction manual.
- It is supposed to be able to import adjustments made with other software, but I have not tried. Rather, I am saving my Adobe files as unsharpened full-resolution TIFFS in Adobe RGB, importing these files into Capture One, and then applying a bit of raw and output sharpening before exporting to sRGB jpgs. This appears to work very well, the final product looks better than the jpgs out of Lightroom.
Be careful, because if you try it you may get hooked. They know this, so you can try the full functional program for free for 30 days, no strings attached. I am about to pay, as my trial period ends in just a few days...
If you are interested in some examples I just uploaded two sets of images processed with Capture One from beginning to end:
http://www.fourbillionyears.com/joshua-tree-national-park#h96de2685and
http://fourbillionyears.org/fujinon-ebc-50mm-f1-4-a-stroll-in-the-woods/
I just checked the pricing for Capture 1:
- $299 for three workstations.
- Annual subscription, single user, 2 workstations: $20/month
- 12 month subscription, prepaid payment, single-user, two workstations: $180
It looks like a fine application. A little on the pricey side for me, anyway. I find that Adobe ACR and PS-CC does the job for me at present. However, I would not rule out Capture 1 if Adobe does something dumb.--P
I've been using ON 1 Camera Raw for about six months and I have yet to see any advantages over Adobe camera raw. It is just different but does the same thing with a different approach. The ON 1 effects panel, which is an add-on included with ON 1 Camera Raw, is worth the price of admission for this software package. The people in Portland, Oregon who are developing ON 1 Camera Raw are however, making constant changes to this package on a monthly basis so there may be some value in the future that improves significantly upon Adobe camera raw.
I just started using a free 30 day trial version of DxO Optics Pro Elite 11 last week and similar to Capture One, it seems to do everything automatically at first and then allows manual corrections. All the automatic corrections can be turned on and off. This is also a European package. Their noise reduction engine, called Prime, has worked better than any noise reduction software I have used. I find it a little slow although they claim it is four times faster than the previous version. I have enclosed a sample of two images, one I processed with Adobe camera raw and Topaz Denoise and the other with Prime. Although I don't know the answer to this, the list price on this software package is $199 and the discount advertised with the package just increased from $50 to $100 if you purchase it before October 1, 2017. Perhaps that means version 12 is on the way?
DxO Optics Pro Elite 11 is an add-on to Light Room. It creates a separate nondestructive .DxO file in the Light Room catalog and retains the original Lightroom raw file. So one has a choice of using either file. I have started reprocessing some of my older noisy files just to see if I can save them using the software. So far the results are promising.
original image left above DxO image right above
Merganser image posted 9/24/17 in avian, a 30% of full frame crop with D500 also used Prime
I believe that Capture One supports the new Nikon: https://www.phaseone.com/en/Products/Software/Capture-One-Pro/Supported-Cameras.aspx although I don’t know what “12 bit uncompressed” is - this may be the sticking point? I tried DxO Pro a few years back (v. 8, I believe) and although I liked it quite a bit, at that point it did not have any useful cataloguing functionality and for that reason alone I decided to stick with Lightroom. I would have chosen DxO on the basis of image quality. Perhaps cataloguing in DxO has improved?
I don’t know what Capture One was able to do a couple of years ago, nor how it performs with Canon sensors. I do know from my own experience that with Sony ARWs, Leica DNGs, as well as my old Olympus ORFs and as a way of adjusting full resolution TIFFS, the current version of Capture One (v.10.2) is way ahead of ACR - it is not even close. Add all of the incredible functionality and flexibility of Capture One and it is game over as far as I am concerned. Perhaps the fact that Sony sensors routinely outperform Canon’s has something to do with this particular point...see the following table from DxO Mark (most of the missing slots are Nikons and Pentaxes, which I believe use Sony sensors, mostly). Note in particular the launch dates, and the scores for portrait and landscape, which measure color depth and dynamic range, respectively. Sonys also occupy the first three slots in terms of low light performance (sports score).
Model
Mpix
Sensor Format
Launch Date
Overall Score
Portrait
Landscape
Sports
Sony A7R II
42.4
Full Frame
Jun. 2015
98
1
26.0
3
13.9
21
3434
3
Sony A7R
36
Full Frame
Oct. 2013
95
6
25.6
7
14.1
14
2746
21
Sony a9
24.2
Full Frame
Apr. 2017
92
12
24.9
20
13.3
52
3517
2
Sony SLT Alpha 99 II
42.4
Full Frame
Sep. 2016
92
13
25.4
8
13.4
48
2317
28
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV
30.4
Full Frame
Aug. 2016
91
16
24.8
24
13.6
36
2995
10
Sony A7
24
Full Frame
Oct. 2013
90
17
24.8
21
14.2
10
2248
33
Sony A7 II
24.3
Full Frame
Nov. 2014
90
18
24.9
19
13.6
34
2449
24
Sony SLT Alpha 99
24.3
Full Frame
Sep. 2012
89
23
25.0
16
14.0
19
1555
41
Canon EOS-1D X Mark II
20.2
Full Frame
Feb. 2016
88
25
24.1
52
13.5
42
3207
7
Sony A7S
12.2
Full Frame
Apr. 2014
87
28
23.9
62
13.2
57
3702
1
Canon EOS 5DS
50.6
Full Frame
Feb. 2015
87
31
24.7
26
12.4
128
2381
26
Canon EOS 5DS R
50.6
Full Frame
Feb. 2015
86
33
24.6
31
12.4
130
2308
29
Canon EOS 6D Mark II
26.2
Full Frame
Jun. 2017
85
36
24.4
37
11.9
171
2862
17
Sony A7S II
12.2
Full Frame
Sep. 2015
85
37
23.6
86
13.3
50
2993
11
Canon EOS 1Dx
18.1
Full Frame
Oct. 2011
82
56
23.8
68
11.8
176
2786
20
Canon EOS 6D
20.2
Full Frame
Sep. 2012
82
58
23.8
69
12.1
161
2340
27
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
22.3
Full Frame
Mar. 2012
81
61
24.0
61
11.7
182
2293
31
Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III
21.1
Full Frame
Aug. 2007
80
65
24.0
57
12.0
164
1663
39
Canon EOS 5D Mark II
21
Full Frame
Sep. 2008
79
76
23.7
78
11.9
173
1815
38
Sony Alpha 850
24.6
Full Frame
Aug. 2009
79
77
23.8
70
12.2
153
1415
47
Sony Alpha 900
24.6
Full Frame
Sep. 2008
79
78
23.7
76
12.3
142
1431
46
Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II
16.6
Full Frame
Sep. 2004
74
113
23.3
111
11.3
228
1480
43
Canon EOS 5D
12.7
Full Frame
Aug. 2005
71
145
22.9
130
11.1
254
1368
51
Canon EOS 1Ds
11
Full Frame
Sep. 2002
63
223
21.8
229
11.0
266
954
109