Zum Hauptinhalt gehen

Capture One Always overlays grain

Kommentare

52 Kommentare

  • Fenjen
    The people from support don't see it..
    0
  • Gustavo Ferlizi
    [quote="Fenjen" wrote:
    The people from support don't see it..


    Did you mention it seems to vary depending on the current colour profile?
    0
  • ---
    [quote="Fenjen" wrote:
    The people from support don't see it..



    this does not surprise me as they use grain to mask the outdated noise reduction they are unable to improve for years know.
    0
  • Gustavo Ferlizi
    [quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
    [quote="Fenjen" wrote:
    The people from support don't see it..

    this does not surprise me as they use grain to mask the outdated noise reduction they are unable to improve for years know.


    I know right! 😂
    0
  • Fenjen
    [quote="gusferlizi" wrote:
    [quote="Fenjen" wrote:
    The people from support don't see it..


    Did you mention it seems to vary depending on the current colour profile?


    I don't actually see this for myself, but I really tried my best to convince them. I made another video showing it and explained everything again and again, and finally the support agent said they saw something but only when the fine grain is used, not with the other ones (for my copy at least it doesn't seem to matter which grain I use, since it is there even when I set the impact to 0). They closed the support thread, so I guess nothing will come from it. Due to this and another problem with X-Trans III where on high iso images there will be a lot of "hot pixels" that don't show up in other raw convertes, I will stop using Capture One. I'll keep an eye on development though.
    0
  • Gustavo Ferlizi
    [quote="Fenjen" wrote:
    [quote="gusferlizi" wrote:
    [quote="Fenjen" wrote:
    The people from support don't see it..
    Did you mention it seems to vary depending on the current colour profile?

    I don't actually see this for myself, but I really tried my best to convince them. I made another video showing it and explained everything again and again, and finally the support agent said they saw something but only when the fine grain is used, not with the other ones (for my copy at least it doesn't seem to matter which grain I use, since it is there even when I set the impact to 0). They closed the support thread, so I guess nothing will come from it. Due to this and another problem with X-Trans III where on high iso images there will be a lot of "hot pixels" that don't show up in other raw convertes, I will stop using Capture One. I'll keep an eye on development though.

    I have impact at 0 as well. Grain type setting does not seem to matter. I can confirm however, that If I change the output profile to AdobeRGB this background granulation disappears.

    I will also try to raise issue.

    By the way, can you elaborate on your issue with the hot pixels?

    I have an X-T2 and noticed a drastic increase in sharpening artifacts from version 10.0.2 to 10.1+. (I think that I now understand what went on, and managed to circumvent it to a large extent. They seem to have improved pixel-to-pixel luminance definition, which in high ISO images, results in very crunchy noise and images that are extremely hard to sharpen in a pleasing manner.)

    Fuji cameras also appear to be cursed and always come up with new hot pixels at certain sensor refresh rates; regardless of doing the pixel mapping routine.

    Capture One's hot-pixel algorithm, however, seems to catch most of them by default. Perhaps better now on version 11.x...
    0
  • Fenjen
    [quote="gusferlizi" wrote:


    I have impact at 0 as well. Grain type setting does not seem to matter. I can confirm however, that If I change the output profile to AdobeRGB this background granulation disappears.
    I will also try to raise issue.

    By the way, can you elaborate on your issue with the hot pixels?

    I have an X-T2 and noticed a drastic increase in sharpening artifacts from version 10.0.2 to 10.1+. (I think that I now understand what went on, and managed to circumvent it to a large extent. They seem to have improved pixel-to-pixel luminance definition, which in high ISO images, results in very crunchy noise and images that are extremely hard to sharpen in a pleasing manner.)

    Fuji cameras also appear to be cursed and always come up with new hot pixels at certain sensor refresh rates; regardless of doing the pixel mapping routine.

    Capture One's hot-pixel algorithm, however, seems to catch most of them by default. Perhaps better now on version 11.x...


    Ahh good find! I didn't notice that. Yes I indeed see that it doesn't happen for me when I choose Adobe RGB, that might have been why the supporter didn't see the problem. Here is an image that shows the hot pixels I'm talking about.
    https://ibb.co/hTUExc, X-T20 ISO 6400. Look in particular at the shadows. The noise reduction doesn't make these go away.
    I think I'm going to open a new support thread too then, I didn't mention SRGB or Adobe rgb could have anything to do with it.
    0
  • Gustavo Ferlizi
    [quote="Fenjen" wrote:
    Ahh good find! I didn't notice that. Yes I indeed see that it doesn't happen for me when I choose Adobe RGB, that might have been why the supporter didn't see the problem. Here is an image that shows the hot pixels I'm talking about.
    https://ibb.co/hTUExc, X-T20 ISO 6400. Look in particular at the shadows. The noise reduction doesn't make these go away.
    I think I'm going to open a new support thread too then, I didn't mention SRGB or Adobe rgb could have anything to do with it.

    Oh the coloured hot pixels!

    I remember this same issue from a few months ago and another user.

    viewtopic.php?f=69&t=26559&p=124731&hilit=fuji+x+t20#p124846

    I did open a support ticket, and got a reply back today, stating "What it boils down to at this point is a bug with the x-trans sensor." They said they'd passed it to the development team for a fix sometime in the near future.
    0
  • Fenjen
    [quote="gusferlizi" wrote:
    [quote="Fenjen" wrote:
    Ahh good find! I didn't notice that. Yes I indeed see that it doesn't happen for me when I choose Adobe RGB, that might have been why the supporter didn't see the problem. Here is an image that shows the hot pixels I'm talking about.
    https://ibb.co/hTUExc, X-T20 ISO 6400. Look in particular at the shadows. The noise reduction doesn't make these go away.
    I think I'm going to open a new support thread too then, I didn't mention SRGB or Adobe rgb could have anything to do with it.

    Oh the coloured hot pixels!

    I remember this same issue from a few months ago and another user.

    viewtopic.php?f=69&t=26559&p=124731&hilit=fuji+x+t20#p124846

    I did open a support ticket, and got a reply back today, stating "What it boils down to at this point is a bug with the x-trans sensor." They said they'd passed it to the development team for a fix sometime in the near future.


    Yeah according to them it's a bug and they will try to fix it.. But it taking quite a long time. Did you try to contact them about the grain issue? I really love capture one but due to this issue I rather use Lightroom + Iridient at the moment, even though I like Capture One's output more in general.
    0
  • Gustavo Ferlizi
    [quote="Fenjen" wrote:
    Yeah according to them it's a bug and they will try to fix it.. But it taking quite a long time. Did you try to contact them about the grain issue? I really love capture one but due to this issue I rather use Lightroom + Iridient at the moment, even though I like Capture One's output more in general.


    Sorry man, I haven't. Got busy with other things.

    Will try to have another look at it this week.
    0
  • Yann Gouffon

    This thread is very old, but it's the only one talking about this topic. Even in 2021, I still note this “issue” (see the comparison 1:1 with FilmPack 6 https://cln.sh/pcQWnF). Capture One should add a bit of grain in the shadow like true film stocks, but not as much as in the highlights. I open a new support request and we'll see the response.

    0
  • ---

    this company has the really strange behaviour that they are introducing new features but almost never improve them later which makes me think the only important point for them is to have an entry in the feature list. this is bad for itself but worse as most of their new features are often inferior or limited like in this case compared to other state of the art software like dxo FP or SEFX. so the grain tool is no exception, while it does render a very nice grain it is rather limited as the grain is applied globally.  

    0
  • Keith R
    Top Commenter

    Pretty meaningless comparison without some idea of ISO; NR and sharpening settings; degree of shadow recovery in post; amount of cropping etc., Yann.

    0
  • Keith R
    Top Commenter

    this company has the really strange behaviour that they are introducing new features but almost never improve them later which makes me think the only important point for them is to have an entry in the feature list.

    And which alternative software companies do it differently, CSP?

    None, in my experience.

    And in Capture One's defence, both their highlight recovery and noise reduction are much better than they were several generations ago - so, y'know...

    0
  • C-M-B

    I agree with Keith, this is mostly due to shadow recovery and nothing that can't be fixed easily (if you want to).

     

    0
  • ---

    maybe I understand it wrong but the comparisons Yann showed is about adding grain and not NR. so I think I have already answered your question. 

     

    0
  • Yann Gouffon

    And which alternative software companies do it differently, CSP?

    Actually, DXO did with FilmPack ^^' Small disclaimer, I'm a C1 user and I don't really want to buy a FilmPack license only for grain. But I played a bit with their trial and I notice this huge difference when approaching the grain addition in dark tone / blacks. I also compared with HP5 and TRI-X scans and the grain in the blacks are more present than the FilmPack simulation, but not as much as C1 did.

    Here is a more complete example with a 64 ISO contrasty photograph (so no noise obviously) :

    0
  • ---

    no surprise the scans show more shadow noise but the FP simulation looks rather similar to what you would get from a real photo print. 

     

    0
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    the grain tool is no exception, while it does render a very nice grain it is rather limited as the grain is applied globally.

    That's really a pity, I remember having requested long ago to add the grain tool to the tools which can be used locally.

    Sometimes it is not only a grainy image you want to simulate but I could be used to finetune problematic local areas.

    0
  • ---

    user have posted a lot of great ideas over the years to improve c1 but sadly almost NOTHING made it in the app.  since a few years the only goal they seem to have is to make c1 a LR clone, todays release is just another step in this direction but only 10 yeasr too late.  adding a more film like blend mode can't be such an overwhelming task for them. but making it applicable via a layer in combination with the luma tool this would be absolute fantastic.  everything leads to the assumption that the people in charge have no clue what advanced user really need which in the past had been their most loyal customers.

    0
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    To be fair, HDR blending and pano stitching also has been requested (and yes, this sells better than improving the grain tool). And from the business point of view, new (LR) users increase cash flow, loyalty alone doesn't pay all bills.

    Nothing should stop them from doing both though....

    0
  • ---

    yes that's why I said "almost nothing" but when you release a HDR and pano tool 10 years after your  completion you should make sure to offer something slightly better or more sophisticated. 22 is just another sad under-delivering realise.  

     

    0

Bitte melden Sie sich an, um einen Kommentar zu hinterlassen.