Haze removal?
I could have sworn I understood that CO9 had a haze removal tool. But I've search their help pages and the Internet and can't find it!
Maybe there is no such thing?
Maybe there is no such thing?
0
-
Nope.
Lightroom has DeHaze, DxO Optics Pro has ClearView - both of which are great.
But Capture One has nothing remotely equivalent.0 -
[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
Nope.
Lightroom has DeHaze, DxO Optics Pro has ClearView - both of which are great.
But Capture One has nothing remotely equivalent.
I submitted a feature request about 4 months ago and hoped that it might be in 9, but it does not appear to be. As it is I use AffinityPhoto for that as it has an excellent haze removal tool.0 -
Do you guys have a specific use case in mind? How do contrast, clarity and curves not give you what you want to achieve. No trying to be smarty pants, really trying to understand. 0 -
[quote="HCS" wrote:
Do you guys have a specific use case in mind? How do contrast, clarity and curves not give you what you want to achieve. No trying to be smarty pants, really trying to understand.
I don't truly know. Perhaps there is some right combination of those. Or perhaps Lightroom's tool does some image alchemy from their research labs, as was suggested by Eric Chan on an interview I saw with him.0 -
[quote="HCS" wrote:
Do you guys have a specific use case in mind? How do contrast, clarity and curves not give you what you want to achieve. No trying to be smarty pants, really trying to understand.
Saved as a Preset and ready for re-use on an image by image basis ....
I can see the potential for writing a front end UI that simplifies the use of a group of pre-existing functions in a way that is dedicated to dealing with a quite specific problem - even if it is not impossible to replicate the effect using the tools individually. There may even be some smart inter-tool relationships in play. Whether that would be always better than individually adjustable tools used together? - difficult to know.
However if the function includes software technology that does not exist in the core of the product then the game changes somewhat. As would the development overhead. Indeed the feature may be dependent on underlying computing technology that is not available across all tools and architectures.
I have been very happy with contrast, clarity and curves. So far I have not looked at the new potential provided by V9 when using those tools.
Grant0 -
To be honest I use neither DeHaze or ClearView for their stated purpose of - well - dehazing.
In Lightroom, the slider's primary benefit (to me) is that adds an aesthetically pleasing depth and contrast, while subtly enhancing detail (note - not microdetail); ClearView's main benefit for me is that in addition, it's a far better highlight recovery tool than anything else in Optics Pro intended for that purpose.
All that being said, yes these things also have the effect of dealing with haze. But for me, it's just a very nice image quality enhancement.
Excellent example of the effect at the top of this page:
http://www.dxo.com/us/photography/photo ... /clearview
Photo Ninja's Detail slider has something of the same effect too:
http://www.picturecode.com/tutorials/detail_enh.php
http://www.picturecode.com/showcase/detail_enh.php
(Before any of the Usual Suspects start to argue that they can do something similar in Capture One just by moving this slider; then that one; then adding some saturation; then making this change in Levels; and then using the new Contrast slider; and then the new Luma curve; and then adding some Clarity - good for you, if you think that's the equivalent of spending three seconds moving a single slider around: and I'm in no doubt that there's more going on behind the scenes with both of these tools than can be replicated from pre-existing tools - I could say more, but I'm still tied to an NDA from when I was an Optics Pro beta tester).0 -
Not that I want to wind you up Keith but the Picturecode example page images remind me of close to extreme HDR and Portrait Pro.
I can see where they could well have a place in this cosmopolitan age in which we snap things. Thus I can understand why people would use them. But that's not to say that everything could or should work the same way.
In general the software industry for digital photo and graphics adjustment would hugely benefit from everyone adopting your broad acceptance of the "horses for courses" philosophy that you adopt. After all more often than not it is the software capabilities used in images processing that make the image what it is as an "after" image rather than a "before" image.
As you will obviously be aware (and have experience of iirc) the analogue days required a somewhat different approach.
One thing that I find especially beguiling is that there seems to be so much interest these days in old, grainy, out of focus B&W images, many of which seem to have quite low values of interesting content or compositional perfection.
Whether our digital images of today will retain such interest, irrespective of their subject and technical prowess, for future generations, I rather doubt. If the promises of the mass storage people are to be believed the shear volume of images available may diminish their appeal.
There's nothing around like a hand painted B&W original to excite interest from those existing solely the digital era. Will future generations really be fixated on how sharp our photos were in their day?
Indeed if we have not printed them will they ever be seen again?
I am totally behind your adoption of using the right horse for the course you want to run on.
Grant0 -
As a long time PhotoShop User and an Aperture soon-to-be convert to Capture One Pro, I can tell you that the Dehaze feature in Photoshop (and Lightroom) is not a simple combination of Contrast, Exposure, and Color Curves. There is more too it and I can spend 2-3 minutes working to accomplish almost, but not quite, the same impact that I can get with 2-3 seconds with the Dehaze tool in the Camera Raw Filter (and equivalent in Lightroom) in Photoshop CC. That feature is not in PhotoShop 6.x and who knows if and when a stand-alone version is coming that will include the feature.
I am not an expert yet on Capture One Pro but I spent 10+ minutes playing with an image to see if I could duplicate the effect. Between Exposure (Exposure + Contrast), Curves, Clarity, Luma and Sharpening I was able to come close, but still not quite capture the same image the the Dehaze tool provided. Dehire is nice because it maintains a lot of other factors so I am also not worried about Hue or Saturation, etc. when using it.
It is also a nice tool to quickly improve a sky in many pictures, deepening the blue and helping the clouds pop out, and it is a nice tool to deal with harsh sunlight streaming into a picture (I know many of you never have that problem since you are more scene aware than I am, but when shooting 1,000+ soccer game shots your going to get unintended light effects).
Just my input on the tool - I would look to see it that is for sure - it will save a trip on editing a pic.0 -
[quote="JRomer79" wrote:
I can tell you that the Dehaze feature in Photoshop (and Lightroom) is not a simple combination of Contrast, Exposure, and Color Curves...
Yep, absolutely no question about that: in both DeHaze and ClearView there's some intelligent scene-aware processing going on, controlling the adjustments (and the kind of adjustment) being applied to the image - and bringing something extra to the table.
To use ClearView as a case in point: Optics Pro has really poor highlight recovery tools - seriously inadequate: yet ClearView does a really good job (relative to what Optics Pro's dedicated highlight tools are capable of) of bringing back detail into apparently blown highlight areas.
ClearView is unquestionably doing something not available via the standard toolkit.
As to DeHaze, again it's the intelligent selective application of adjustments that impresses: and although Lr's standard tools are a lot more capable than those in Optics Pro, it is still the case that accurately replicating the look of DeHaze with them is close to impossible in the majority of cases.
Both Adobe and DxO explicitly lay claim to the use of novel technology: Adobe says:The Dehaze technology is based on a physical model of how light is transmitted, and it tries to estimate light that is lost due to absorption and scattering through the atmosphere
DxO says:ClearView analyses the colour components of the image... to evaluate the amount of light diffusion affected by haze. From this it creates a kind of depth map of the scene and increases contrast locally. ClearView acts only when necessary: only the most distant elements in the various planes of the image are corrected... ClearView applies filtering to preserve contours and other details.
The light source of the scene is automatically analysed and taken into account in order to restore the full tonal range.
A lot more than the equivalent of just moving a few pre-existing sliders around, then...
And as JRomer and I both attest to - they do more than what the existing tools can do. We see it with our own eyes.
First-hand experience is a wonderful thing...and it is a nice tool to deal with harsh sunlight streaming into a picture (I know many of you never have that problem since you are more scene aware than I am, but when shooting 1,000+ soccer game shots your going to get unintended light effects).
Yep, this reiterates the "highlights" point I make above. I'm also a sport (and wildlife) photographer, and I routinely face this issue too. I also know my way around my software choices, and - no question - these tools deliver results which are denied to users who don't use (or have) them.
Another case in point: witness the regular caterwauling on the Lightroom forums from Lr 6 users who think (wrongly) that DeHaze comes with version 6 (it only comes with CC 2015, the subscription version): if it was possible to do with the sliders what DeHaze can do, I imagine they wouldn't care.
But oh how they do...0 -
PO clearly has some very advanced image processing specialists developing CO. Perhaps they are already working to develop their own analysis and algorithm for a Dehaze/ClearView tool? 0 -
Oh, hell area in which I was interested during some past studies in past.
If some on curios what is done behind the scene for hase removal.
http://www-scf.usc.edu/~qiyu/Papers/ivcnz2011.pdf
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/ ... PR2009.pdf
Happy reading.
And hope C1, will add something like that in future.0 -
This is a copy of what I posted in the C1 V8 thread, which had the longest dehaze discussion but it more properly should be in C1 V.9 Pro, as that is what I use.
I have just come back from Myanmar with over 2000 images mostly with a Leica SL but some 250 with a Leica C112. Firstly I was very relieved that Phase One has FINALLY got round to issuing an SL profile (thanks Scott for lending them your SL). However Myanmar particularly in the Irrawaddy valley, where I was most of the time, on a boat going from Yangon to Mandalay, haze is a major problem. This is mist haze in the early morning, gradually changing to a dust haze later in the day or in more built up areas, photochemical smog. I have tried various schemes in C1, altering curves for various colours, altering black points, increasing structure, contrast and clarity but I agree with others, the dehaze tool in ACR (9.5) does a better job. It is far better at bringing out micro contrast and detail. Time C1 caught up with the crowd (ACR/LR and DxO etc) and added a Dehaze tool. Given Phase One's skills, I would hope its implementation might be even better than the rest. Certainly C1's SL profile was worth waiting for and is a noticeable improvement on ACR and LR for colour accuracy and general appearance.0 -
Since this is a Mac user's forum ... Take a look at Affinity Photo, it is an all round excellent addition to C1 as an external editor and has a particularly good haze removal filter. 0 -
I looked at all the examples of ClearView and Dehaze and don't think there's any more happening than just a gradient filter for the sky with a combination of Highlight recovery, curves adjustment, clarity and contrast.
The rest is marketing speech.0 -
Well you're wrong - what I write above is personal experience (and plenty of it), not marketing speak.
Nor is it a hastily arrived-at conclusion based on no first hand knowledge, to support a pre-existing prejudice.
Did you even read what I said up the page? Does it really strike you that I imagined it?0 -
[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
Did you even read what I said up the page? Does it really strike you that I imagined it?
I have no idea why you think that my comment was directed at yours before, but while we're at it: you quoted the marketing material by both competitors and follow up with believing what they tell you word by word. Case in point.0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
16 comments