Skip to main content

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived. The information contained here may no longer be accurate or up-to-date. ⚠️

Version 4.6 is "faster" than V 4.5 (preview rendering and...

Nando From Brazil
Hi

I have a question for 4.6 users:

Version 4.6 is "faster" than V 4.5 (preview rendering and final conversion) ?
And about all bugs (crash, poor image quality at preview screen, no 25% view at big monitors) - version 4.6 solved all?

So... may i still with 4.1 or upgrade to 4.6?

At this time i can't use 4.5 (crashes at my computer) than "downgrade" to 4.1
Thank you for your attention and sorry about my poor English.
0

Comments

14 comments

Date Votes
  • Dave4
    I have never had any problems....even with any of the beta versions.

    The speed of v4.6.2 is indeed much faster.....good luck
    0
  • Paul1921
    I love 4.6. Although I have never experienced any of the problems posted here, even back in the beta days, this version is by far much faster. I noticed it immediately. I had serious doubts if 4.x ever could be a fast product since I have used other .Net programs which performed sluggishly, but thankfully Phase proved my doubts wrong.

    To the Capture One 4 critics, the biggest risk/undertaking a software developer can make is completely scrapping the code from prior versions, and start over again. The advances made since its release is quite impressive.

    The old version had to go!!!!

    Paul
    0
  • christiaan1
    Yes,
    version 4.6 is the best by far. I'm still not sure about the quality of the noise reduction, especially the color noise reduction, (there's of course very good other software for that when needed, but should still be better I feel), but otherwise it's now become the ideal raw-developer for me (although of course I'm not a professional user). I never had any real problems, save for the first version, but speed has almost doubled on my computer with this latest version, and the image quality is just...perfect?

    Chris
    ps. DNG support has also improved.
    0
  • Paul Steunebrink
    [quote="christiaan" wrote:
    ...
    ps. DNG support has also improved.

    Great, but in what way?
    0
  • Paul1921
    Chris, I am not a pro either, but since I am closely tied to the industry, it has become a hobby of mine. I too still struggle with noise though, but I have found in doing some comparisons, my results with CO4 edges out most other solutions such as Noise Ninja, and Neat Image. For me CO4, and Photoshop offer the best trade-off when it comes to noise and detail retention. Noise Ninja, and Neat Image seem to lose too much detail. The in camera noise reduction of my D300 do not compare to CO4, and Photoshop either.

    What other noise reduction software have you used?
    0
  • Paul1921
    Well since I asked the question in my previous post, let me open the question up, and ask everyone what their noise reduction of choice is.

    Paul
    0
  • Paul Steunebrink
    [quote="Paul" wrote:
    Well since I asked the question in my previous post, let me open the question up, and ask everyone what their noise reduction of choice is.

    Paul

    None, never used one in the past 5 years (that is since starting shooting digital).
    0
  • deejjjaaaa
    [quote="Paul" wrote:
    Noise Ninja, and Neat Image seem to lose too much detail.


    on fully automatic settings (by default) or you try to tune the noise reduction there (Noise Ninja and Neat Image) using sliders (they have many) ?

    here are some D300 raw files @ ISO3200-6400

    http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D300/D300THMB.HTM

    which one you want to use a test example
    to make a comparison between C1 w/ noise reduction and C1 w/ nr off (all zeros) plus CS4 w/ Ninja or Neat ? we can then study 100% crops and find out.
    0
  • Nando From Brazil
    Thank you all !

    I just install (and work whit one photography) v4.6 and.... WOW!!!

    NO MORE PROBLEMS.
    NO MORE BUGS.
    NO MORE WORST PREVIEW (in raw converters category)
    No more bibble.... kkkk and No more downgrade (v4.1) ...
    Now i have 25% preview again...
    All my problems - solved. Now i'am happy. 😄

    OK - MY CONGRATULATIONS TO PHASE-ONE. This version is the best of v4
    (and install fine, no crashes, all ok)
    Thanks!
    0
  • christiaan1
    [quote="Paul_E" wrote:
    [quote="christiaan" wrote:
    ...
    ps. DNG support has also improved.

    Great, but in what way?


    Dng images can be manipulated any way round now, CO1 can read them all, also the ones created with camera raw, and run through recover edges, and previews, although not yet similar, match better in different appliations. My install of C4.5 had a lot of trouble with DNG.

    [quote="Paul" wrote:
    Chris, I am not a pro either, but since I am closely tied to the industry, it has become a hobby of mine. I too still struggle with noise though, but I have found in doing some comparisons, my results with CO4 edges out most other solutions such as Noise Ninja, and Neat Image. For me CO4, and Photoshop offer the best trade-off when it comes to noise and detail retention. Noise Ninja, and Neat Image seem to lose too much detail. The in camera noise reduction of my D300 do not compare to CO4, and Photoshop either.

    What other noise reduction software have you used?


    I've tried a couple of demoversions (noise ninja, neat image and noiseware) but found all of them hard to master, but must confess I have not been really motivated to do so, as I tend to accept the noise and choose for maximum detail. And I chose a very fast lens to avoid high iso as much as possible. But sometimes lack of light simply demands high iso, and my camera (olympus e3) nééds noise reduction above iso 800. So I eventually settled on the user-friendly Nik Dfine, and always reduce its default noise reduction setting after the auto-scan by about 50%, but again: I find default settings of all noise reduction programs too agressive. I find Nik Dfine quite ok as long as I reduce default settings.
    But I also tried the noise reduction in CO1, and I don't know whether its my specific camera, but colornoise reduction seems to affect the saturation of certain colors, when I move the slider to the right it starts to desaturate parts of the image, dramatically visible viewing at 100%, and Nik Dfine certainly doesn't do that, no matter how agressive the settings. To be complete: it does only damage the image at settings fairly much higher than default, and perhaps its meant to be used conservatively. Still, it hasn't changed with this new version and I don't really trust its quality.

    Apart from that, I find only good things to say about 4.6, previews are also much better now.
    So, much to enjoy using this new version.

    regards
    Chris
    0
  • Stephen141
    I use three noise reduction programs. Neat Image, Noise Ninja and the most recent addition is Noise ware. Noise ware is by far the easiest to use, however, I like the output of all three just fine. You are going to lose some detail whenever you reduce noise. The key is to learn to tune i properly.
    0
  • Paul1921
    Thank you Dee for those samples, I have seen them before. Judging by the output of my camera, it appears those samples already have the in camera noise reduction embedded in the RAW file; it is turned on by default. I have done a comparison between two samples, and see visual differences in the images with and without noise reduction in CO4. I was under the assumption that with RAW, there is NO in camera tweaks to the image what so ever so that is what prompted me to turn it off completely to have control of what noise reduction will be applied. I really need to work now with all three programs (add Noise Ware to the list) to better understand them. Spent a lot of time with CO4, and have not invested the same time in the other programs. Thank you for the input about Noise Ware, will have to try it out.

    This is a good topic, the trade off between noise and detail is truly an art, and takes time to master. 😕 But will keep trying.
    0
  • deejjjaaaa
    [quote="Paul" wrote:
    it appears those samples already have the in camera noise reduction embedded in the RAW file; it is turned on by default.


    I guess that for example the sample named like "D300hSLNR_OFF3200.NEF" has in camera NR turned OFF during its shot ... so we can have a 3rd party (3rd party - to make it fair) test shot (raw file) from D300 w/o any in camera NR to use for a test.

    [quote="Paul" wrote:

    I have done a comparison between two samples, and see visual differences in the images with and without noise reduction in CO4. I was under the assumption that with RAW, there is NO in camera tweaks to the image


    it depends on a camera... even w/ raw (RAW, not in-camera .JPG) you can have a camera where NR will be applied (and in most cases it is possible to switch it off)

    read here for example

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08091 ... rmware.asp

    "...The choice to turn [Off] the High ISO NR feature has been added...."

    because originally

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra700/page32.asp

    "...High sensitivity noise reduction applied before RAW image is produced..."

    as there was a lot of complaints from user base, etc.


    [quote="Paul" wrote:

    what so ever so that is what prompted me to turn it off completely to have control of what noise reduction will be applied. I really need to work now with all three programs (add Noise Ware to the list) to better understand them.


    you might add Topaz Denoise too

    http://www.topazlabs.com/topazlabs/03pr ... z_denoise/

    or some free (for non profit) adobe plug-ins here

    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~foi/SA-DCT/#ref_problems

    some open source utilities

    http://cimg.sourceforge.net/greycstoration/index.shtml
    0
  • christiaan1
    [quote="Dee" wrote:


    it depends on a camera... even w/ raw (RAW, not in-camera .JPG) you can have a camera where NR will be applied (and in most cases it is possible to switch it off)


    And different cameras offer different settings. I used the sony a700 for a while, and also disliked the fact that in-camera noise reduction at high iso could not be turned of, good to hear they fixed that in the firmware. Olympus offers more advanced settings, not just on/off, but three settings (low/medium high) to give you more control.
    I do not use it though, because noise reduction in the raw-developement or p.p. stage allows you to adjust the level of noise reduction to the specific needs per photo. And it also assures you of maximum detail in the raw file: future noise reduction programs will no doubt become better and better, and then you will always have the ability to get maximum detail out of your old raw files. In-camera N.R. can not be reversed.
    By the way: according to the experts, it is always recommended to apply N.R. before any other image editing, including (pre)sharpening or downsizing.

    Chris
    0

Post is closed for comments.