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⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived.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

Infinity platform in CO for the rest of us

Comments

6 comments

  • Michael Wendt

    Thanks, you are right, but I do hope to get support for such concepts, since CO has not given any useful reply to requests only " we do not comment future development"... 

    I suggest, that there are further tied connections between hardware and software development. Infinity platform is software on a capable hardware platform and this is like in the smartphones the future. 

    1
  • SFA

    Michael,

    You might be better asking such a question in the Phase hardware forums rather than this Capture One for the non-Phase user forum.

    Also this is a User to User forum, mostly, so the potential for getting a useful reply (other than mine of course!) is minimal.

    0
  • SFA

    Phase One has never (or almost never  - there was a recent exception related to an early preview of Capture One V21.1. by a couple of days) discussed future possible developments publicly.

    There have been no further signs of that principle changing.

    There seems to be more potential for the serious "business" software - for the Phase backs, Industrial and Cultural Heritage markets and perhaps more - to diverge somewhat from the Capture One consumer market along with possible diverging needs for the different markets.

    0
  • Michael Wendt

    Again, you are right.

    But I do see CO also as a professional market. So of course they may decide to publish CO++ which offers those features only for the PO backs, no problem. The future of photography is software beside the sensor complex. Thats what they are doing in the Infinity platform and what Apple and others are doing in the smartphones. So limiting CO to a"simple retouching pltform" - sorry for this degrading - is by far the wrong way.

    0
  • SFA

    Phase have control of their hardware.

    Apple has control of its hardware.

    What will the other hardware manufacturers to to enable access to all of their in-camera facilities by third party providers? And will their "consumers" all want to use the facilities?

    (Indeed will many of them even know or care that some very clever facilities exist in their expensive new toy?)

    0
  • Michael Wendt

    It is sad, that we are not discussing the intention. If I used Phase One IQ4 as an example I really focussed on computational photography. This is one of the big areas of future in this field. 

    If f.e. Marc Levoy is leaving Google to focus on computational photography at Adobe, anyone could see, how this is focussed at competitors. 

    The distinction of CO and PO must lead to independent development. Smartphones and IQ4 do have the advantage to share high computational power inside their housing, DSLR and ILC cameras are only starting with computational photography. So taking remote (tethered) a series of pictures and processing the results will allow big improvements for those who will further use semiprofessional photography. 

    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.