Publication of my statement to Capture One in connection with the update 13.1.1
Today I wrote the text below to the Capture One support. I hope that other Capture One customers, who also need profiles for Canon RF lenses, will contact Capture One in a similar way - maybe we can get something moving in the minds of those responsible.
Hi,
I am very unsatisfied, not about Andre, but about the company Capture One, because Andre very probably had to throw smoke candles on behalf of his company with his answer.
When he claims that Apple's Nvidia OpenCL drivers are no longer supported, he is right, but Capture One also fails to answer why so many other companies, such as Adobe, Skylum, Affinity and Pixelmator are currently making the GPU on macOS Catalina usable for their programs, including via Apple's Metal API. So why don't you use the new Metal API platform to support application functionality in Capture One Pro? The pros know that OpenCL is a phase-out program and Apple itself has announced this several times. According to Apple, the future for GPU support in certain applications is called Metal API.
In addition, I have been getting the same message about the missing Canon RF Lens Profiles for a year now, that my request will be forwarded to the database. How many times do you want to do this with me? My lifetime is limited and I am paying now to use Capture One Pro! Therefore I expect the full usability (i.e. here the RF profiles) of the RF lenses currently on the market to be available in Capture One Pro - and these are not just any exotic lenses, they are lenses that are mainly bought by professionals.
After all, you have already published profiles for several Canon RF lenses, such as the RF 24-105mm L IS USM, RF 28-70mm L USM, RF 50mm L USM and the RF 35mm IS STM. So you can, so why are the other RF lenses available on the market not supplied with corresponding profiles in Capture One Pro? First and foremost, I mean the RF 15-35mm L IS USM, RF 24-70mm L IS USM, RF 70-200mm L IS USM, RF 85mm 1.2 L USM and the RF 85mm L USM DS. The magic word is "customer orientation"!
At least tell your customers what time schedule you have set up for providing the missing profiles and don't fob off customers with helpless and meaningless messages.
Regards
-
Hear hear!
CO has a great chance and potential to be a really good competitor to LR and Adobe but because of their ignorance and stubbornness, they keep getting constant complaints on 2 certain issues, GPU performance and database speed. I find it really difficult to understand why they insist what they are doing. Whatever they are doing, is plain wrong that’s it. I guess they will understand better once the number of their users drop.
And for you, if the lens support is important, I’d go to LR. Yes it does have some issues but lens support is there, catalog speed is faster so is the GPU usage.
2 -
Hi Luka,
Thank you for your writing to the support about OpenCL vs Metal. Actually, I had a pending ticket about the healing tool (briefly, when you chose an other source than the one selected by C1, the target turns very bright), and André gave me the same answer : Nvidia is no longer supported by Apple, and this is probably the reason of your issue. I disabled OpenCL and it didn't help, so I commented my (closed, then) ticket in about the same way.
If Capture One wants to fully benefit from the hardware acceleration, they clearly should go to Metal.
1 -
CO has a great chance and potential to be a really good competitor to LR and Adobe
It is a great competitor. It has nothing whatsoever to prove on that score.
but because of their ignorance and stubbornness
It's childish to ascribe malice to what is almost certainly "just business" and limited resources.
they keep getting constant complaints on 2 certain issues, GPU performance and database speed
You have no idea whether the odd post on here can accurately be described "constant complaints" - much more likely a tiny handful of users with a machine-specific local problem.
I guess they will understand better once the number of their users drop
Aaand there it is... We've been seeing the same comment for more years than I care to remember. It was wrong then, and it's wrong now: your personal experiences are no indication whatsoever of the experiences of most users, and it's arrogant to assume otherwise.
-4 -
Hi Keith R
What bonus do you get for your contribution?
4 -
I was expecting when Keith would turn up in here.
Keith, CO is not a competitor to Adobe based on user numbers or market penetration. Exactly like Leica is not a great competitor to Canon.
Let's just do a basic count how many "slow, crash, GPU, database" entries there are in this very forum. Just you are happy, that doesnt mean we should be happy.
Basic business markers, if your numbers are dropping, you are doing something wrong and you look back to see what you are doing wrong. I don't know in what business you are in but sales number is a key number internationally.
Speaking of Metal, it is know for years now Apple is transitioning to that, so sorry if a company doesnt see that, in my book it is just plain stubbornness. You are happy to call whatever it is. Especially when they say, "Apple doesnt support Nvidia now, so you need to turn off OpenCL". Nvidia is supported through Metal so it is the stubbornness of CO now causing a crippled softwaregardware to the user.
Again these are not my personal experience but what many of the users say on this forum.
You can go now and sing the song Capture One is great
2 -
photo by FA
Thanks, the situation of CO could not have been better described.
2 -
Just perfect, let’s cue all the problems we are going to see soon. Apple is transitioning to their own CPUs
I have CO uses this opportunity to truely transform the software, compile the code fresh, utilise the built in tools in Mac.
Do I hope too much?
2 -
Yes, the lack of Metal support is vexing and hard to understand, but there is something beyond the known shortcomings inherent in Capture One and the problems that are inconsistent from user to user.
Every time I think of updating, I browse the Forum and find serious issues. Then I wonder, what percentage of users have problems, what they have in common and what percentage of users don't have problems and what they have in common. Then I wonder what the odds are I will or will not have problems if I install the update.
I have owned a lot of software and a lot of computers over the past 40 years and have spent a lot of my career in quality improvement and am flummoxed about the industry's inability or disinterest in polling users about the problems they have with their products. As they say, you can't improve what you can't/don't measure.
Beta testing does not require a report of what works. It relies on reports of what doesn't work. Essentially, the quality management process is a compilation of anecdotes, not a systematic examination of a defined user population's experiences. As such, the manufacturer does not have useful data on which to prioritize resources to focus on problems.
Users with problems continue to be told it is a problem with their hardware or its operating system or other software on the system because the product development work needed to trace down these complex interactions would benefit too small a proportion of the users to affect the bottom line.
The solution is beta testing in which a sizable defined group of testers reports systematic results. This requires organization and resources. Somewhat less resource intensive is a polling of all users to spot the conditions causing problems.
Sadly, I do not expect to see this and expect to experience each update, be it from Apple or Capture One, as a form of Russian roulette.
1 -
-> photo by FA
I assume that CO will fob us off with Rosetta2 as long as possible
2 -
Or, "We do not support Apple CPU yet, we cannot tell you when or how we will support it nor the timescale or anything else, so you need to switch off Apple CPU" :)
1 -
Adobe vs. Capture One, the difference in magnitude of financial power and number of employees is probably similar to Canon vs. Leica. If this assumption is true, I find C1 is doing a good job. If one doesn't acknowledge this, one is rather not able to differentiate much in general.
The only knowledge I have about their quality managment is that they have a beta testing phase. I would assume they have internal quality management and testing too. But I don't know.
I also assume the actual user base is much much bigger than the few people posting here and there in forums and social media. Probably the majority of users only occasionally browse through this forum, if at all, and rarely post, if at all. And, as most of the time, issues and problems are the most frequent topics in forums. Probably for most users C1 works most of the tome. But I don't know.
If Apple is abandoning OpenCL, and if my assumption is true that the majority or at least a big portion of C1 users is running C1 on Mac, then I further assume C1 is working already on a solution. But I don't know.
Which brings me to my point: None of you know either, none of these points.
C1 could be a bit more communicative with regards to future developments, maybe a roadmap for lenses as soon as they know they are going to profile them, but on the other hand they likely need to test them first before they even know if they see a need for a better profile than the manufacturer profile. Hm, hard to make a roadmap then.
And if they'd choose to publish a roadmap for lenses or features or support of computer infrastructure, we probably would see the same amount if complaints here in the forum, with a slight shift of subject, i.e. complaints about the content and dates of the roadmap instead of complaints about its absence and silence.
It seems they can't do the 'right' thing, whatever they choose to do or not to do.
1 -
BeO, you are right, absolutely right. We don't know anything. However the problem with OpenCL is not new, Apple has announced it few years ago and with Catalina they have dropped it completely.
I'd like to give an example of Affinity Photo, they have written the code from ground zero, utilized Apple kits etc and it runs remarkably. Is it as good as PS, probably not however if you check their forum, you can see the positive mood around most of the users and staff. All is open and communicative. Staff acknowledge the issues and work on them, rather that what CO is doing and blaming the user.
Personally, I experience graphic speed problem since v9 with my current system. They have always blamed me using a 5K iMac and my GPU is not enough. It was top of the line at that time. I don't experience any issue when I am utilizing editing on Affinity or PS, so that just means for me my GPU is not that bad.
Speaking of database, I am quite sure you will remember that, on every iteration people are complaining about it.
Certainly it might be a fact that, most users of CO are using sessions and working on low resolution MBPs however a great deal of people in here complaint on the same few subjects.
The gloom we see at least personally is due to the history as usually the history is good source to look at. For 5 years on every iteration, I have seen the same problems and they haven't been improved at all. 5 years ago I was having database speed issue, 5 years ago I was having laggy mask drawing issue. I still have them
1 -
Yes and no.
I remember whenever a new version came out, some users complain about the issues they find are the most urgent have not been addressed. You'll always have this, unless all issues if all users would be solved with the next version. Not possible.
I actually noticed improvements in performance and stability up to v11 (I did not use v12 so can't comment on this version). V20 seems to be a small step vsck, but some variance in quality is not a rare event in software industry, and I also need to factor in that I migrated to Win 10 from a more stable Win 7.
It took a long time until C1 supported Win 1909, or Catalina 10.15 (I hope this name is right), which somehow backs my assumption they are a very small company.
Affinity. I cannot create a ticket, only a forums post. There are known bugs e.g. in sRGB color management which I have raised, which hadn't been addressed for ayear or more, if I can believe one of the forum users.
Nobody from Affinity answered or gave me acknowlegdement or a date when it will be fixed. Honestly, C1 is doing much better in this respect.
In addition, I have crashes where Affinity just vanishes from my screen, their panorama stitching often creates weird artifacts, dark muddy sky areas, which you have to remove with the brush, which you can even see in a youtube video somebody explained how to remove this sh... Something C1 users would not have tolerated, rightfully.
Point is, the grass isn't greener on the other side of the street.
0 -
I went ahead and just bought C1 Pro after 30 day evaluation.
I bought it primarily, for tethering, and from using it, I do like the color editing capabilities and RAW translation.
That being said, I am still not 100% committed to switching and I came from On1 RAW. It has had layers and luminosity masking too for awhile, and their customer support IS responsive. I had a problem a few years back with my Mac book pro and they said they were working on it and gave me a beta version of the fixed version to use till the official one could be published.
That impressed me.
Anyway, ON1's database seems pretty quick to me....but then again, I don't have it loaded by too much, neither have I C1 yet. A lot of old stuff in on LR5 on another older laptop and likely I will not migrate ALL of that over to either one.
But anyway, I really do like a LOT of things about Capture One, sure, it is a different workflow, and having 2 different databases, sessions vs catalog....that appears to be a legacy -> new paradigm holdover....but all in all, I like a LOT of things I see on C1....but one like not being able to get in depth to ALL of the metadata, from C1 and the answer support gave me regardcxing being 100% "non-destructive" didn't seem to address being able to change all meta data or not.
Thankfully on that one, I found the CLI tool exiftool and was able to edit all the metadata as needed.
But anyway, I'm still evaluating....and wanted to put my $0.02 in. I like C1, I've dropped the Adobe "rental" software like a rock....but On1 RAW is one I'm deciding with between C1 and it.
C
0 -
I'm really afraid I made the wrong choice switching from Aperture to C1. Probably should have gone with Lightroom. Now I paid my money and I'm too deeply invested in a C1 workflow, and things are starting to look like I got onto a sinking ship, and will see yet another sunset on my DAM/RAW program in the coming years. *sigh*
I use Affinity too. They're supposedly developing a DAM app, and when they do, everyone who has committed to ditching Adobe will jump on board, and Capture One folks will feel it. This is clearly not a fresh company with the future in mind. Version 13/20 was supposed to be a sort of rewrite, but that would have been the time to implement Metal APIs. I think now it'll never happen. Performance just plain sucks right now, and I've got an rx580 installed, so this isn't even an NVIDIA issue.
3 -
I agree! I did also expect a major rewrite with Metal support from version 13/20.
But I guess the rename to v20 was just the idea from marketing or maybe product mgmt.
I still believe the developers know about Metal and wouldn’t have called the current version such a big thing.
Hopefully the upcoming release will get Metal support. Or the one after the next when it’s also time to support ARM Macs...3 -
Super big job for them to switch to Apples APIs because then it will have a different code base to the Windows version.
Doesn't look like the new "Speed Edit" version is going to be Metal based either.
I got fed up last year with all the RAW editors pausing whenever you make an adjustment while re-rendering the images and developed my own using Apple's hardware accelerated APIs - live editing, super fast raw conversion and export and instant loading of 1000s of thumbnails in the browser. Took me all of 4 days to create this and I get built in support for every RAW format supported by the macOS !! Also it doesn't insist on copying the RAW files into its own repository!!
Just got a M1 MacBook Air and man the performance is, well, instant even with a 100% zoom in 45mp file. No need for a $5,000 MacBook Pro any more !
They're doing live edits on 4K RAW Video on the M1 so no excuse not to be doing this.
1 -
just to add a little clarification ; openCL running on Mac is still at ver 1.3 which is a decade old. OCL made it to 2.0.x. but apple who was an original part of the openCL founding body cut it loose. Apple has been pushing metal for years as the way forwards for write once and the hardware is supported. Its akin to DirectX on PC. there is zero reason for C1 not to support and transition to metal except stubborness and maybe internally crying no time or money. when you have no Mac users that will be a lot less money you get... just like the '21 prepay upgrade with no specs, and a feature or two no one cares about. I've talked to TS a few times about C1 spraying its db house keeping files all over my drives to the point I have a script I'm working on to wipe them out now. when all that crap goes into your backup system times 2 or 3 copies its a lot of dead data to keep and waste space. I dearly wish there was another option that wasn't adobe because I'd be there in an instant if given the option. I'm certainly not doing the '21 upgrade.
1 -
This is why Adobe keeps winning. They're responsive, first to market with new features, and not afraid of committing the necessary resources. Capture One consistently comes off as one guy in his basement writing code, while also marketing and dodging support questions. Poor management, poor messaging, unfixed bugs for YEARS and weak feature support. I made a huge mistake switching to C1 from Aperture. Now the attrition begins as I weigh the pros and cons of the aggravating migration to yet another DAM/RAW processor.
1 -
...just looking at colormangment - camera profiles & contrast you can study how they like to do things... "just make it work.." but don't really improve the (long outdate) concept. when somebody complains about the side effects of this approach brush it arrogantly off and call it a superior feature or the signature look ! maybe this attitude goes deeper ?
0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
20 comments