C1 Improvments request
Hello,
First of all, I love C1 software. I've switched a few years back from Lr and never looked back. It's the best on the market at this point. There are definitely some improvements in the 20 version but not to blown you away. I'm in the beta tester program and really thought to the end that there are many others stuff that were to be announced at the official launch. I see this version like a 12.X version. Anyway, I'm using the subscription payment method but if I were to own C1 12 I would never ever pay to the upgrade.
I've sent this requests to support and I thought maybe there are some other users that want some of the features presented here and can send their requests also, maybe the developers would apply them in a future update (hopefully) or in a new version. 😊
1. Please make a auto perspective correction tool, the keystone are not so easy to use for every situation. Also, the lens correction tool has limitations, now you can use the slider from 0 to 120 but there are situation when I need to go to -50 for example and can't.
2. A before and after button and shortcut. It's a pain sometime to just go and press Alt+Reset. Also, you can apply this "before/after" to every tools so you can see what the image looks with edits and without them and not be forced to use Alt+Reset. Like a toggle on/off that Lr has.
3. Healing brush. A powerful healing brush. The remove spot tool it's not quite useful and has many limitations.
4. I would love to be able to change the opacity for the tools when dragging them above the image. Now, if you put the curves tool, for example, above the image, obviously, there is a part of the image that it's covered and can't see what's happening over there.
5. For the Crop tool, it would be great to rotate the image not only from the corners but also from the middle (side) of the new handles. I know you can press Cmd/Ctrl to rotate freehand but I still think it would be a nice feature to have.
First of all, I love C1 software. I've switched a few years back from Lr and never looked back. It's the best on the market at this point. There are definitely some improvements in the 20 version but not to blown you away. I'm in the beta tester program and really thought to the end that there are many others stuff that were to be announced at the official launch. I see this version like a 12.X version. Anyway, I'm using the subscription payment method but if I were to own C1 12 I would never ever pay to the upgrade.
I've sent this requests to support and I thought maybe there are some other users that want some of the features presented here and can send their requests also, maybe the developers would apply them in a future update (hopefully) or in a new version. 😊
1. Please make a auto perspective correction tool, the keystone are not so easy to use for every situation. Also, the lens correction tool has limitations, now you can use the slider from 0 to 120 but there are situation when I need to go to -50 for example and can't.
2. A before and after button and shortcut. It's a pain sometime to just go and press Alt+Reset. Also, you can apply this "before/after" to every tools so you can see what the image looks with edits and without them and not be forced to use Alt+Reset. Like a toggle on/off that Lr has.
3. Healing brush. A powerful healing brush. The remove spot tool it's not quite useful and has many limitations.
4. I would love to be able to change the opacity for the tools when dragging them above the image. Now, if you put the curves tool, for example, above the image, obviously, there is a part of the image that it's covered and can't see what's happening over there.
5. For the Crop tool, it would be great to rotate the image not only from the corners but also from the middle (side) of the new handles. I know you can press Cmd/Ctrl to rotate freehand but I still think it would be a nice feature to have.
0
-
NN636119919401968919UL wrote:
1. Please make a auto perspective correction tool, the keystone are not so easy to use for every situation. Also, the lens correction tool has limitations, now you can use the slider from 0 to 120 but there are situation when I need to go to -50 for example and can't.
2. A before and after button and shortcut. It's a pain sometime to just go and press Alt+Reset. Also, you can apply this "before/after" to every tools so you can see what the image looks with edits and without them and not be forced to use Alt+Reset. Like a toggle on/off that Lr has.
3. Healing brush. A powerful healing brush. The remove spot tool it's not quite useful and has many limitations.
4. I would love to be able to change the opacity for the tools when dragging them above the image. Now, if you put the curves tool, for example, above the image, obviously, there is a part of the image that it's covered and can't see what's happening over there.
5. For the Crop tool, it would be great to rotate the image not only from the corners but also from the middle (side) of the new handles. I know you can press Cmd/Ctrl to rotate freehand but I still think it would be a nice feature to have.
1. You want it increase distortion?
I can't think of a use case that would fit with the tool's purpose. Can you suggest one please?
2. Use a Variant. Much better IMO and far more flexible for the purpose.
3. Spot tool is mostly OK for its intended purpose.
For full retouching it just makes more sense to go for an application with all of the dedicated retouching features. (PS. Affinity, Portrait Pro, etc.)
4. I'm not sure the view of what is happening would be any better with a semi-opaque tool. I would rather just organise things differently.
5. The handles are not new. Their visibility is.
IMO, if rotation is required, it's best to do that first since it will automatically create a crop if lens correction has not already done so and that saves an action. However if I expect to be doing some precise cropping and rotating work having the tools open in the tool panel makes for quicker access to more refined adjustments.0 -
NN636119919401968919UL wrote:
Also, the lens correction tool has limitations, now you can use the slider from 0 to 120 but there are situation when I need to go to -50 for example and can't.
The lens correction tool correct Barrel distortion by default (if it says Generic). If you find you want a negative amount, you need to use the drop down menu and switch to Generic Pincushion.
Ian0 -
NN636119919401968919UL wrote:
2. A before and after button and shortcut. It's a pain sometime to just go and press Alt+Reset. Also, you can apply this "before/after" to every tools so you can see what the image looks with edits and without them and not be forced to use Alt+Reset. Like a toggle on/off that Lr has.
3. Healing brush. A powerful healing brush. The remove spot tool it's not quite useful and has many limitations.
Agree 100%0 -
SFA wrote:
3. Spot tool is mostly OK for its intended purpose.
For full retouching it just makes more sense to go for an application with all of the dedicated retouching features. (PS. Affinity, Portrait Pro, etc.)
I agree that full retouching requires a more specialized tool like Photoshop,or Affinty Photo, as you mention. On the other hand, if Capture One has a tool, it’s quite reasonable to expect it to work well. ‘mostly OK for its intended purpose’ is clearly not enough.0 -
Irvin.Gomez wrote:
SFA wrote:
3. Spot tool is mostly OK for its intended purpose.
For full retouching it just makes more sense to go for an application with all of the dedicated retouching features. (PS. Affinity, Portrait Pro, etc.)
I agree that full retouching requires a more specialized tool like Photoshop,or Affinty Photo, as you mention. On the other hand, if Capture One has a tool, it’s quite reasonable to expect it to work well. ‘mostly OK for its intended purpose’ is clearly not enough.
Well, if the purpose is, say, sensor dust spot removal and the complaint is that 100 corrections are not sufficient one could argue that as being a reasonable criticism or one could wonder whether starting with a cleaner sensor would be a better approach. Or maybe an LCC file.
So in almost all the cases for which I have used the tool it has worked well. The separate processing for spot and dust seems effective. Maybe to or three times in over a decade of use I have encountered marks that seemed to be difficult to ID as either dust or spot and either way gave slightly challenged results viewed at 100%. Cloning seems to work for those as I recall - if they really were a problem for the final output.
We often see demands for more than 100 spot corrections. Far too tedious to do 100 let alone even more, in my opinion.
What I would prefer is some sort of tool (probably "AI" labelled I would imagine) that could be commanded to inspect an image to discover spots (especially dust spots rather than portrait type spots) and suggest fixes for them that one could simply review quickly and accept (or reject).
Grant0 -
SFA wrote:
Irvin.Gomez wrote:
SFA wrote:
3. Spot tool is mostly OK for its intended purpose.
For full retouching it just makes more sense to go for an application with all of the dedicated retouching features. (PS. Affinity, Portrait Pro, etc.)
I agree that full retouching requires a more specialized tool like Photoshop,or Affinty Photo, as you mention. On the other hand, if Capture One has a tool, it’s quite reasonable to expect it to work well. ‘mostly OK for its intended purpose’ is clearly not enough.
Well, if the purpose is, say, sensor dust spot removal and the complaint is that 100 corrections are not sufficient one could argue that as being a reasonable criticism or one could wonder whether starting with a cleaner sensor would be a better approach. Or maybe an LCC file.
So in almost all the cases for which I have used the tool it has worked well. The separate processing for spot and dust seems effective. Maybe to or three times in over a decade of use I have encountered marks that seemed to be difficult to ID as either dust or spot and either way gave slightly challenged results viewed at 100%. Cloning seems to work for those as I recall - if they really were a problem for the final output.
We often see demands for more than 100 spot corrections. Far too tedious to do 100 let alone even more, in my opinion.
What I would prefer is some sort of tool (probably "AI" labelled I would imagine) that could be commanded to inspect an image to discover spots (especially dust spots rather than portrait type spots) and suggest fixes for them that one could simply review quickly and accept (or reject).
Grant
I most have missed the part where someone requires more than 100 spot corrections. If not, your post does not make any sense and comes across as a classic strawman argument.
The request for improvements is clearly more along the lines of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJ4xgrXDym8
That’s just too much and justifies your suggestion that it’s much better to go to a dedicated pixel editor.0 -
Irvin.Gomez wrote:
NN636119919401968919UL wrote:
2. A before and after button and shortcut. It's a pain sometime to just go and press Alt+Reset. Also, you can apply this "before/after" to every tools so you can see what the image looks with edits and without them and not be forced to use Alt+Reset. Like a toggle on/off that Lr has.
3. Healing brush. A powerful healing brush. The remove spot tool it's not quite useful and has many limitations.
Agree 100%
I do agree about no. 2. It would be convenient to be able to use something like \ as in some other apps to do the equivalent of the Alt-reset procedure in Capture One.
I'm not sure point 3 here is well thought out, though. The spot removal tool does have limitations (and one of them is the limit of 100 spots). But that is not the healing feature, which is a separate thing. I agree that the healing feature (heal layer, or clone layer) is not as powerful as the healing brush/patch tool/similar features in something like Affinity Photo or Photoshop. The main limitation is being restricted to one source point. But I think the point is that at some stage there needs to be a limit to what you expect a raw converter to do, and after which you would expect to use a pixel editor like Affinity or Photoshop. There is room for discussion as to whether that limit is presently drawn in the right place - some users say Capture One does not do enough in that respect, and some think it has already tried to over-reach itself into pixel editor territory. Partly a question of the design philosophy behind the product, I suppose, but eventually for some kinds of work many photographers would expect to use Photoshop or its equivalent for extensive retouching.
Ian0 -
Ian3 wrote:
(...) at some stage there needs to be a limit to what you expect a raw converter to do, and after which you would expect to use a pixel editor like Affinity or Photoshop. There is room for discussion as to whether that limit is presently drawn in the right place - some users say Capture One does not do enough in that respect, and some think it has already tried to over-reach itself into pixel editor territory.
Excellent point - I recently wrote about this specific topic on another thread.
Raw converters have gone into “Photoshop territory†as the only way to remain relevant in the marketplace. It’s a losing battle against Photoshop because they are like 15 years behind. I think the best strategy should be to define a small set of features (whatever they choose) and make them flawless. Fight on quality, not quantity. That’s how Capture One became better than Lightroom. Tackling Photoshop is not realistic at this point.0 -
Irvin.Gomez wrote:
I most have missed the part where someone requires more than 100 spot corrections. If not, your post does not make any sense and comes across as a classic strawman argument.
I think the "it's useless because it only allows 100 corrections and I can't use a layer to increase the count" crops up quite regularly in the forum. Quite often the writer seems to be involved with scanning negatives which I guess is likely to be a larger problem than a digital sensor but is in itself a rather specialised "fix" probably best handled, if at all possible, by the scanning software.
The point is made in the linked video. The functionality is a reasonable RAW editor activity as provided one accepts that the 2 modes are dedicated for specific purposes.
BTW I think the video is wrong about which spot type to use for the sensor spots. The Dust correction spots are for sensor 'dust'. The latest on-line help link form the tool's "?" icon gives a slightly broader understanding of function than I recall from previous help sections - although it may have been a few versions since I last read it.
I have not chacked this in V20 but in previous versions the DUST type spot would copy from one image to another if required whereas the Spot type spot did not. I assume that difference still applies.
The rationale for that is that sensor spots tend to be persistent and perpetual for several images (or several shoots depending on one's sensor cleaning habits!) whereas the SPOT tool, as user for small image imperfections in, say, portraits, are not usually that consistently placed on one frame after another.
Of course if people are going into serious portrait retouching the chances are that PS or similar will be involved. That's just the expected norm. However for a quick fix of spots for producing proofs, for example, the C1 facility probably works well and certainly can produce great results.
PS, Affinity and the others always baffle me for some reason so I am happy using C1 though to be fair I don't do a lot of shoots where SPOT type image enhancements are likely to be required and when I do the actions I would likely take can usually be covered by what is available in C1.
Grant0 -
SFA wrote:
Irvin.Gomez wrote:
I most have missed the part where someone requires more than 100 spot corrections. If not, your post does not make any sense and comes across as a classic strawman argument.
I think the "it's useless because it only allows 100 corrections and I can't use a layer to increase the count" crops up quite regularly in the forum. Quite often the writer seems to be involved with scanning negatives which I guess is likely to be a larger problem than a digital sensor but is in itself a rather specialised "fix" probably best handled, if at all possible, by the scanning software.
The point is made in the linked video. The functionality is a reasonable RAW editor activity as provided one accepts that the 2 modes are dedicated for specific purposes.
Grant
Are you serious?
You’re replying to something nobody has said in this thread.
C’mon, man! Lol...seriously...lol0 -
Irvin.Gomez wrote:
SFA wrote:
Irvin.Gomez wrote:
I most have missed the part where someone requires more than 100 spot corrections. If not, your post does not make any sense and comes across as a classic strawman argument.
I think the "it's useless because it only allows 100 corrections and I can't use a layer to increase the count" crops up quite regularly in the forum. Quite often the writer seems to be involved with scanning negatives which I guess is likely to be a larger problem than a digital sensor but is in itself a rather specialised "fix" probably best handled, if at all possible, by the scanning software.
The point is made in the linked video. The functionality is a reasonable RAW editor activity as provided one accepts that the 2 modes are dedicated for specific purposes.
Grant
Are you serious?
You’re replying to something nobody has said in this thread.
C’mon, man! Lol...seriously...lol
In terms of requests it is an often mentioned factor. If modifying some functionality it will come up at some point. It always does.
From the original post - "The remove spot tool it's not quite useful and has many limitations."
"Many" limitations? Does that not count?
There are only 4 possible limitations.
The 2 types of "spot" addressed.
The maximum size of the correction area.
The total number of corrections available. (By far the most popular criticism)..
Make that 5 if one was to include the"doesn't work on a layer" complaint.
What counts as "many"?
If the comment was purely about the "Healing" functionality then why mention the Spot tool? But either way if people want a different approach to a healing tool (perhaps something more like the spot tool?) the issues about number of corrections and how many layers can be used will come up.
May as well put it on the table now.
Grant0 -
😂
whatever...0 -
Irvin.Gomez wrote:
if Capture One has a tool, it’s quite reasonable to expect it to work well. ‘mostly OK for its intended purpose’ is clearly not enough.
Sure it's enough. Having realistic expectations of what Capture One is offering is very sensible.0 -
Irvin.Gomez wrote:
Raw converters have gone into “Photoshop territory†as the only way to remain relevant in the marketplace.
Eh?
The need for excellent Raw converters isn't going to go away, and there's no functional challenge between converters and pixel editors that the converters need to respond to.0 -
Irvin.Gomez wrote:
:lol:
whatever...
That's a helpful contribution, Irvin - and Emoji or not - we know what it means...0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
15 comments