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⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived.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. ⚠️

is C1 slow or am I doing something wrong?

Henrik1
Hello fellow C1 users,

I am quite content with C1 as my prefered raw converter, but I was really surprised to find that it is about 4 times slower then ACR when converting Canon 1Ds files on the same computer (PC) I tried it on two different PC's now and there is a similarity to the time taken and still a 4 to 1 ration in favor of ACR.

OS: Windows xp x64
C1: 3.7.4 pro
I only have the numbers for the x64 now, as i didn't save the spreadsheet
system comprises of
Dual Opteron 250
Tyan S2895 mainboard
8x1Gb ECC ram
U320 SCSI 15k disks for processing, there is also some 300Gb 10k for storage but not involved in raw processing
2x Quadro Fx3400 graphics cards

it takes about C1 26 sec to convert a 16bit 1Ds file which result in a 64mb file
on the same system it takes ACR 5.5sec to do the same!!!

What gives??? Don't tell me it is a x64 problem!

I would prefer to use C1, i like it alot (besides we are both danish! 😉 ) also what will be the best way to integrate C1 into a DAM workflow??

thank you for taking your time to read this

Henrik Tived
A Dane Down Under
0

Comments

4 comments

Date Votes
  • Anonymous
    Henrik Tived ,

    It has been interesting to read posts on other Forums where comparisons are made solely with speed of processing in mind.
    Personally, my first thoughts are always...
    hmm would they want a red wine from last Tuesday... or one from 1995 ?...

    The Phase One RAW process algorithm is the most sophisticated there is bar none. It comes down to math and the Danes have a step ahead of others.
    It simply takes longer because it does so much more with the data.
    The result in Quality speaks for itself. Most accept this as it truly is a matter of seconds and many process batch queue overnight.
    Need I say film ?... and then seconds for a far superior image quality is quite acceptable.
    When Speed truly is the priority, there is the QuickProof algorithm that is built for speed.

    See Knowledge Base article related to process speed variables:
    http://www.phaseone.com/Content/Support ... nguageid=1

    Version 4.0 is planned to support DNG, have Windows and Mac features and functions as equal as is possible; and a goal of 3x faster in processing is a target.
    We shall see as this version is due 4th Q of this year.

    Sincerely,
    k c
    0
  • Nill
    Yes it's sophisticated, but is it really significantly more sophisticated than Raw Shooter, which seems to be at least 4x faster?

    Nill
    ~~
    www.toulme.net
    0
  • Anonymous
    Nill,

    Point is that good results take time.
    In this age of Immediate Gratification there is no such thing as Fast Enough for some. These folks will shoot JPEGs 😉

    Again, if speed is what is important, then use QuickProof.
    Overall, which program to use is a decision to be made by photographer. Most want the best possible image from their cameras; and image quality that is unsurpassed. Others want images Fast. Capture One offers tools to accomplish both desires.

    Sincerely,
    k c
    0
  • Nill
    Very true, and I have no intention of abandoning C1. But you have to keep an eye on the competition, both for quality *and* speed (and, for that matter, cost).

    Nill
    ~~
    www.toulme.net
    0

Post is closed for comments.