Three weeks (or so) with CaptureOne 8
Hi all,
currently I'm using the test version of CaptureOne 8 in order to decide if I should switch from LR6 to C1. For this I imported ~500 of my RAW files into a C1 cataloge and played with them. What could I say, I immediately loved this software and was exited about its rendering as well as its editing possibilities. Like many others I guess...
But there are some things irritating me. Therefore I'd like to hear some comments from you (or hints how to make it better).
First of all: The printing module. For me its implementation is really, really disappointing! The dialog seems to "forget" nearly all of the settings I've done, mainly page settings and printer settings. Whenever I want to print an image, I have to re-enter all of these, orientation, paper selection and print quality in the printer driver etc. All of this is gone as soon as I close the dialog.
Furthermore, I can't even set all values I want: The "Resolution" field is always disabled and says "Not available" (please note that I'm using the German version of C1 and have to translate the field names. I'm pretty sure you know which fields I mean...).
I'm just an amateur, but I print quite often, and it seems to me that C1's dreadful print module will force me to print my images from LR, meaning that I don't really switch to C1 but have to use two RAW converters in parallel. Furthermore I'd have to export images from C1 and import them to LR in order to print them. Something like a show stopper for me.
What are is your experience with C1's print module? Is there something I have to do in order to make the print dialog work as expected? And how can I set this silly print resolution?!
Another thing is that on import C1 seems to always select the print engine of version 6. I'm wondering what's going on there. Why does the software doesn't choose the most recent engine? Instead I have to remember to select all imported images and apply the "Update" on them. Annoying... Any tips regarding this?
Stefan.
Windows 7, 64Bit.
RAWs imported so far are of a Sony DSC R1, Canon 60D and Olympus E-M1.
currently I'm using the test version of CaptureOne 8 in order to decide if I should switch from LR6 to C1. For this I imported ~500 of my RAW files into a C1 cataloge and played with them. What could I say, I immediately loved this software and was exited about its rendering as well as its editing possibilities. Like many others I guess...
But there are some things irritating me. Therefore I'd like to hear some comments from you (or hints how to make it better).
First of all: The printing module. For me its implementation is really, really disappointing! The dialog seems to "forget" nearly all of the settings I've done, mainly page settings and printer settings. Whenever I want to print an image, I have to re-enter all of these, orientation, paper selection and print quality in the printer driver etc. All of this is gone as soon as I close the dialog.
Furthermore, I can't even set all values I want: The "Resolution" field is always disabled and says "Not available" (please note that I'm using the German version of C1 and have to translate the field names. I'm pretty sure you know which fields I mean...).
I'm just an amateur, but I print quite often, and it seems to me that C1's dreadful print module will force me to print my images from LR, meaning that I don't really switch to C1 but have to use two RAW converters in parallel. Furthermore I'd have to export images from C1 and import them to LR in order to print them. Something like a show stopper for me.
What are is your experience with C1's print module? Is there something I have to do in order to make the print dialog work as expected? And how can I set this silly print resolution?!
Another thing is that on import C1 seems to always select the print engine of version 6. I'm wondering what's going on there. Why does the software doesn't choose the most recent engine? Instead I have to remember to select all imported images and apply the "Update" on them. Annoying... Any tips regarding this?
Stefan.
Windows 7, 64Bit.
RAWs imported so far are of a Sony DSC R1, Canon 60D and Olympus E-M1.
0
-
Hello Stefan and welcome to the forum.
I use the English Language version of C1 but as far as I know that should not make any difference to functionality - just the descriptions used.
On that basis, having used C1 since version the later stages of version 5, I do not recall a "Print Engine" that had a version number. The main RAW conversion certainly does have a version number associated where images have been "developed" using earlier versions of Capture One and the Print options have been somewhat enhanced I think compared to some earlier versions but "print engine" and "version" are terms that I cannot recall being combined.
Actually "print Engine" is a phrase that does not look familiar to me in a Capture One context. Certainly not for version 8.
So I am puzzled.
Is it possible you have looked at Capture One some years ago and perhaps have a previous Template or something saved on your system?
You should be able to make use of the included combination of pre-defined output options or modify them/create your own and save them for future use.
Whatever you are seeing on your installation does not sound like it is typical of a Capture One V8 (or any version) installation. However right now I cannot think of anything that explains what you have described.
Can you create some screen shots? You would need to host them somewhere and post links in the forum.
Alternatively create a Support Case with Phase One (You can do that when running a trial period) and seek technical help directly from the support team.
Best regards,
Grant Perkins0 -
Hopefully this doesn't break any rules, but I've always been frustrated with any of the photo applications that I've used, Lightroom, Photoshop and Capture One when it comes to printing. So quite some time ago, I tried Qimage and have been using it ever since.
Capture One is a fantastic RAW converter, which I re-acquainted myself with just recently when I gave up on Lightroom, but I don't really think any of them are a shadow of Qimage, which was designed from the ground up as printing software. And what's great is that you can go directly from Capture One to Qimage by using 'File/Edit With' command and it'll create a TIFF file of the variant ready for printing.0 -
Hi Ray,
The potential benefit of printing directly is that one is printing directly and not through an intermediate image.
However I would suspect that for many people that is not at all important for the appearance of the final output (it will be more than good enough either way) so it comes down to a question of what one wants to do. At that point a dedicated printing application will likely be (or probably should be) a more complete offering BUT it does mean creating an intermediate file. Or, perhaps, files if printing on different media at different sizes.
Printing directly means that no intermediate file is required although perhaps each option might justify a different edit variant for best quality fine art output.
I don't think there is a right or wrong approach here but I am happy with the C1 output although the interaction with the printer driver for my not very young Canon printer is perhaps a little convoluted. That said the interaction of the driver with another application I sometimes use is completely erratic to the point of being unusable so I suspect my C1 experience is the best result that can be achieved with interaction the printer driver offers.
Having said all of that, none of it addresses or explains Stefan's experiences which, based on the information available, seem very strange indeed. At least they do to me.
Grant0 -
Yes, it does create an intermediate step, but in this case I think that it's worthwhile. I use a variety of paper types and sizes, and each one has been calibrated to my printer (Canon IPF5000) and that calibration recorded in Qimage. So whenever I select any image to print on a particular paper type/size, Qimage automatically assigns the correct profile to the print.
It also does great pre-print sharpening, sizing, amongst other things, and records the settings if I want repeat print later on. It's also fully colour managed from screen to print. For some reason, I found Qimage a lot easier and more consistent to use than going through photo editing software. Like Capture One, it doesn't try to be a Jack of all trades (though it has introduced other features lately).0 -
Hi all,
sorry for this "print engine" in my last post. I rather meant C1's (RAW? rendering?) engine which was predefined to version 6 in my installation. I discovered that you can set the default engine in the settings dialog so this no longer is an issue. (But why was version 6 pre-selected instead of the current version?)
My issues about printing with C1, however, still remain. For me this part of the software looks like being designed and implemented with much less care than the remainder of the program. Like carelessly being pushed on the software "because we kind of need something for printing".
Maybe you're right, Ray, and C1 users don't care much about printing because they use a different program for this anyway. For me it's complicated and tedious. Export the images from C1 (as TIFF file) and import them into LR, just for the purpose of printing. I'd have to maintain two catalogs and keep two programs up to date (which implies at least higher costs), have more files on my disks and in the backups.... And I'm asking myself if the superior RAW conversions and manipulation abilities of C1 are worth these complications.
Thanks for your thoughs anyway...
Stefan.0 -
It was definitely worth it for me. I tried printing from Lightroom and hated the process and you still effectively needed to convert the image for printing. There's no need to maintain multiple catalogues with Qimage, as it uses the existing Capture One or Lightroom catalogue. You should try out the trial version of Qimage and then decide what might work best. 0 -
Hmmm - think I'll try it out.
Thanks for the tip, Ray!
Stefan.0 -
Stefan,
For the C1 Version default question - If you installed a V8 download I would expect it to default to the V8 engine.
The only time I have seen an image appear with a different suggested Engine is when I open one previously edited in an earlier version and not already updated at some point.
I use sessions not catalogs but I would not expect that to make a difference. It seems a little strange but there is prob ably an explanation somewhere. Perhaps not so important to dig deeper now you have an answer to the anomaly?
For the printing .. as I understand it most of the functionality is provided by the printer driver which dictates what options are available based on what the printer can deliver.
Your point about resolution for example is something that will be active is you print to an electronic document (if you have a a suitable document "printer" set up as a device - say an XPS writer under Windows as a simple example to establish and experiment with).
However for a hard copy printer in most cases the printer's resolution in dots per inch has little or no relationship to the the file's pixel count and the effective "resolution" in image editing terms will be defined by the number of pixels available and the print size you specify.
I would agree with you that exporting and then importing to LR would be a painful exercise.
For a single image intended for printing the alternative would be to do just what one would do if sending to a print service.
Process the file to a jpg (or TIFF if you would prefer bear in mind the additional file size for storage) and then use your printer's printing utility (as far as I know they all have one) to print the image. For all intents and purposes this could be the same as going through LR or any other program (except, possibly a dedicated printing tool like Qimage if you really need some of its more specialised facilities). No need for the extra steps and you can re-use the file as often as you like.
I use both approaches depending on the purpose for the output. If I have prepared images for electronic delivery and possible printing by the recipient I will process to file (to a likely popular size or sizes) and print from the file if asked to supply "hard copy". Alternatively I can send the file and suggest the correct print size for it.
If I am printing more for myself (and in a few other circumstances) I will use the Print option which works very well for my needs in so far as the ability to save personalised layout templates is concerned.
Retaining the Printer preferences is a different matter and something that, so far as I can tell, can only really be achieved at the Printer Driver level. I have a Canon printer and the preferences for the Canon driver software includes the ability to set and save preferences that include all of the potential adjustments available. These combinations can then be quickly recalled as needed through the Print Settings button in the Printer section of the Print tool in C1.
I assume it should also be possible to create a number of "printers" for a single print device instance each with a default set of profile preferences for a particular need and then just select the "printer" you want rather than have to select a different printer profile for each use. My volume of printing and mixture of media materials and sizes is not really great enough to justify the effort for the sake of saving a few keystrokes now and again. YMMV.
I suspect that, in the main, the personal printing options are, for many people, not so interesting on the basis that quality printers are quite expensive and OEM inks are VERY expensive for low volume use so it makes more sense to send a file to a specialist print service for output. That also offers a wider choice of media and finishes than most small users would have. A large studio may see the economics differently and perhaps also have the space to install and operate a printer that can print premium size images cost effectively. But then in that case they probably do not print very often directly from their RAW conversion application.
HTH.
Grant0 -
Not that I've ever used the function, but Qimage allows you to Print to File, meaning that you can send the file to a photo lab and it will print exactly according to your parameters; assuming that it's a professional printing lab. Of course undertaking correct colour printing involves a lot more if you want repeatable colour correct prints. 0 -
Ray! wrote:
Not that I've ever used the function, but Qimage allows you to Print to File, meaning that you can send the file to a photo lab and it will print exactly according to your parameters; assuming that it's a professional printing lab. Of course undertaking correct colour printing involves a lot more if you want repeatable colour correct prints.
A Pro printing lab will usually provide the ICC profiles their equipment requires and will suggest that you use them for final preparations.
Of course they still work best with editing equipment that allows a fully managed workflow and is accurate. That said most people might struggle to tell the difference in most cases. IMO.
Grant0 -
Hi Grant,
setting the print resolution is neccessary if the actual ppi of the image does not fit the size of the output. In this case the image has to be upsampled or downsampled. If I can't set the resolution in the printing program, the printer driver will, of course, do this job, but uses a pretty simple algorithm compared to LR. Fine details are much cleaner if the image is resized in LR as compared to the printer driver. In addition there always must be some output sharpening applied for the print, which yields visible better results (on most images) if done in the printing program after the image is re-sampled to the correct resolution.
There is an intresting (but lengthy) discussion on LuLa on this topic:
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/ind ... ic=54798.0
Sending my files to a print service is not an option for me. First, because I have a very good printer here (Epson 3880), as well as tons of fine art paper. Second, because I simply like printing my images. It's part of the process for me - and part of the joy I get from photography.
You said that saving the printer settings can't be done by the printing program but only by the printer driver (if I've got you right). That's not the case with LR. You can create "printing templates", and these will save *all* settings, even those you defined in the printer driver's dialog. Very comfortable and, more important, much less error prone. You not even need to open the driver's dialog when printing from LR. Just choose the printing template and print...
Maybe I'm just disappointed by CaptureOne's printing module because I know it can be done so much better.
Stefan.0 -
Stefan,
I have not looked at LR since V1.4 other than a quick assessment of V3 when it came out so I have no idea what it does for printing.
I would guess that they have built a front a end to the application that understands printer setting adjustment needs and effectively sends the values required at print time. Nice of course but given the wider Adobe product range and long history of document preparation specialisation it would be a surprise if they had not lifted the modules they will have been developing over the years and applied them to all of their products.
I think they may have the advantage of most developers in that particular area of application development!
I can fully appreciate that you prefer to print your own images and that you enjoy doing so.
Nevertheless I don't personally know many people who do their own (serious) photo printing - or indeed many people who make prints at all these days. I know of one person, a friend of my wife, who set up her own office services support business for graphics work and has a quality printer (also offering a framing service) but finds the printer very underused and uneconomic.
Hence, in part, my comments about using print services - not to suggest that you should but as an observation that the demand for highly sophisticated printing from within an application may not be very strong in the non-specialist printing market. It would be interesting to know what C1's support Case system could tell us about user requests for enhanced printing facilities.
The printer driver for my printer does not offer any facility to set a specific resolution although there are the usual generic offerings (Standard, Fine, etc.) so I assume there is no way that Capture One could do so either. Even then is more for quality considerations than print resolution as far as I can tell. It's DPI not PPI.It will simply take the pixels it has and upscale or downscale accordingly or pass that job off to the printer.
It probably all depends on how the printer manufacturer writes (and maintains) their driver interface or perhaps their SDK offering.
In my experience, so long as the scaling is within reason, the results are fine. If, rarely, I feel like doing something extreme I will just process the image to a file and set scaling in the Process recipe. That also allows intermediate files to be used if extreme scaling is required. Obviously there are potential compromises - but then adding or removing data is a compromise anyway. If C1's printing module also makes use of the algorithms used in file scaling for enlarging, even if deriving the values under the hood, the results should be fine. Certainly I have been happy with some of of my extreme enlargement experiments. Obviously your preferences may be different to mine.
However as an enthusiastic printer you would probably get tremendous enjoyment from moving beyond even LR's options and looking at Qimage (or similar) products.
I will confess I have not paid much attention to LuLa recently although I was at one time an avid reader. I dip in now and again to discover which mirrorless offering is the current flavour of the month. 😉
Once MR got to the point with printers that he concluded they were, in effect, about as good as inkjets (or almost anything) was likely to be in terms of human discernable differences he seemed to be saying that the printers could deal with anything we could throw at them (within reason) and most people would be more than happy with the output provided the basics were right. I had to agree if the purpose was for casual use. There is potential for advancement in Commercial applications perhaps but then the serious players in that market are using several technologies some of which are only practical in an industrial environment.
Having written all of that it has been true (and probably still is) that there are some excellent programs around that can take printing to a different level for those that require it. I read about Qimage some years ago and thought it very interesting but had no plans to print enough to justify learning it (or paying for something that did far more than I thought I was likely to need.) . The Pro printing level RIPs also have their own place in the market for those that need them and can use them economically.
An interesting subject! Thanks for creating the thread.
Grant0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
12 comments