C1-20
Does anyone else find this upgrade a bit rich I'm looking at what's new and do not see the value, I will not be upgrading anytime soon. Would've liked to see the feature Aperture had where it would group your sets of focus stacks or or bracketing groups
0
-
It seems to me that every year, people complain that there is not much in the newest version. And yet if you compare Capture One 20 with a few versions back (I go back as far as version 4.1) it is packed with features that it didn't previously have. I think it's like watching your children growing. It's rather incremental, and if you live with them day to day you hardly notice the change. But when their grandmother comes to visit, she exclaims at how much they've grown.
Ian0 -
I am in the process of reprocessing my image archive. Going back over more than 15 years, all my raw files have been adjusted with Capture One from Day One, so it is easy to see how I did years ago.
I get much better results today compared to images from a few years back (I go back in time working from most recent towards the oldest). For sure, my skills have improved but also has Capture One with each version.
The new HDR sliders, for example, can make a big difference, as layers do and their growing feature set over the years.
Like Ian3 said, I watch myself growing up with Capture One over the years. It is not only me, not only Capture One. It is what I am able to do with it that makes the difference.
Instead of complaining I am most grateful for the results. Thank you Capture One to help me grow.0 -
When I first read the V20 feature list it looked underwhelming although I was interested to discover what was coming for Noise Reduction.
However when I started to use the features it became clear there is much more useful functionality available than the descriptions provide in terms of image processing. If one chooses to use it.
For image Stacking and other PS like features (that I very rarely use) I have Affinity. One day I will work out how to use it for anything other than the most basic pixel pushing and moving that C1 does not set out to offer. I guess if I really really needed it I could find out what to do on the pixel manipulation side. Stacking seemed to be a bit more intuitive when I tried it.
I don't use catalogues so DAM functionality requirements are, for me, quite simple and OK in session mode.0 -
I found the upgrade feature lists from the last couple of versions to be underwhelming. Fortunately I tried the versions, watched David Grover's excellent introductory webinars, and bought every one.
Sometimes really useful features' importance can't be describeâ€"they must be experienced. There are at least 3 excellent intro YouTubes out already that tap into the new features' power.
Like Paul, the results I can get from each successive version (I've only been a user since v8) have improved markedly. But you need to actually work with the features and learn how to use them in a workflow before their real usefulness becomes evident.
As for stacks: I have no problem with the way C1 groups stacks. I shoot my stacks as sequential images and have C1's browser set in in strip mode to sort either by capture time or image number. Stack sets always show in sequence. If you need delineating marks, just shoot null frames before and after the sequence, just like many people do with panoramas and other sequenced work. You could also make albums for each stack. There are a lot of ways to do what you (MikeKG) seem to want to do, but those ways aren't what Aperture did.
I'm sure it's been written many times before: C1 isn't Aperture (or LR), doesn't work like Aperture, and must be learned as the tool it is. If you have wants, submit them via a Support request.0 -
I agree with the OP: For a year's worth of work, it seems like a pretty minor upgrade. Actually I thought the upgrade from v 11 to 12 was underwhelming as well and I didn't purchase it.This one has even less to recommend it (and yes, I've used it for awhile through the beta test). I'm upgrading this time, because I've bought a new camera, but if not for that I'd probably stick with v 11.
It's not that the new features are bad, but given that the upgrade cost is more than half the cost of purchasing new, the value isn't there. On the other hand, you can have a perpetual license, so no one is forced to upgrade.
I do wonder however, about Phase One's strategy. They had an opportunity with Adobe going to a subscription model, and they don't seem very eager to pursue it. My general impression is that they have a small development team that just doesn't have the bandwidth to do anything very ambitious. From my point of view, C1 is good enough, but there are a number of things (stacks are one of them) that have been obvious and requested feature updates for years, and they just haven't happened.0 -
NNN636312766227382972 wrote:
I
I do wonder however, about Phase One's strategy. They had an opportunity with Adobe going to a subscription model, and they don't seem very eager to pursue it.
Well, as I have read, the Subscription model across all products has been very good for Adobe financially and all of the big boys are forcing corporates (who are probably OK with the rental concept) and us poor minions to take that path.
You, I and a few others may be hold outs against it but the "rent your life starting with your phone contract" generations probably don't understand anything else. They expect change to happen fast enough to make an owned product obsolete very quickly.
Photographically speaking most images are made on Phone cameras and sales of other types, especially those aimed at the social user, have plummeted and continue to do so, though will little distance left to drop in many cases.
Even the type of market that Capture One is likely to appeal to is not exactly buoyant at the moment.
What, exactly, is the market in terms of size and potential revenues?
I would guess that Phase will have a good understanding of it.
Do we?
Grant0 -
Downloaded the trial and there is not nearly enough new to make it worth the money and also did some clone and heal's and it is still pathetic at those functions. Will not be upgrading until I see a worthwhile upgrade. Why do they even put the Heal & Clone in there they don't even come close to working well.
Mike0 -
Where was there any indication that there had been any changes to the Clone and Heal functions? 0 -
MikeKG wrote:
Downloaded the trial and there is not nearly enough new to make it worth the money and also did some clone and heal's and it is still pathetic at those functions. Will not be upgrading until I see a worthwhile upgrade. Why do they even put the Heal & Clone in there they don't even come close to working well.
Mike
So don't upgrade. Nobody's forcing you, and the only reason you'd need to upgrade is if you bought a new camera that required the newer version for support. And at that point you could decide whether to upgrade C1 or move to something else.0 -
MikeKG wrote:
Downloaded the trial and there is not nearly enough new to make it worth the money and also did some clone and heal's and it is still pathetic at those functions. Will not be upgrading until I see a worthwhile upgrade. Why do they even put the Heal & Clone in there they don't even come close to working well.
Mike
What do you find lacking? I don’t do a lot of cloning or healing but find the tools to be sufficient for my needs. You do know you need to make a cloning/healing layer, right? (figuring that out took me quite a while...)0 -
MikeKG wrote:
Why do they even put the Heal & Clone in there they don't even come close to working well.
I use them successfully most of the time. For instance on the day I installed Capture One 20 I went out to take some photos of water birds to have some new images to try it out with. I used the Capture One heal and clone tool on several of the images to remove small objects floating in the water, and never had to resort to anything like Affinity Photo for any of them. Of course, on something like a portrait, with perhaps lots of stray hairs on the model's face, you'd have to use something else. (I believe that users of the Adobe products would also be resorting to Photoshop for that kind of thing and wouldn't expect to do it all in Lightroom.)
Ian
Edited to add: 4 gulls and one coot removed here, all with just two heal layers in Capture One 20.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49176688418_7fb848a038_z.jpg
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49177178551_a5ca1a96df_z.jpg0 -
A case of each to their own.
After a while with software I tend to trust the developer, and start from a position that I will upgrade until I get burnt by a dud version. With the 30% discount on upgrade price I was willing to pre-purchase.
I am happy with what I have seen so far with changes. I don't want to relearn a new system, so incremental changes probably suit me.
My biggest regret is the DAM capabilities falling short of Aperture ... but I am mostly over that.0 -
Ian, very nice work. I too find the Heal and Clone tools very useful. I haven't tried them yet in the official release, but in the last couple of betas they seemed to work better than in the last several versions of C1 12 (it looked like the blending got messed up in those versions and got fixed in 20).
For more extensive healing/object removal than C1 does, I don't mind going into a bonafide pixel editor like Affinity Photo.0 -
Nature Isme wrote:
Ian, very nice work. I too find the Heal and Clone tools very useful. I haven't tried them yet in the official release, but in the last couple of betas they seemed to work better than in the last several versions of C1 12 (it looked like the blending got messed up in those versions and got fixed in 20).
For more extensive healing/object removal than C1 does, I don't mind going into a bonafide pixel editor like Affinity Photo.
Thanks.
Ian0 -
mtm59 wrote:
My biggest regret is the DAM capabilities falling short of Aperture ... but I am mostly over that.
amazing that Aperture hadn't been touched in 6 years and was still the best DAM. it can't possibly be this hard to catch up to 2013, can it?0 -
mattcohen wrote:
mtm59 wrote:
My biggest regret is the DAM capabilities falling short of Aperture ... but I am mostly over that.
amazing that Aperture hadn't been touched in 6 years and was still the best DAM. it can't possibly be this hard to catch up to 2013, can it?
Might not be so easy to do the same job unless one has one's own computer company developing the database and the tools around it.
Then of course there is the matter of user demand. It would seem that Apple could not see the value in keeping it going. Is there a wheel design there that needs to be reinvented?0 -
Value for the money isn't here on this upgrade will wait and see future upgrades. 0 -
MikeKG wrote:
Value for the money isn't here on this upgrade will wait and see future upgrades.
Your choice, of course. No point in updating for the sake of it, unless there are new features that you really want.
Ian0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
18 comments