Zum Hauptinhalt gehen

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived. The information contained here may no longer be accurate or up-to-date. ⚠️

I'd really like to get Capture One, but no deskew/upright?

Philip Warner
I can not seem to find a way to deskew an image. The keystone correction does not (even at 120%) make the lines perpendicular.

The simplest steps to reproduce are:

1. Take a photo of a poster/painting on a wall at a very bad angle (say 45 deg, from slightly below)
2. Use the keystone tool with both Horizontal and Vertical correction.
3. Set the slider to 120% (or not)
4. Apply.

Lines will not be perpendicular. I have small demo images showing this problem, but can not see a way to attach them to this post. It is easy to reproduce though. The limits set on the Horizontal and Vertical sliders *seem* to be the problem here.

What makes this worse is that my mobile phone does the deskew flawlessly, but downscales the image and, sadly, is not an ideal image processing and library platform!

FWIW, Lightroom also does this flawlessly with the Upright tool; automatic correction is almost perfect, manual correct is easy and perfect.

This was reported in version 10, and remains un-fixed. Am I correct in assuming that there is some reason for NOT wanting to fix this?

If you would like demo images, send me a message with your email address.
0

Kommentare

12 Kommentare

Datum Stimmen
  • OddS.
    [quote="NNN636403476753378678" wrote:
    ...Am I correct in assuming that there is some reason for NOT wanting to fix this?


    Could be. You may have a different take on "flawlessly" then they do over at the Capture One lab.
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="OddS" wrote:
    [quote="NNN636403476753378678" wrote:
    ...Am I correct in assuming that there is some reason for NOT wanting to fix this?


    Could be. You may have a different take on "flawlessly" then they do over at the Capture One lab.


    I suspect that is exactly right.

    Beyond the level of adjustment available in C1 one is into the area of pixel manipulation and artistry - the sort of things that applications such as Photoshop and Affinity have always been offering since they originated in digital artwork applications. That means that they so not perform the corrections directly from a RAW file as far as I am aware.

    Photographically speaking one might be expected to 'fix' most of those types problem at the point the image is taken either by changing position or using a tilt and shift lens or the more traditional "Movements" of older style cameras.

    I fully appreciate that in the situation described such options may not be available. However if the solution requires significant manipulation of the image by adding/deleting pixels that were not in the original file the chance are that an 'art' type engine would be advisable rather than a RAW conversion and editing application.


    That's just my impression of course.


    Grant
    0
  • Philip Warner
    [quote="OddS" wrote:
    [quote="NNN636403476753378678" wrote:
    ...Am I correct in assuming that there is some reason for NOT wanting to fix this?

    Could be. You may have a different take on "flawlessly" then they do over at the Capture One lab.


    My definition is pretty simple: the bounds of the correction rectangle should be perpendicular after correction on maximum settings. Thats what my phone and Lightroom do.

    If that's not the definition according to C1, then I'd love to know what theirs is!

    [quote="SFA" wrote:

    Beyond the level of adjustment available in C1 one is into the area of pixel manipulation and artistry -

    ISTM that what they are actually doing is much more art than science. It's the interpretive dance version of deskewing...

    [quote="SFA" wrote:

    ...However if the solution requires significant manipulation of the image by adding/deleting pixels that were not in the original file the chance are that an 'art' type engine would be advisable rather than a RAW conversion and editing application.

    Except that ANY deskew involves either deletion or creation of pixels; Deskewing involves pixel deletion/combination, or interpolation, and interpolation isn't art it's basically a "scale" operation, which I'm pretty sure C1 contains.

    In all honesty I can't imaging any reason, other then market differentiation with one of their more expensive products, that keeps this feature so dreadfully hamstrung.
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="NNN636403476753378678" wrote:

    In all honesty I can't imaging any reason, other then market differentiation with one of their more expensive products, that keeps this feature so dreadfully hamstrung.


    I think the product you may be referring to is likely to be used with some extremely (for current day standards) high resolution sensors and mostly in very controlled conditions. The amount of data available at the beginning of the process compared to the amount required for quality results at the end may be advantageous in a way that we poor mortals in the "mass market" would not appreciate as we battle to try to make images shot at ludicrous angles look like technical masterpieces.

    Now that may not be your starting point or objective but it could be for many possible users who might be better off with something designed with artistic intent to offer relatively large and potentially extreme adjustments irrespective of availabe, manipulateable pixel numbers.


    Grant
    0
  • Philip Warner
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    ...
    Now that may not be your starting point or objective but it could be for many possible users who might be better off with something designed with artistic intent to offer relatively large and potentially extreme adjustments irrespective of availabe, manipulateable pixel numbers.

    This argument would be convincing if the settings didn't just barely stop short of what is the ideal solution; it already messes up pixels to within a hairs-breadth of what is needed. Instead, C1 produces a disturbingly "slightly off" result that is very unappealing. Their solution is not helping to save me from myself at all; it's just helping me make a frustratingly bad result. This is not a good outcome, and I still fail to see how it helps anyone -- it certainly does not fit with the advertising about shifting from LR to C1 (which I would LOVE to do).
    0
  • Ian Wilson
    Moderator
    Top Commenter
    [quote="NNN636403476753378678" wrote:
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    ...
    Now that may not be your starting point or objective but it could be for many possible users who might be better off with something designed with artistic intent to offer relatively large and potentially extreme adjustments irrespective of availabe, manipulateable pixel numbers.

    This argument would be convincing if the settings didn't just barely stop short of what is the ideal solution; it already messes up pixels to within a hairs-breadth of what is needed. Instead, C1 produces a disturbingly "slightly off" result that is very unappealing. Their solution is not helping to save me from myself at all; it's just helping me make a frustratingly bad result. This is not a good outcome, and I still fail to see how it helps anyone -- it certainly does not fit with the advertising about shifting from LR to C1 (which I would LOVE to do).

    When I've tried to deskew something using both vertical and horizontal keystone combined, I've generally found that it only works well in something that is slightly off in the first place. And when it does work, it is very sensitive indeed to the placement of the guides - it is not easy to get them just right.

    Ian
    0
  • NNN636948568013048939
    Some of my work involves photographing flat artwork, like paintings and drawings. So a properly functioning keystone tool is essential and this one does such a bad job at making edges parallel is pretty useless. I can carefully adjust keystone and then try to crop and it's not even close. This is such a simple error to correct yet I see posts on this forum going back years complaining of the same problem. Fortunately adobe camera raw does the job well so I can continue work, but I was hoping that C1 might have a bit more functionality for me besides just capture. I've been looking for a place to report bugs but haven't found that yet.
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="NNN636948568013048939" wrote:
    Some of my work involves photographing flat artwork, like paintings and drawings. So a properly functioning keystone tool is essential and this one does such a bad job at making edges parallel is pretty useless. I can carefully adjust keystone and then try to crop and it's not even close. This is such a simple error to correct yet I see posts on this forum going back years complaining of the same problem. Fortunately adobe camera raw does the job well so I can continue work, but I was hoping that C1 might have a bit more functionality for me besides just capture. I've been looking for a place to report bugs but haven't found that yet.


    Ah, you probably want the Cultural Heritage section of the web site.

    And for contacting support try "Capture One Support" form the Help menu.

    When the link has opened scroll down to the "Contact Support" section and choose which option best suits you purpose for creating a Support Case.

    HTH.

    Grant
    0
  • Philip Warner
    Does anyone know if the upcoming release includes an actual working 'deskew' feature?
    0
  • Ian Wilson
    Moderator
    Top Commenter
    [quote="NNN636403476753378678" wrote:
    Does anyone know if the upcoming release includes an actual working 'deskew' feature?

    No doubt beta testers know whether or not it does, but they would be unable to tell you because of a non-disclosure agreement.

    Ian
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="NNN636403476753378678" wrote:
    Does anyone know if the upcoming release includes an actual working 'deskew' feature?


    Did you contact the Support Team as previously suggested?

    If so what did they say?
    0
  • Philip Warner
    I reported this problem to support a LONG time ago. The response was that the broken behavior (my words) was by design, and that they had logged it as a feature request. That was probably back in version 9...or maybe 10.
    0

Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.