applying presets to multiple files possible?
Is this possible?
0
-
no, not yet; I believe it is on Phase One's target list. 0 -
[quote="Paul_E" wrote:
no, not yet; I believe it is on Phase One's target list.
Thanks for getting back to me. That is nice to hear. C1 is choice for my portrait work where things are relatively close, but for my event/theater work indoors and out, adobe raw is faster for down and dirty correction of a few hundred files that are all over the place. But I refuse to buy CS4 just to develop mark 2 files because I also have to update my action manager and batching plugins and it gets a lot more expensive. Hopefully next release maybe?0 -
[quote="randy1" wrote:
...
Hopefully next release maybe?
Hopefully but don't count on it to much. Maybe it is a good idea to do a feature request through a support case to be sure.0 -
I couldn't help but notice you said "buy" V4...you should know that I don't know of anyone who has had to do this, PhaseOne has a very generous upgrade policy.
If you're asking about workflow such as presets without trying Cone, you might find Styles will fit your needs...if you know this, ignore this post.0 -
Help me understand here, A style changes everything right? I cant do a style to just affect one correction and leave the rest untouched? [quote="John4" wrote:
I couldn't help but notice you said "buy" V4...you should know that I don't know of anyone who has had to do this, PhaseOne has a very generous upgrade policy.
If you're asking about workflow such as presets without trying Cone, you might find Styles will fit your needs...if you know this, ignore this post.0 -
Welllll...I'm not sure I'm understanding your need...and wether styles is the best method to change one parameter....as I recall, you saved a group as a Style...but it might or might not work well as some adjustments don't work well globally....
I suugested it because the initial post said "Presets", and I assume if you wanted to change one adjustment globally...you would do the rather simple "copy and paste" that adjustment. That's what I would do to change one parameter on a selection of files.
I can only tell you that working with V4 is slightly different than working with 3.x, but not drastically so....and the interface is designed to allow for expansion of features that allow more user choices. That by definition means that my choice of tools might be different than yours, there's more than one way to apply adjustments globally...and depending on the desired adjustment...sometimes more than that.
As you can run BOTH 3.x and V4 on any computer...each separate but equal (they do not "share" adjustments)...you can consider that a bonus in testing and training during the switchover. My suggestion would be to try working with the V4 version as soon as you can...0 -
...John4"]Welllll...I'm not sure I'm understanding your need...and wether styles is the best method to change one parameter....as I recall, you saved a group as a Style...but it might or might not work well as some adjustments don't work well globally....
This is a lot of unnecessary unchecking I think anyway.
......I suugested it because the initial post said "Presets", and I assume if you wanted to change one adjustment globally...you would do the rather simple "copy and paste" that adjustment. That's what I would do to change one parameter on a selection of files.....
The problem is I think that if I just want to change for example, exposure to several images, this is after I already have all the other adjustment tabs where I want them, I have to constantly un check boxes to not change the other adjustments. Why cant I just select the certain images I want to change just the exposure on and just change just the exposure? See what I am saying? Like if I could select several images and go to the little triangle (or preferably right click on the top of the adjustment tab...faster) and just apply a single preset.
My Portrait work is not an issue as I take the time to correct exposure color and color balance problems before I shoot the session. But weddings are a different story. And theater work. Every image needs slightly different settings. The check boxes are just a PITA.0 -
Ok, in my workflow, I correct the color for a group and apply that...but seldom do I apply a group exposure...so my styles method won't work for you. Exposure doesn't work well as a preset/style, whatever as I use it. If I were to want to apply it to selected groups, I'd probably do that as the first adjustment and use the copy/paste to that similar group.
I think you would like a feature that (in 3.x) applied ONLY the settings from the tool you were working on, correct? I'd encourage you to request that through the support contact, that way it goes on the programer's list. Many requested features have been added to V4 since its introduction, IMHO this is a likely candidate for a feature that would be handy.0 -
Oh yes I loved 3.7 and still would be using it if it wasn't for my mark 2. I used adobe cs3 raw for all my wedding/event work. But I have to buy cs4 (2) upgrades plus all my action batching plugin upgrades, just to convert mark 2 and I don't need it. The mark 2 really screwed me up. Now I have to use C1 4 for event/wedding and it is really slowing me down.
I am really dumbfounded that C1 set up 4 the way they did.0 -
I too rarely use 4x..........I can not get 3.7 to work on my vista 64 so have to use Abobe CR
as it is much faster to go through 100's of images. I keep checking back to see it the will "fix" 4x to have the presets and the auto generated "develops" folder like 3.7..........you have to wonder why "they" took this great feature out.
Jack0 -
[quote="John4" wrote:
Ok, in my workflow, I correct the color for a group and apply that...but seldom do I apply a group exposure...so my styles method won't work for you. Exposure doesn't work well as a preset/style, whatever as I use it. If I were to want to apply it to selected groups, I'd probably do that as the first adjustment and use the copy/paste to that similar group.
I think you would like a feature that (in 3.x) applied ONLY the settings from the tool you were working on, correct? I'd encourage you to request that through the support contact, that way it goes on the programer's list. Many requested features have been added to V4 since its introduction, IMHO this is a likely candidate for a feature that would be handy.
Yes I started a support case on it. Exposure tab was just an example, High dynamic range is a biggie as well as white balance. White balance can vary with every exposure in a church if I am moving around, where there is big stained glass or window light mixing with tungsten mixing with occasional fill flash possibly gel corrected. Rarely is there a constant suitable white or neutral to click balance on other than the dress which is better than nothing. Most whites are warm which throws the balance to cool so I gotta change it anyway. Now while all this is going on the sun is going in and out changing the room lighting a stop or two, then I walk to the other side of the church and now everything changes again. Then it goes the the hallway, then out side to sun, shade, partial shade....to the fire hall with 25 year old fluorescent bulbs mixed the tungsten...ETTL flash trying to decide whether to expose for the white gown or black tux.... ☹️
So the next day I have 3 or 4 hundred images to correct that are no two exactly the same. I start by zooming through the pile doing a quick rough exposure and WB. then go though and fine tune it all. With 3.7 I could scroll through the pile with the mouse over the tabs, no jumping around the screen selecting images, AND JUST APPLY SINGLE TAB CORRECTIONS TO SELECT GROUPS OF IMAGES. NOT THE WHOLE FRIGGEN PALLET AND HAVE TO UNCHECK THE ONES I DONT WANT....ARRGH.. 🤬
(I know about the C14 arrow keys BUT, when I click on a slider the keys stop working till I click on the image again..more unnecessary mouse movement, though I realize if I just scroll the mouse over the slider the arrows still work) 🙄
Now (groups) of images ending up having the same white balance but not the same exposure, or high dynamic range, ect For example group (A of 6 images) may have the same exposure but not white balance, Group B of 10 images may have the same White balance but not exposure, then there are the single images that dont fit any where. Then there is the high dynamic range...ect...
It doesnt take long before before a guy is on his way to the nut ward with uncheck tab induced psychosis. ☹️
It appears to me as though the program writers where thinking more about indoor studio shooters or a guy outdoors with a 645 back and a light crew and a fashion model. Sadly with the time I have devoted to trying to explain all this I could almost have made enough money to upgrade to CS4 or light room, But as someone opposed to world dominance by mega corps like adobe, anytime I can help the competitors I will. Not the mention I cant the the skin tones out of adobe products like I can get out of C1 products. 😄
Another issue is C1 4 wont remember my custom camera profile, and keeps defaulting the default generic profile, ARRGGH.....On a positive note the dual monitor interface is awesome. 😄0 -
Hey, I know this program is frustrating if you expect it to work like 3.x, but it doesn't, then neither does Lightroom, nor Camera Raw. Features have been added, and the program WILL be continued to be improved and more functional. Maybe my perspective is slightly different, I stated with 1.x, and all the improvements since then have me more grateful than ticked.....
That said, sometimes this forum will be helpful (or not) with advice for other users.
In the case of 3.x develop folder behavior, that is a BIG ROGER. YES, the Pro version does that...EXACTLY LIKE 3.x....do a search here, I just explained that in another thread. Shortcut is to go to recipes, and use the advanced tab there to set a folder under the image folder...it will behave just like 3.x...
In the case of multiple images in the same basic light requiring different adjustments...I'm guessing you are either using AWB, or using the Canon flash. Those set color slightly differently frame by frame. Good if you like the color. Bad if you want to apply global corrections as the differences make that...not so much good. I have gone to setting a K value for this reason ( I use the new Sekonic Color Meter...which unlike the old Minolta...actually is fairly accurate), a custom WB is good also, you can use an ExpoDisk from camera position and that works pretty well. I agree that setting a grey card in frames is unweildy, I don't use an assitant either....he important thing to think about is not to use the AWB type setup for color.0 -
[quote="John4" wrote:
Hey, I know this program is frustrating if you expect it to work like 3.x, but it doesn't, then neither does Lightroom, nor Camera Raw. Features have been added, and the program WILL be continued to be improved and more functional. Maybe my perspective is slightly different, I stated with 1.x, and all the improvements since then have me more grateful than ticked.....
That said, sometimes this forum will be helpful (or not) with advice for other users.
In the case of 3.x develop folder behavior, that is a BIG ROGER. YES, the Pro version does that...EXACTLY LIKE 3.x....do a search here, I just explained that in another thread. Shortcut is to go to recipes, and use the advanced tab there to set a folder under the image folder...it will behave just like 3.x...
In the case of multiple images in the same basic light requiring different adjustments...I'm guessing you are either using AWB, or using the Canon flash. Those set color slightly differently frame by frame. Good if you like the color. Bad if you want to apply global corrections as the differences make that...not so much good. I have gone to setting a K value for this reason ( I use the new Sekonic Color Meter...which unlike the old Minolta...actually is fairly accurate), a custom WB is good also, you can use an ExpoDisk from camera position and that works pretty well. I agree that setting a grey card in frames is unweildy, I don't use an assitant either....he important thing to think about is not to use the AWB type setup for color.
Hello, Thanks for the help full comments and suggestions, it is nice to have some others input. it is not that I expect 4 it to work like 3.7, I expect it to work (more efficient) than 3.7. Not less efficient. Maybe I am not praising the other improvements enough, I think they are very nice, maybe even ingenious, but they come at the cost of reduced efficiency. At least so far.
On WB, I only use presets, custom or kelvin. AWB is insanity. Better to have a row of images consistently off, Than having some Canon engineering group trying to (guess) usually wrong, what color my white should be, and never recording the same way twice. My Flash is geled to match tungsten if necessary, but usually 5400K is what it is. If I can I bounce it, but not all rooms are that small, I can over ride some of the ambient room lighting, but most of the time there is going to be a compromised mix. I dont care for any flash at all really, but hate dark eyes. I think they are unprofessional.
But really that is why I shoot raw in the first place. Again in my portrait work indoor and out everything is carded. But it is not practical in the theater. Where the light temp changes every 10 seconds. Or most event work where I am constantly on the move. I never flash unless I have no other choice because that just adds to the problems....plus flat light just looks so cheap as a primary light source....So I just guestamate my WB and focus on making money. As long as it is reasonably close I can make it up later in the raw conversion. So you see the problem I hope.
I have been a C1 user for a number of years. Several years back I was just starting out and started going to professional schools ans seminars and got to see really good work. I just could not get my skin to look like I thought it should once I saw what good skin looked like. I was talking to Gary Box about it and he said my problem was I wasn't using capture one. I took him up on it and he was right. I am now fairly successful in the higher end portrait world for my geographic location and C1 gets some of credit for that. So now it is personal. At my convention I talk about C1 like its a messiah of some sort, and I know I converted some people from adobe. and rightly so. Because it is better software for the portrait world. The noise reduction is even better than adobe. But I feel it is a little lame in the mass correction of a few to several hundred event/wedding files, and if you guys could bring back the speed and functionally of 3.7 along with all the new features you have already implemented nobody would need any other raw program. So I will probably bitch and moan till that happens now that my mark II forces me to use C1 4.
If you want to, go to my link at the bottom of the page, got to password slideshows, and choose ABNER, password is ABNER you will see a dress rehearsal of the play little abner shot with all available light.
Have a happy and holiday every one,
Randy
http://www.laskodyphotography.com0 -
>>Hello, Thanks for the help full comments and suggestions, it is nice to have some others input. it is not that I expect 4 it to work like 3.7, I expect it to work (more efficient) than 3.7. Not less efficient. Maybe I am not praising the other improvements enough, I think they are very nice, maybe even ingenious, but they come at the cost of reduced efficiency. At least so far. <<
Agreed. However, more efficient workflow as designed is not always met with approval from the user base. Over the course of COne's development, several improvements have been rolled back due to user feedback.
Version 4 is a fresh page, it was released later than announced...one assumes the program is never finished, but released when workable. I suspect many of the current features that have already been added were slated to be included from the beginning. The fact is that they have been included at no upgrade charge, and continue to be provided. One could sau that CS4 is less efficient than PS7 in terms of speed of some operations, particularly the Browser in PS7 relative to the much slower Bridge in CS versions. However, the slower versions are much more full featured....
I'm still not clear on why you don't use copy/paste for global corrections the same as in 3.x, the check boxes are different but they function the same way if a tad slower....more than made up for by the dual monitor function that really speeds editing workflow overall, it's wicked fast to edit on a full screen preview that snaps to 100%0 -
<<Agreed. However, more efficient workflow as designed is not always met with approval from the user base. Over the course of COne's development, several improvements have been rolled back due to user feedback.>>
I would like to hear more about this.
<<Version 4 is a fresh page, it was released later than announced...one assumes the program is never finished, but released when workable. I suspect many of the current features that have already been added were slated to be included from the beginning. The fact is that they have been included at no upgrade charge, and continue to be provided.>>
Understandable and appreciated.
<<One could sau that CS4 is less efficient than PS7 in terms of speed of some operations, particularly the Browser in PS7 relative to the much slower Bridge in CS versions. However, the slower versions are much more full featured....>>
CS3 bridge is the most unstable program I ever have been forced to use. my action manager and batch engine need it or I would never use it.
<<I'm still not clear on why you don't use copy/paste for global corrections the same as in 3.x, the check boxes are different but they function the same way if a tad slower....>>
Because it requires to much concentration from a scattered right brainer. I cant focus now any better than I could in second grade, and trying to remember what the heck I am supposed to uncheck is a major PITA. Unfortunately most corporations that provide software are full of left brainers running things, along with most of our learning institutions. If it wasnt for my primary left brained wife running things though, I wouldnt get to be sitting here sitting in my nice air conditioned printing production room sitting beside my 2000sq ft camera room, needing to type this email. So I understand the way it is. It is no doubt though that there are many scattered creative artist type photographers like myself with the same C1 4 issues, that cant get it together to complain. So hopefully this all is not in vain.
Randy0 -
[quote="randy1"] wrote:
<<Agreed. However, more efficient workflow as designed is not always met with approval from the user base. Over the course of COne's development, several improvements have been rolled back due to user feedback.>>
I would like to hear more about this.
Well, the BEST example of this TOM for me was the change to a contrastier film curve default, saved me lots of time as I generally go in that direction. It absolutely looked and performed better than the standard default. Due to user complaints (mostly from those who use this as a library tool (rather than an active RAW converter as I do) this was rolled back and offered as "Film High Contrast". Not so much high contrast as a good film s curve, but there it is....I can select all and apply...so that's the workaround.
I hope you submit the feature request , this user forum dosn't get to the decision makers...0
Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.
Kommentare
16 Kommentare