Working with Graphic Tablets in C1
I recently bought a Graphic Tablet for retouching/post production and I'm getting pretty good results in Photoshop, it feels really intuitive.
When it comes to Capture One it just doesn't feel as intuitive - when I check the option to control the brush size via stylus pressure it radically jumps from small (and rather hard) to big and quite soft - and it seems to affect the opacity setting as well..
Is there any way to improve it or am I doing something wrong?
When it comes to Capture One it just doesn't feel as intuitive - when I check the option to control the brush size via stylus pressure it radically jumps from small (and rather hard) to big and quite soft - and it seems to affect the opacity setting as well..
Is there any way to improve it or am I doing something wrong?
0
-
what tablet are using ? wacom ? my intous works fine only issue phase one ignores requests about full wacom support including pressure sensitivity for density. 0 -
Yes, a Wacom Intuos Pro M - as I said it works fine with all applications and does a great job with retouching stuff in Photoshop.
The only problem I have is with brush size in CaptureOne, where it tends to react very unpredictably.0 -
do you have the latest driver for your os ? do hav setup the pen for c1 as a individuell preset ? 0 -
Yes, the drivers and firmware are up to date - as is everything else on my systems. Both running High Sierra (MacBook Pro and Mac Pro) and both show a similar behaviour.
I only set up the Express Keys as individual presets for CaptureOne, the pen itself is the same for all applications.
Is there a setting for CaptureOne that you would recommend?0 -
sorry can't help, played a little with c1 and you are right seems things got worse. I can't see a change in softness / density but it seems from the 1000 or more steps the wacom offers c1 uses only 3 0 -
[quote="Ian3" wrote:
Have you seen this blog entry?
Ian
" Using Pen Pressure
Depending on the model, Wacom tablets are sensitive to the amount of pressure you place on the pad. You can link that pressure sensitivity to the size of your brush in Capture One Pro’s brush settings panel:
fig11_body
Personally, I am not skilled enough to make this work well, and find it faster to just bring up the settings panel to finesse brush size as I work. Also, with the addition of Flow control (The importance of Flow control) it doesn’t make sense to link Pen Pressure to Opacity right now. "
sorry but...this is beyond stupid and explains why p1 can not get wacom support right, they are unable to understand the main reason for a wacom and no it is not to have all those fancy menus on your screen. unbelievable !0 -
Well this is a bit disheartening.
Even though I bought the tablet mainly for use in Photoshop, I was hoping it would help me with getting more precise layers done in CaptureOne...but it seems even CaptureOne professionals can't get it to work correctly and the fact that they even publish it on the PhaseOne-blog speaks volumes about the need for an update.
I really hope they are going to address this in a future update.0 -
High end work where smooth masks are needed is done in arc / photoshop anyway so maybe they see no need to improve support and for marketing purposes it is propably enough. 0 -
Well, of course Photoshop etc are the most important tools for fine retouching - but for adjusting and balancing skin tones and other local adjustments (brightness, contrast,...) CaptureOne is simply the best solution (for me).
If only they did a better job of interpreting input signals..0 -
I would love to see full wacom support because I prefer to do as much as possible in c1 before going to photoshop but I have no problem to use other software too the adobe masking & painting tools are far superior. we wacom user are only a tiny fraction of the c1 user base not enough to make them care and the majority seem to prefer bumpy masks instead of smooth transitions 😉 0 -
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
I would love to see full wacom support because I prefer to do as much as possible in c1 before going to photoshop but I have no problem to use other software too the adobe masking & painting tools are far superior. we wacom user are only a tiny fraction of the c1 user base not enough to make them care and the majority seem to prefer bumpy masks instead of smooth transitions 😉
If you have problems with the Wacom implementation, please create a Support Case, so we can take a deeper look. We know that a lot of users are using Wacoms and we know first hand how useful it is as a tool.0 -
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
I would love to see full wacom support because I prefer to do as much as possible in c1 before going to photoshop but I have no problem to use other software too the adobe masking & painting tools are far superior. we wacom user are only a tiny fraction of the c1 user base not enough to make them care and the majority seem to prefer bumpy masks instead of smooth transitions 😉
If you have problems with the Wacom implementation, please create a Support Case, so we can take a deeper look. We know that a lot of users are using Wacoms and we know first hand how useful it is as a tool.
deeper look ? what is so difficult to understand that the most interesting feature a wacom offers is to control density with pressure ? wacom offers 2048 pressure levels for smooth painting, a waste if only used to change the brush size, no ?
we already had this discussions years ago with no effect so what is different now ? why is it impossible for phase one to simply go and implement this essential features like adobe or affinity.... you would make a lot of user happy !0 -
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
I would love to see full wacom support because I prefer to do as much as possible in c1 before going to photoshop but I have no problem to use other software too the adobe masking & painting tools are far superior. we wacom user are only a tiny fraction of the c1 user base not enough to make them care and the majority seem to prefer bumpy masks instead of smooth transitions 😉
If you have problems with the Wacom implementation, please create a Support Case, so we can take a deeper look. We know that a lot of users are using Wacoms and we know first hand how useful it is as a tool.
deeper look ? what is so difficult to understand that the most interesting feature a wacom offers is to control density with pressure ? wacom offers 2048 pressure levels for smooth painting, a waste if only used to change the brush size, no ?
we already had this discussions years ago with no effect so what is different now ? why is it impossible for phase one to simply go and implement this essential features like adobe or affinity.... you would make a lot of user happy !
Let's keep a proper tone here, shall we....
Nothing is impossible, but so far, other features have been deemed more useful to more people. You are most welcome to file a feature-request (through Support), so we can keep track of demand for further pressure-sensitivity functionality.
However, my main interest was not to get a missing feature, but your note on " bumpy masks". If you are experiencing that, please let us now in a Support case. That we can take a deeper look into0 -
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
[
Let's keep a proper tone here, shall we....
Nothing is impossible, but so far, other features have been deemed more useful to more people. You are most welcome to file a feature-request (through Support), so we can keep track of demand for further pressure-sensitivity functionality.
However, my main interest was not to get a missing feature, but your note on " bumpy masks". If you are experiencing that, please let us now in a Support case. That we can take a deeper look into
Thanks for your suggestions, but you are aware of the limitations it is your companys decision to not improve usability for
us wacom user since years, it does not need one more useless feature request. It is even sad that we need have this discussion !
I use c1 almost every day , my first version was 3 so I can say I have a lot of experience with capture one and I know the limitations very well. It is simply impossible to draw smooth masks with the same efficancy and resultes as it is possible with other software. flow is not a real replacment for density control with a wacom so it is nothing your support can fix.0 -
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
Thanks for your suggestions, but you are aware of the limitations it is your companys decision to not improve usability for
us wacom user since years, it does not need one more useless feature request. It is even sad that we need have this discussion !
I use c1 almost every day , my first version was 3 so I can say I have a lot of experience with capture one and I know the limitations very well. It is simply impossible to draw smooth masks with the same efficancy and resultes as it is possible with other software. flow is not a real replacment for density control with a wacom so it is nothing your support can fix.
Our Support team can indeed help you in the long run. They can add your vote to a Feature Request. The more votes a given feature get, the higher likelihood of product implementation.
Right now, not many at all have requested “pressure sensitivity for flowâ€, so your voice and vote is important.0 -
My vote would be an option to link pen pressure to opacity, because unlike stated in the blog post, I think it does make a lot of sense despite having flow control. 0 -
[quote="NN635800043462984933UL" wrote:
My vote would be an option to link pen pressure to opacity, because unlike stated in the blog post, I think it does make a lot of sense despite having flow control.
Again, please request so in message to our Support Team. That is the only way your request will be officially logged.0 -
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
[quote="NN635800043462984933UL" wrote:
My vote would be an option to link pen pressure to opacity, because unlike stated in the blog post, I think it does make a lot of sense despite having flow control.
Again, please request so in message to our Support Team. That is the only way your request will be officially logged.
Done, thank you! Hopefully I didn't confuse your "voting system", because I voted for "opacity" and "combined size + opacity" (the latter works great in Photoshop)0 -
the strength of a company is also reflected in the way they deal with request which only serve a small percentage of their user base. adobe, affinity and others see probably a value in supporting wacom user without compromises. if wacom support in this apps would have been based on voting i assume it would never had made it. sorry I see your suggestion to file a feature request only as a polite why to brush off my demand as your support brushes off anything they don't like to acknowledge too. there are very good rational reasons for a full wacom support in capture one but if you think this does not count but some votes in you un-transparent feature request system are more important - fine.
btw I can't believe you got many requests for linking luminous noise reduction with a kind of sharpening 😉0 -
[quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:
the strength of a company is also reflected in the way they deal with request which only serve a small percentage of their user base. adobe, affinity and others see probably a value in supporting wacom user without compromises. if wacom support in this apps would have been based on voting i assume it would never had made it. sorry I see your suggestion to file a feature request only as a polite why to brush off my demand as your support brushes off anything they don't like to acknowledge too. there are very good rational reasons for a full wacom support in capture one but if you think this does not count but some votes in you un-transparent feature request system are more important - fine.
btw I can't believe you got many requests for linking luminous noise reduction with a kind of sharpening 😉
Whether or not you want to improve your chances are up to you.
Support will accept your feature request.0
投稿コメントは受け付けていません。
コメント
21件のコメント