C1Pro - No "stacking" is my big issue
I do not use Adobe LR/PS, I used Nikon NX and need replacement. I'm not a huge landscape photographer, nor have I tried to stack much, a few times for exposure or HDR. Never Focus Stacking. I like C1Pro Dynamic Albums, Sessions and Styles. I appreciate the customer service with all the webinars, this forum and the community willing to help.
So what's my issue? I'm a fan of Thomas Heaton, You Tube Landscape Photographer, used Lr/Ps and did a quick tutorial on Focus Stacking, 3 images, foreground rocks in seawater, mid ground surf with last image distance hill sky and stone church. He demonstrated how to basic adjust exposure in LR and apply to all 3, then import into PS and do the stacking and cleaning with masks, then back to LR for a bit of clarity. it was published Oct 17 2017.
I also have watched tutorials on HDR or stacking of exposure, +/- 3 and 0. This I have done this in the past and like the effect.
With C1Pro I would need another software tool to do stacking and that's a disadvantage. C1Pro looks to be a great studio tool, tether etc. Sessions are great for "projects", sharing, moving from workstation to workstation, getting assistance or feedback.
Am I missing something? Do you Landscape types miss stacking? Or do you "get it right at time of shooting" (everytime?) and not deal with stacks? Digital makes stacking so easy and the effect so dynamic, why give that up or deal with hassles of additional tools. Maybe its me and its no big deal to use other tools then import TIFF I assume.
So that's it, my first post and I'm complaning, my rant is over and I'm interested in what others think. Oh and per the banner, I use as Mac, but not sure why that matters.
After previewing post I should have mentioned I'm not a big fan of the $20/month for PS/LR CC subscription, that will add up fast, much more the C1Pro with any 3rd party Stacking program.
So what's my issue? I'm a fan of Thomas Heaton, You Tube Landscape Photographer, used Lr/Ps and did a quick tutorial on Focus Stacking, 3 images, foreground rocks in seawater, mid ground surf with last image distance hill sky and stone church. He demonstrated how to basic adjust exposure in LR and apply to all 3, then import into PS and do the stacking and cleaning with masks, then back to LR for a bit of clarity. it was published Oct 17 2017.
I also have watched tutorials on HDR or stacking of exposure, +/- 3 and 0. This I have done this in the past and like the effect.
With C1Pro I would need another software tool to do stacking and that's a disadvantage. C1Pro looks to be a great studio tool, tether etc. Sessions are great for "projects", sharing, moving from workstation to workstation, getting assistance or feedback.
Am I missing something? Do you Landscape types miss stacking? Or do you "get it right at time of shooting" (everytime?) and not deal with stacks? Digital makes stacking so easy and the effect so dynamic, why give that up or deal with hassles of additional tools. Maybe its me and its no big deal to use other tools then import TIFF I assume.
So that's it, my first post and I'm complaning, my rant is over and I'm interested in what others think. Oh and per the banner, I use as Mac, but not sure why that matters.
After previewing post I should have mentioned I'm not a big fan of the $20/month for PS/LR CC subscription, that will add up fast, much more the C1Pro with any 3rd party Stacking program.
0
-
I think you're just going to have to accept that certain tools work better at certain things. I suspect you have more than one lens for your camera, no? Same applies to software.
CO1 subscription is $20 per month.
LR/PS subscription can be as low as $9.99 per month.0 -
The reason that it is suggested to please indicate whether using Mac or Windows is that the operating systems have different methods and there are some things that are different between the two that affect the way that C1 can work with them, especially when considering coding "standards".
For may questions the answers for either OS may be the same but for some few things they are not. To know which OS you are using helps somewhat for Windows users like me to avoid answering questions in detail that would not apply.
The reverse is also true of course!
As for stacking, some application have it, some not.
Some have exposure stacking but maybe not focus stacking. It seems to be that it rather depends on what sort of general blending technology they have in their software portfolios. It probably helps if they core software on which the application has been built has some graphics processing (art work rather than photos) somewhere in its history but there are some application that are quite specialised and dedicated towards stacking/blending and often stitching too.
I suspect that Phase, historically, full expect their users to also be using other applications for specialist functions and so perhaps there is little to be gained from competing for screen time against existing work flows. At some point the mix of the user base and maybe decisions taken by other developers may suggest the time is right to include additional functionality like stacking (or any number of other features people ask for.)
Phase use their Support Case system to register, monitor and assess the level of interest in all the enhancement ideas that people have so the best option is to add your vote to the concept of "stacking" (for whatever purpose) by creating a Support Case and starting the Title Line with "Enhancement Request:"
Meanwhile other here who regularly perform stacking activity with various software may, hopefully, chime in to advise what they do.
That said and depending on your camera and the nature of the subject, there is potentially enough flexibility in a single RAW file to extract for possibly +2 and -2 on exposure to get a usable result. +/- 3 may be pushing things although some of the more recent cameras might be viable.
Focus stacking is a different matter of course. Phase Digital Back and XF camera system users have been able to "round trip" to Helicon Focus software since version 9.2. The camera system offer a focus stacking "image set" feature.
One potential concern for exposure stacking - especially for landscapes - is how to deal with movement of content in the image - tree branches for example. There is more the software specification and design/development skills needed to get a fulfilling and comprehensive product to the market and have it maintained and developed in the future than might at first be evident.
HTH.
Grant0 -
I've been testing Helicon and it's extraordinary. Not only does it allow you to create any depth of focus you wish, but it makes your lenses look like they're all Zeiss!
Phase MF back users have been able to round-trip to Helicon since version 9.0. This feature is way overdue for the rest of us non-Phase MF users.
D.
Ps. Another feature that is way overdue, and utterly bog-standard, is radial Gradient Masks. Off-topic, but...0 -
I too really miss the stacking feature. It's very useful in dealing with bursts of iamages (e.g. action photography), bracketting (e.g. HDR and focus stacking), and event photography (e.g. grouping images with similar content).
My Applescript skills have reached the point where I can write a stcking feature for COP in Applescript, and I think this will be my next project. I can see two general approaches to the problem, Haven't decided yet which one I shall choose.
I will likely share it in the Scripting forum, as I have done for my scripts to find collections where an image is located, and to find images which are not in any user collection. Unfortunately this will not be much use for Windows users.
I will use one or two IPTC Metadata fields to store stacking information, any comments on which IPTC metadata fields to avoid using would be helpful.0
投稿コメントは受け付けていません。
コメント
4件のコメント