An Angry Customer

Comments

24 comments

  • Hogleg 44
    Yes, I recently bought pro mainly for two just features. Unlimited batch processing and arbitrary rotation. Now in their own inevitable way they have cut the additional price I paid over LE to just one lone feature. I paid the price difference solely for arbitrary rotation!!!

    It's my own fault!!! After seeing the way they operate, over the past year, I shoulda known!!! Now, after alienating a great many of their customers, and the increaseingly excellent, and lower priced, competition, they will probably be forced to add arbritary rotation to LE, and then lower the price of Pro........and I'll really have screwed up!! ๐Ÿ˜ญ
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Flashram_Peter_AUS
    Paul you haven't screwed up, you are in the same boat as many customers. They seem to think that this is the way people should just deal with their attitude and take what is given to them. They don't seem to understand what loyalty is to their customers who have been loyal to them, purchased what was offered in good faith and are now being screwed by them.

    Since Michael Tapes severed ties with PhaseOne (although not fully as has been pointed out in other posts, but read between the lines and you will see that he isn't suppporting PhaseOne Capture One as much as he has up till recently), their attitude to thier customers has certainly gone down hill fast.

    They seem to think they can walk all over their customers as they have the money and so what if the program doesn't work the way they describe it too.

    Currently they have thousands of beta Testers around the world trying out the 3.7RC which still exhibits many errors in the program that have been there for months now and still aren't being fixed.

    Other software is proving to be just as good, less buggy and give just as good a workflow that C1 has been up until now.

    Come on PhaseOne get your act together and give the customers what was originally paid for and stated on your website. A buggless program with the updates that were originally agreed upon.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • MattFahrner
    As Michael T. has pointed out to me, there is often something lost in the translation for their support sometimes. It is hard not to take it personallly at times though.

    While I am interested in seeing the new Photoshop (due to arrive here today), I do think the new version 3.7 is a huge improvement. Of course, I'm an LE user, so the freed up batch queue made all the difference in the world to me.

    I still think it's a great product and having checked out a lot of others, most don't compare.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bernardtan
    [quote="scathew" wrote:
    As Michael T. has pointed out to me, there is often something lost in the translation for their support sometimes. It is hard not to take it personallly at times though.

    While I am interested in seeing the new Photoshop (due to arrive here today), I do think the new version 3.7 is a huge improvement. Of course, I'm an LE user, so the freed up batch queue made all the difference in the world to me.

    I still think it's a great product and having checked out a lot of others, most don't compare.


    Well, if only their camera profiles were as accurate as others who are selling them it would be great. LE's canned profiles are terribly too saturated for product shooting. I got into trouble with it alot of times & I hope I will not continue to have them or I'm out of business soon. Can't they supply a good accurate profile? One reason I bought the LE is that I would like to be away from color problem. Sadly I got into more trouble than before for promising great colors from my new software ...blah blah blah!
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Anonymous
    bernardtan,

    You should have purchased the PRO version. If color is important to you and your customers; and your business is at risk if color is not accurate, then you need PRO. With PRO you can create your very own and very precise profiles with the Color Editor.

    If staying with LE, then Saturation is very easily adjusted with the tools provided.
    All the tools are available to get precisely the result you're after...especially so with PRO.

    Regards,
    kc
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bernardtan
    [quote="Keith Carpenter" wrote:
    bernardtan,

    You should have purchased the PRO version. If color is important to you and your customers; and your business is at risk if color is not accurate, then you need PRO. With PRO you can create your very own and very precise profiles with the Color Editor.

    If staying with LE, then Saturation is very easily adjusted with the tools provided.
    All the tools are available to get precisely the result you're after...especially so with PRO.

    Regards,
    kc


    I thought the canned profiles (since it's a good profile as advertised) would make my colors all accurate. Well, anyway of course we can adjust them thru LE or photoshop but the thing is I have to adjust so many of the pictures & time is little usually. Having a good camera profile to start with would probably make things better for me since I do not have to adjust anything. Yes the PRO version has the color editor (i tried it). Is that only for editing the camera profiles or can we use it to edit colors on individual images as though it was part of the sliders? It would be great if we can use it like the softwares for editing colors. By the way, it would be nice to warn prospective buyers about the inaccurate profile matter so it would not get them into hot waters like I did with 2 valuable clients. I think even the PRO version still needs a fix on the profiles that's why they come with the color editor. I heard 3rd party camera profiles are more accurate than C1 has, how does that happen ? What else does PRO offer that is valuable to photographers that we may not know of ? Conversion to CMYK is available in CS2 so why need it on PRO ?
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Anonymous
    bernardtan,

    YOU make the color of an image accurate. Work should not be delivered to a client until you are satisfied with the color. All the tools are available within the software to be able to produce Dead-On color, i.e. the color wheel at the White Balance tab.This of course starts with a monitor calibration, good white balance, exposure and some testing.

    The camera profiles are good but can always be improved. Some makes/models have only the Generic choice while others may have a few to choose from. This is why PRO has a Color Editor. Buy 2 cameras of the exact same make and model and each can produce color differently...the chips are different. This is why some photographers make a very specific profile for Their Camera, or hire a Consultant to do so. Yes, there are additional 3rd party profiles available for purchase, you can process an image with a neutral profile and adjust color in another software, or you can fine tune a profile with the Color Editor. Again, all the tools and capabilities are there to fit any photographers workflow.
    PRO> multiple file output, CMYK output, Color Editor, Cross Platform, Tethered shooting with Canon EOS, Exposure warning, arbitrary rotation, intepolation up to %250

    Regards,
    kc
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bernardtan
    Regarding color editor in PRO version:

    Is that only for editing the camera profiles or can we use it to edit colors on individual images as though it was part of the sliders?
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Anonymous
    bernardtan

    The Color Editor edits ICC profiles, the tools of Capture One adjust the color of images.

    Regards,
    kc
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bernardtan
    why don't we just buy profiles from 3rd party makers instead of editing our profiles w/c are too exagerated? If 3rd party profile makers can make a good profile to run on other parties softwares I think it's impossible that Phase One can't make us customers a good profile to come with our software purchase.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Ian1111
    Bernard,
    a complaint similar to your's appears to be coming up in a lot of RAW conversion forums, so you are not a lone voice on the subject.
    I hope the current version of Mange's profiles I bought for 3.7.1 will work okay in the next release. I would hate to have to justify the expense of buying a new profile each time there is a version upgrade of the main software.

    Ian M ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bernardtan
    [quote="RF Cat" wrote:
    Bernard,
    a complaint similar to your's appears to be coming up in a lot of RAW conversion forums, so you are not a lone voice on the subject.
    I hope the current version of Mange's profiles I bought for 3.7.1 will work okay in the next release. I would hate to have to justify the expense of buying a new profile each time there is a version upgrade of the main software.

    Ian M ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„


    So how's the etc. profiles you presently have ? Do they work as it should ? I'm investing on making my own camera profiles soon, I hate to pay for every profile update they have. We can get dead-on colors when making our own profiles but we need time to study the process though, but it will be worth it in the end. Why don't you make your own camera profiles instead & use them on C1 ? Oh, i really think that Phase One should warn clients that their color profiles which are free are not accurate & too saturated... the theory on CMOS & CCD sensors is that they all average into something near accurate & not overboost on colors, which means profiles can be made average & work on almost all cameras they are made for. Another theory is they make alot of profiles for every shooting conditions which are different from the previous. So it means no single profile would work & you need to make new profiles for new projects on new shooting conditions. Some expensive profile makers believe that their one & only profile will do for almost all shooting conditions & will not give you way too far off colors & saturations.

    If you use C1 you should learn to make your own profile if color accuracy is important to you. Get the PRO version to enable yourself to edit the profiles with the right tools & knowledge. This way it will justify your purchase of the C1 PRO for how much money you invest on it for 2 computers & 2 activation. The profile editor of the PRO version I find very pleasing but you need a reference for edit definitely.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Ian1111
    Bernard,
    I am having a hard enough time trying to make profiles for my printers, let alone get brave enough to try one for the C1 raw conversion. I bought both of Mange's for the 10D and mainly use the hsat one.
    My problem is I am still very much an amateur and photography is just a hobby much to my wife's disgust, she would like me to get out and agressively sell some of my photos. We are both retired and would appreciate the extra income. It would also offset some of the cost of software I have bought to improve the final product.

    Anyway off my poor soapbox and back to the subject. I find that as I learn new skills about curves etc I can re-visit a lot of photos and improve them no end. I suppose the real crux of the issue is, once I build that curve is how to save it and call it a profile. More learning to do.

    Thanks I never really thought about how to do it until now and it doesn't appear to hard, at least on paper anyway.

    Ian M ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bernardtan
    [quote="RF Cat" wrote:
    Bernard,
    I am having a hard enough time trying to make profiles for my printers, let alone get brave enough to try one for the C1 raw conversion. I bought both of Mange's for the 10D and mainly use the hsat one.
    My problem is I am still very much an amateur and photography is just a hobby much to my wife's disgust, she would like me to get out and agressively sell some of my photos. We are both retired and would appreciate the extra income. It would also offset some of the cost of software I have bought to improve the final product.

    Anyway off my poor soapbox and back to the subject. I find that as I learn new skills about curves etc I can re-visit a lot of photos and improve them no end. I suppose the real crux of the issue is, once I build that curve is how to save it and call it a profile. More learning to do.

    Thanks I never really thought about how to do it until now and it doesn't appear to hard, at least on paper anyway.

    Ian M ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„


    Hahaha.. the wife thing....leave them be- God made them that way. I think you should make good fotos first before you sell them out or ruin your name. I delivered my files to client as I never expected the LE would not comeout correct in color. I thought it was dead-on. I got carried away with ads (funny). Anyway, there are times when all the clients come together & all of them are in a hurry (they come deliver the product & you shoot & they take it with them right after & new client comes in brings another bunch of multi-colored products), so after shooting you just process the usual way that worked for you in your old workflow & hand them the CD without looking if the colors are okey since you have too many products on hand that you can't recall each of their colors in your memory...worst is all of them vary in hue & saturation so how do you expect us to recall all of them. There are times we just want to finish the job & trust our new softwares to do magic for us (that's why we bought them) without checking the pictures before delivery & do the other clients job that's on CUE. ๐Ÿค“
    Are you using LE or PRO ? Saving the curve is easy !
    With the right tools, profiling a printer is not that difficult...same with profiling your camera for C1 use. Best to test the profiles 1st & use your old methods that work before any delivery to client. Never trust on what you hear on ADS. TEST TEST TEST ... ๐Ÿ˜‚
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Ian1111
    Bernard,
    I am using Pro.
    I have tried something like 5 or 6 convertors, some as trials and some I paid for. All have the same problem, colur conversion and consistency don't go in the same sentence, let alone 2 consecutive photos of the same subject.
    So far I still like C1 it is the most consistent and gives my photos life that I can't get out of the others. Also has some nice adjustment tools as part of the conversion process.
    RAW convertors I have paid for are C1 Pro, RSP 2006, DxO and DPP. RAW convertors I have tried are Bibble 4.4, Breezebrower and ACR and I think there is one other, but can't remember.

    I bought DxO because I thought it would fix the problems I have with CA in the EF 50 1.4, sometimes only. Also very very very slow, not intutitive at all. The auto process leaves a lot to be desired. A newer faster version is due out before Christmas. Probably need to spend considerable time learning the manual setup, which defeats the aim of the application, you are supposed to be able to use the automatic function without thinking seriously about changing the defaults.

    RSP, doesn't quite have it all together yet, auto processes not very good or reliable, has lots of features, most of which can be done in C1 if you learn curves and fine tune the noise and sharpness controls.

    So for all its failings C1 is still the one, for me at least.

    Finally, I calibrate every step of the way. The monitor, the printer, the working space. If I have to use my laptop that gets re-calibrated as well.
    I print with QImage, does wonders that program.

    I do ramble on don't I?

    Ian M ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bernardtan
    ๐Ÿ˜‚ Hahaha! Ur ryt dude. Anyways I've trie RSE 1.3 the free converter, there are features there not on C1 & which I desire. But we can't expect them to be both the same right ? All I want is right color right out-of-the-box if it's possible.
    Do you mean the S-Curve & save it on PRO that you need to know ?

    Yup calibrate monitor 1st amongst all, then your printer, etc. One thing is that you must consider to learn the correct way to calibrate so everything will fall into place I guess ๐Ÿค“

    When you work on your pictures do not forget that as you do them on photoshop the saturation increases as contrast increases. If you do each image with the same formula for enhancement then you will have consistency in color. If 2 or same pictures are done in a different formula for enhancement & correction then definitely you will have color inconsistency. Check all your profiling methods & see if they are done consistently correct or it is the cause of the color shift problem.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Ian1111
    Bernard,
    Keith C has posted a way of doing all this standard stuff. I shoot landscapes and other similar stuff, so colour matching between prints is not that important, but when I print I like to get on paper what I see on screen and usually do when using OEM cartridges in the printer. But we are digressing.

    ian M ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bernardtan
    [quote="RF Cat" wrote:
    Bernard,
    Keith C has posted a way of doing all this standard stuff. I shoot landscapes and other similar stuff, so colour matching between prints is not that important, but when I print I like to get on paper what I see on screen and usually do when using OEM cartridges in the printer. But we are digressing.

    ian M ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„


    On C1PRO under exposure tab you can find the "floppy icon" - you clik it to save whatever curve you made. They even have a good sample curve free where you save your custom curve. Where you save on the left is where you load the same curve to another image if it can benefit from the curve you like. Did you see them ?

    About wat-u-c-wat-get, If there's nothing wrong with your monitor & nothing wrong with your printer & you use all original ink & orig. paper w/c you profiled, then I guess you must have not made a good profile. Study on how to make good profiles. Of course your viewing light source for the prints matter too...maybe you should go out & look at them under the sun or buy a viewing box if it matters to you so much about seeing the screen match the printouts. I think there's alot of stores selling the viewing light box in australia. You specify what light source you want to use for viewing they will supply the halogen bulb. Or you ask for standard viewing bulb to match the viewing box. Then it's here where you will see the screen colors match the print colors consistently.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Ian1111
    Bernard,
    yes, I have looked at all that and thought, maybe one day when I get really serious eg somebody wants me to do a series of shots over a number of days where the colur and saturation are required to be consistent, until then I will fiddle, keep the brain active.

    Regards Ian M ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bernardtan
    [quote="RF Cat" wrote:
    Bernard,
    yes, I have looked at all that and thought, maybe one day when I get really serious eg somebody wants me to do a series of shots over a number of days where the colur and saturation are required to be consistent, until then I will fiddle, keep the brain active.

    Regards Ian M ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„


    I think it's your processing formula that is making the picture colors inconsistent on screen. For the prints & screen matching it might be you need to view it under the right illumination. Or re-calibrate corretly everything from scratch.

    Oh, the color profile editor is what you mean, open the color editor & look at the left side of the profile window that you are using...there's a "save as" tab there. Clik it & viola ... it's saved & renamed as a corrected file or you may rename it under another name if you want.

    Good Luck ! ๐Ÿ™„
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Ian1111
    Bernard,
    how come it is now my problem, we were discussing your issues with the inconsistent colours etc for your product shoots. I was just pointing out some of the issues with a number of convertors I had tried.
    My desktop technique will not affect how 2 adjacent photos from the same shoot have different colours. The 10D is notorious for not capturing the same colur for 2 shots in a row. C1 usually corrects it and then requires a bit of tweaking if you really want it accurate. To be real pedantic you should be using a grey or white card in your photos.

    Ian M ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bernardtan
    [quote="RF Cat" wrote:
    Bernard,
    how come it is now my problem, we were discussing your issues with the inconsistent colours etc for your product shoots. I was just pointing out some of the issues with a number of convertors I had tried.
    My desktop technique will not affect how 2 adjacent photos from the same shoot have different colours. The 10D is notorious for not capturing the same colur for 2 shots in a row. C1 usually corrects it and then requires a bit of tweaking if you really want it accurate. To be real pedantic you should be using a grey or white card in your photos.

    Ian M ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„ ๐Ÿ˜„


    I have solved my problem so we deal with your problem now. I believe the enhancement procedure that we all do shifts the color of any image, that is why we have high-sat & low-sat profiles. You use the low-sat profiles if your technique requires it. Try processing same pictures, one left un-enhanced & see the colors beside the one you sharpened, increase contrast, etc. They will not look the same anymore. They become inconsistent in COLOR ! Yes I use whibal & expodisc for the whitebalancing of every picture I take. Of course with C1 I only use whibal since expodisc doesnt work with any version of C1 (but it works well as it should on DPP- expodisc dislikes workflow). We tweak the camera profile so we don't have to adjust so much color problem in every image that we do, the good quality profile will takecare of that problem for us. It saves time if you have a good camera profile since you don't have to check & adjust each image amongst the whole batch. Just imagine having to adjust 1,000 color problematic images in an hour (it would be impossible).
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • William1111
    I am a portrait photographer. We display and soft proof in the 4x5 format as most of the images we sell corepond to this aspect ratio the customer sees what he gets. Until now we had the luxury of shooting the Kodak 14n camera which put the 4x5 crop on the raw file at capture. We could adjust the crop to size or position of the crop in the Kodak PhotoDesk software before converting to JPEG or TIFF. Also if you made one or many changes to a file, you have a choice of changes you would like to batch to the files selected. Super Duper workflow right?
    Now having switched to the Canon D1-MKIIN we are plauged with DPP software where we can not batch the crop to many images. I do however like it's Curves adjustment and this batches to similar images.
    This is where the Capture One Raw file converter steps in.

    I teach a course every spring to regional pros. A Phase One dealer put a demo on my computer. After figuring it out I demonstrated C1 to my class. Needless to say they were impressed and 6 C1 packages were sold after my session. This is one more reason I switched to Canon DSLRs.

    Until now I was impressed by Phase One, but after reading the posting above I think I'd better stay away. I also noticed that they allow a 2 computer installation. Kodak I could have as many as I wished. I need licence for 4 computers, as my son and I both run 2 at a time.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bernardtan
    [quote="Wildman" wrote:
    I am a portrait photographer. We display and soft proof in the 4x5 format as most of the images we sell corepond to this aspect ratio the customer sees what he gets. Until now we had the luxury of shooting the Kodak 14n camera which put the 4x5 crop on the raw file at capture. We could adjust the crop to size or position of the crop in the Kodak PhotoDesk software before converting to JPEG or TIFF. Also if you made one or many changes to a file, you have a choice of changes you would like to batch to the files selected. Super Duper workflow right?
    Now having switched to the Canon D1-MKIIN we are plauged with DPP software where we can not batch the crop to many images. I do however like it's Curves adjustment and this batches to similar images.
    This is where the Capture One Raw file converter steps in.

    I teach a course every spring to regional pros. A Phase One dealer put a demo on my computer. After figuring it out I demonstrated C1 to my class. Needless to say they were impressed and 6 C1 packages were sold after my session. This is one more reason I switched to Canon DSLRs.

    Until now I was impressed by Phase One, but after reading the posting above I think I'd better stay away. I also noticed that they allow a 2 computer installation. Kodak I could have as many as I wished. I need licence for 4 computers, as my son and I both run 2 at a time.


    Yup, that's the thing I do not like. You can install only on 2 computers when you buy the software. If you want more you have to buy again. Isn't paying for the software enough ? They made the software once only so why do we have to pay again & again ? You may install to more than 2 PCs with one purchase assuming your computer gets a virus or something like that. You have to go thru finding the support center in order to activate the 3rd time around for the same purchase. But basically you can only run 2 computers per one purchase. That's 2 activations online. 3rd activation you have to pay if you do not have a valid reason. It's not a very fast procedure to get activation for the 3rd time. You have to go thru finding the support center etc... I have consumed all my demo on same computers so I can't really install them again if in case I need a fast back-up. My 2nd computer has a terrible specs.. it's really slow & it can't process 16bit files & filters & catch the deadline. I didn't know they had this policy so I activated the 2nd time on the supposed back-up computer. ๐Ÿ˜ญ
    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.