Saltar al contenido principal

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived.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

Sony a6300 .ARW image quality via Capture One?

Permanently deleted user
Been using an A7RII and C1pro 9.0 for months and have been loving the "base" .ARW image quality, before making any adjustments. Just got an a6300 to replace an a6000 and I haven't been thrilled with how those files look. I can generally manipulate the color balance etc... to the point where it looks decent, but I'm now having to manipulate quite a bit just to get to a good starting point.

OOC .jpg files look better and more natural to me, whereas with the A7RII, rarely do I see an OOC .jpg that is even close to the C1pro .ARW "base" image. It seems more a white balance / color tone issue to my eye than anything else. With the a6300, I find LR does a better job with the .ARW files (at least with the color / white balance / skin tones). The color in general on the A7RII .ARW files developed by C1Pro have always been generally very natural and "right" to my eye.

Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
0

Comentarios

6 comentarios

Fecha Votos
  • ChrisM
    Initial support in CO1 can be really sub-standard. In all likelyhood, the A6300 could well have not been properly profiled yet, but support rushed out by means of transferring profiles from preceding cameras, in this case the A6000, with possibly very bad results.
    To be certain about getting proper support you might have to put in an effort with Phase one support.
    Unfortunately, Phase one is no longer really clear in their communication on the quality of camera support. They used to have a term "preliminary support" to indicate that the support of a new camera is not finalized yet, and consequent finalized support would be much, much better.
    I never see that term used anymore in release notes however, and then you are left guessing.

    Chris
    0
  • SFA
    No need to guess or speculate here - just raise a Support Case and ask the questions.

    Are there any special settings that might be in play to enhance the images as jpgs but leave the RAWs looking poor by comparison once the in camera adjustments are eliminated?


    Grant
    0
  • SFA
    I downloaded one of the sample files from DPreview - RAW and jpg versions. Not sure if the jpg was OOC but I suspect it was based on size and lack of comments about how they had processed it. (I seemed to be having some problems getting stuff from the site so have yet to go back to double check.)

    Without any changes other than playing around with some fairly intense sharpening (the downloaded jpg is very compressed looking, it's easy to make the RAW conversion sharper by far) which does make some of the colour texture a tad harsher on skin tones but not unnaturally so, the colour results are pretty much identical. In fact I would say they are identical except where the sharpening I used may have influenced some shading very slightly.

    HTH.


    Grant
    0
  • Christian Gruner
    [quote="ChrisM" wrote:
    Unfortunately, Phase one is no longer really clear in their communication on the quality of camera support. They used to have a term "preliminary support" to indicate that the support of a new camera is not finalized yet, and consequent finalized support would be much, much better.
    I never see that term used anymore in release notes however, and then you are left guessing.


    It actually quite the opposite.
    We try to not do preliminary support, but instead make first-go quality support. That is why you don't see the term preliminary any longer.

    We realize that all colors are perceived quite subjectively, and thus it will never be a one-size-fits-all.

    If you have a different approach to the default colors, please create an example for us. That could be an image adjusted and packed as an .EIP or a saved color-profile from the Color Editor.

    Also remember that you can create new defaults for a given camera. That can save you a lot of time, when importing the images.
    0
  • ChrisM
    [quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
    It actually quite the opposite.
    We try to not do preliminary support, but instead make first-go quality support. That is why you don't see the term preliminary any longer.

    We realize that all colors are perceived quite subjectively, and thus it will never be a one-size-fits-all.

    If you have a different approach to the default colors, please create an example for us. That could be an image adjusted and packed as an .EIP or a saved color-profile from the Color Editor.

    Also remember that you can create new defaults for a given camera. That can save you a lot of time, when importing the images.

    Thanks for clearing that up Christian.

    Chris
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    Thanks for all suggestions and info - very much appreciated. As I've really only shot 60 raw shots or so to look at, maybe I'm jumping the gun - its just that I can only think of one shoot out of 50 on the Ar7II using C1pro that the color balance wasn't either very close or right straight away. a6300 is a different animal, I know - so maybe I just need to get used to it. Will look into submitting the color info mentioned above and see what Phase One thinks about it.

    In regards to modifying a camera profile / preset - is it possible to save relative offset? ie not set white balance at 5300K, but +650 (from whatever was going to be used ordinarily)? I'm certainly far from any kind of expert using C1pro.

    Thanks for such fast and detailed info.
    0

La publicación no admite más comentarios.