What are the benefits upgrading to C1 7 Pro?
I am currently running the C1 6 Pro and do not wish to use catalogs. What are the major benefits upgrading the C1 7 Pro other than the new camera support and potentially faster processing speed?
0
-
The new Raw developer engine is very nice.
Other than that, it is really a pain to work full of confusion. There obviously missed the mark on their users. Everyone I talk to misses the old folder view. Sessions many like, but really have needed to adapt to this since C1 rolled it out.
I wish they would make a 3.7-like version and help so many that still prefer to work this way.
Trust us, we won't leave you. You don't have to lock us in for our loyalty! You had a great, straight forward raw developer. I hope C1 comes full circle in its maturity... at least in some version of the app.0 -
[quote="Raffi3" wrote:
Everyone I talk to misses the old folder view. Sessions many like, but really have needed to adapt to this since C1 rolled it out.
Is it a lot difference from Sessions folder view? I always work with folders, so I am a little confused. 🤭
http://www7.pic-upload.de/thumb/03.12.12/dzf4wnfcsxy.jpg0 -
I also still work from folders. I believe they use a 'default session' to setup the output folder structure etc. but to me it's no different from v5 or 6. 😕 0 -
If you were in a Catalog and what to "browse folders you simply CAN'T. you have to MAKE a NEW Session, or open another and browse within that. Its a mess for me. Basically Sessions act like Catalogs, and Catalogs like more catalogs. Get rid of both with some of the album abilities so those that liked the plus of Sessions to remain yet leave everything in Folder live access to all files. DONE! (if that forces for sidecar, so be it). 0 -
[quote="Kevin" wrote:
I also still work from folders. I believe they use a 'default session' to setup the output folder structure etc. but to me it's no different from v5 or 6. 😕
Not being in a position to upgrade from V6 at the moment (I will need to upgrade hardware for 64bit stuff) I am interested to follow the new features and changes to existing functionality through the forum user experiences.
I use sessions in V6 and the concept is very similar to another folder based application I use and used to use exclusively. (It is now somewhat inactive for development and no longer available for sale.) That application, in effect, used sidecar files with built in thumbnails but keeps a record of files imported just like a session. However if has only a loose background folder structure compared to Capture One's pre-defined folders with specific intended purposes created when a session is created.
In theory both approaches mean that copying an entire session backup for archival purposes is simple although doing that without using an application tool to update the internal records may well mean broken links that would have to be reinstated later (if 'later' ever becomes necessary. It may naver happen once you have an output file that you are happy with and/or the project is complete.)
Much of my activity is shooting events and that often means working with several thousand files. I may do some amount of metadata encoding but, realistically, not much more (for the majority of images) than I can do with file and folder naming for much less effort. So to me the benefits of a catalog approach, as I tried out with LR V1, does not seem so great. The facilities available from filters and smart sessions within a session are usually enough for my purposes.
I sometimes have more "open" sessions, usually for random stuff and experiments. So copy (or not) files from a memory card into a folder and then simply browse to that folder and work with them although usually I will import to the session from the folder of course if I want to be able to keep the entire selection together for archiving and so on.
There seems to be no reason why people should not have the same file in multiple sessions edited for different results. However that would make archiving without 'importing' the file to every session somewhat less predictable. Moreover the use of sidecar files would also be a chellenge since, presumably, any number of sessions (or just edits) would all affect the same sidecar file OR one would need multiple sidecar files ... in which case you are back to sessions or catalogues to make sense of them and provide some administrative controls.
The benefit of a catalogue, as far as I can see, is that it offers an opportunity to create a single entity for administering a set of image files whilst also offering advanced search and retrieval facilities - providing one puts the effort into metadata entry in the first place. So if one's image archive has a long and potentially active shelf life a catalogue system probably makes a lot of sense both from an archival and image search/retrieval basis. The decision about whether to store files in the catalogue database or leaving them to be referenced in an external file system is likely to be a matter of personal preference. When I used LR1 I did not import the files since I wished for them to be available to other applications without having to go through LR to get to them. So for me catalogues have never seemed to be important enough to make them the "go to" way of working. Should I review that understanding? Have I missed something?
Sessions make sense though. I like sessions.
Considering Raffi3's points about browsing through folders - quite possible with sessions of course. However surely the point about catalogues is that one has already taken a decision to establish a formal approach to creating and archival requirement influenced construct. I assume that it is possible to add more files to an existing catalogue by browsing to a folder (or device) and importing them. Presumably a new tethered shoot could also be attached to an existing catalogue?
Therefore, unlike the simple browse folders option for a session I would sort of expect a catalogue to go to the file system using an Import style function. If I just want to have a look around in the disks and folder of my systems I can use windows explorer. I suppose there could be a case for allowing browsing first without electing for possible import in advance but, for a catalogue, what else would one be doing? Pre-selecting/rejecting perhaps? In theory that can be done during the (potential) import process. That said I wouold expect people to have a different opinion about selection at that point!
So, as part of my planning preparation for upgrading to V7, can anyone tell me what further considerations I need to investigate when comparing catalogues and sessions for my purposes? My intention at the moment is to stick with sessions. However I could see some beneifts for using catalogues for managing outputs (or selected outputs) from multiple sessions into common catalogues that would make identification and retrieval easier even though the original files may still be hendled and edited within sessions. Of course this may be an under-use of the capabilities of catalogues!
Any observations will be gratefully received.
Grant Perkins0 -
I doesn't use the catalog function, but the problem of databases (like DAM-Software) are, that you can just move in folders which was been imported (Imatch, PhotoSupreme, ...). That's why my decision was, just use the session stuff with my main output, etc. folders. 0 -
The new CO 7 engine is one of the key assets of Capture One Pro 7. There are also many tool enhancements. That is why there is a 60-day trial period.
I do not understand the confusion some users experience regarding 'folder view'. There is no difference between CO7 and previous versions (4, 5 and 6). The features are the same, the tools are the same. Many users however, who used to work from folders instead of sessions, were never aware they used (the same) session all the time. Now, that they become aware of that because CO7 asks you, they start becoming confused. But you can still use the same session forever, CO7 creates it automatically for you on first use - ignore the session concept, and work from folder. Like you did in previous versions.
Don't get confused. Nothing has changed (if you do not use catalogs).
Even CO 3 Pro worked with a session (which you could ignore all the same).0 -
I agree with Paul. There is no difference in the folder view between CO6 and CO7 when one chooses to use sessions instead of catalogs.
But the problem is that CO6 and CO7 look identical in looks and feel with minor difference. One cannot see what this upgrade is all bout. Yes CO7 is faster with better high ISO noise reduction. I call it performance tune up. How can a performance tune up qualify for a new version designation?
I am still looking for a complete feature list of CO7 has than CO6 does not.
Let me start.
1. Catalog support
2. Fast processing
3. Better noise reduction
4. ??????????????????
5. ??????????????????
6. ??????????????????
7. ??????????????????
8. ??????????????????
...0 -
[quote="Nelson1" wrote:
..
But the problem is that CO6 and CO7 look identical in looks and feel with minor difference. One cannot see what this upgrade is all bout. Yes CO7 is faster with better high ISO noise reduction. I call it performance tune up. How can a performance tune up qualify for a new version designation?
I am still looking for a complete feature list of CO7 has than CO6 does not.
Let me start.
1. Catalog support
2. Fast processing
3. Better noise reduction
4. ??????????????????
5. ??????????????????
6. ??????????????????
7. ??????????????????
8. ??????????????????
...
You might argue the same type of performance tuneup for Lightroom 3 to LR 4.
Speaking for CO 7 , for me the major improvements in processing shadows and highlights (in the high dynamic range) and the new clarity tool are the main reason I upgraded.
I could care less about the catalog feature (I use Media Pro), I find the processing speed about the same, and the improvements in noise reduction are nice, but not enough.0 -
I was hope PhaseOne puts a table with two columns, CO6 and CO7 and a list of features and improvements with check marks on the CO7 column very much like the LR version comparison chart that Adobe put out.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop ... ID=2159997
I am surprised that you did not think that the noise reduction was good enough in CO7 vs LR4. I downloaded some 5D Mark III RAW files shot at ISO 6400 from dpreview and processed them in CO6 and CO7. The CO7 output is much better.
I have take a look at the clarity tool to what improvement has been made to CO7. I like the new local adjustment brush in CO7 as it shows the true edge of the soft brush.0 -
The point "everyone"(you don't know what you don't know) is confused over is that I had hopes of Media Pro to mature and be a great cataloging application. The reason I can see C1 v7 has Catalog is for
1. A sad day for me....
As SFA, as Worlfman and too many others...(just about ALL shooters in C1) care nothing about cataloging within C1! SFA, no you are not missing the point on your methodology. The app developers ARE!
To my point....This is is SW engineering to "lock" you in with the software you choose in order for it to be a pain to switch if you want to. I honestly see no other reason. Why all this effort when all the users who know their stuff care NONE about these being a part of a raw developer. This is for new blood, new imagers, new photographers that have no idea how to manage their images. And they will take the bate as WE for decades have been building C1 reputation as AMAZING, and simple and superior quality, etc. Now it is trumping on that for new users with "lock in feature". Great, fine with me...as long as you make another version for those that have no use for all this added fluff. I want to shoot into MY folder, and then process my RAW to its optimal before I export for LR/Photoshop to do further tweaks. Thats all a RAW should be doing. Do we gain from the metadataing as SFA mentions, SURE, and it is a welcome feature IF it embeds it in the file as a optional default without more actions required. Otherwise SAY GOODBYE to all that once you look at the files in a DAM or other APP. This are complex in the relationship, and thats where new users are overwelmd and they just "go with it". But down the line they will realize something they are stuck in.
Sorry this sounds negative, but it is bothersome....
Why wouldn't you make Media Pro better? It would be a mature stand alone new market to be in? It would be C1 independant as other raw developers see the value even over LR catalogs. You missed that opportunity. It would have also set you apart from LR and in the right modality of dealing with images. the true leader in the approach to imagery.
Keeping C1 as a nimble and amazing and catalog free...even doing away with the way sessions works in auto pilot as it litters my folder structure.......Here is where I don't agree with C1 3.x (3.7) working same as C1v7 today in sessions.
It's not that we didn't know. Its we did our best to ignore it. C1 3.x JUST picks a Capture folder and it allows you to be in any folder without opening or making new "sessions" as it didn't have this, just called Capture folder(rightfully so).
Now a session is really a catalog. Just called Session. Try having a catalog open, and then going to a folder...You can't!
The SysFolder doesn't exisit.
Also. since Sessions. Each folder you open C1 WILL without asking if you want to work in that folder place the Capture/Cashe/Settings folder whereever you simply browse!
Use a DAM, be smart about your files if you value them. Keep a developer as a Developer. A dam as a DAM.
Don't drive your 911 in the desert dunes, and don't take your quad runner on the speedways!
I do think the new raw developing is rather nice and that is what keeps us coming back....Besides the fact that I like to capture within C1, well with DB I have no other tether choice do I?
I wrote this quick and "conversation style", would be happy to answer any ambiguous areas. 😊0 -
Today i install C1 7 Pro Trial. I saw some new features, for example: enhanced local adjustments (gradient tool).
But i so confused of new engine work. I have one new project now. And previous I done it in C1 6 Pro Trial.
I used Auto Adjust Feature and it worked fine! As i installed C1 7 Pro, I opened this project and looked this files in new version. I used Auto Adjust Feature here, and I dont like result. Very dont like. I have photos with warm temperature in this project. C1 6 makes neutral colors more precision! With C1 7 i got bad white balance, very yellowish!
P.S Now I see that selection of white balance in Auto Adjust Feature drop-menu doesnt work! 😂
I create clone of an image. For one of them i apply all Auto Adjustments except White Balance, to other - all Auto Adjustments. And results were the same! Ahaha. Try it people and say im not mad.
I dont explore new version very well, but im afraid of some faults in it. By the way i planned to buy own C1 Pro, instead of trial versions, but now im scared 😎
P.P.S. BTW, does registration number for C1 7 go up for previous versions? For C1 6, until 7 version become more "normal".0 -
[quote="realsam" wrote:
...
P.P.S. BTW, does registration number for C1 7 go up for previous versions? For C1 6, until 7 version become more "normal".
viewtopic.php?f=47&t=135540 -
[quote="Nelson1" wrote:
I agree with Paul. There is no difference in the folder view between CO6 and CO7 when one chooses to use sessions instead of catalogs.
But the problem is that CO6 and CO7 look identical in looks and feel with minor difference. One cannot see what this upgrade is all bout. Yes CO7 is faster with better high ISO noise reduction. I call it performance tune up. How can a performance tune up qualify for a new version designation?
I am still looking for a complete feature list of CO7 has than CO6 does not.
Let me start.
1. Catalog support
2. Fast processing
3. Better noise reduction
4. ??????????????????
5. ??????????????????
6. ??????????????????
7. ??????????????????
8. ??????????????????
...
4. Improved local adjustments (better view of the size and hardness of the brush, gradient tool, more adjustment layers)
5. New clarity tool with extra options.
6. Built-in support for quite a lot of DSLR lenses.
I'm sure there are more, but those are some that I have already used (on the Mac version).
Ian0 -
[quote="Ian3" wrote:
[quote="Nelson1" wrote:
I agree with Paul. There is no difference in the folder view between CO6 and CO7 when one chooses to use sessions instead of catalogs.
But the problem is that CO6 and CO7 look identical in looks and feel with minor difference. One cannot see what this upgrade is all bout. Yes CO7 is faster with better high ISO noise reduction. I call it performance tune up. How can a performance tune up qualify for a new version designation?
I am still looking for a complete feature list of CO7 has than CO6 does not.
Let me start.
1. Catalog support
2. Fast processing
3. Better noise reduction
4. ??????????????????
5. ??????????????????
6. ??????????????????
7. ??????????????????
8. ??????????????????
...
4. Improved local adjustments (better view of the size and hardness of the brush, gradient tool, more adjustment layers)
5. New clarity tool with extra options.
6. Built-in support for quite a lot of DSLR lenses.
I'm sure there are more, but those are some that I have already used (on the Mac version).
Ian
Thank you for the update. You are right, those are added features. The new processing engine is nice too.
Now we just need the 15mm fisheye lens support added. 😊0 -
It looks like C1 Pro 7.0.1 has a performance issue which affects the screen refresh during editing. See the thread below for more detail.
viewtopic.php?f=47&t=136120
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
16 comments