メインコンテンツへスキップ

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived.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

Why is there a dust spot tool limitation?

Kip Vaughan
One of the things I use editing software for is to edit film pictures that have dust spots on them. I sometimes enlarge these photos to be far beyond their original size which makes any spots they once had to be far bigger than they originally were. This project is pretty straight forward using Affinity Photo since I have an unlimited editing limit with tools like the in-painting tool. What I don't understand is why Affinity can have no limit but C1, a product that costs over six times as much money, has a very small spot editing limit? I can't imagine that reason being because of some hardware limit given the very high hardware configurations we have today. Why can't the new version of C1 be on par with a $50 product?
0

コメント

8件のコメント

日付 投票
  • Robert Whetton
    So are you editing the RAW file with Affinity or has it already been rendered out?
    0
  • Kip Vaughan
    What I meant to compare was how the two products both do this basic task. Affinity allows me to repair as many dust spots as I have while C1 has a small limit. I don't understand why. In this case I am not dealing with raw files as they are photos which were originally shot with a film camera (hence why I am dealing with dust on the prints.)
    0
  • Emory Dunn
    The two tools handle dust and spot removal in very different ways. Capture One's spot removal will always be "correct" even if adjustments are made later. Affinity (or Photoshop) are filling in spots with actual pixels, so if you modify the color of the base layer later none of the spot removal will match.

    I'm not sure why that would necessarily limit how many spots you can remove, but it might have something to do with it.
    0
  • Paul Steunebrink
    [quote="NNN636934704713702443" wrote:
    (...)
    What I don't understand is why Affinity can have no limit but C1, a product that costs over six times as much money, has a very small spot editing limit?

    Just for the record, as far as I know you can have 100 spot corrections per image in Capture One. So far for the 'very small spot limit'.

    Your comparison on price regarding a single feature does not add up in my opinion. They are so completely different tools each with a different toolset and only some similarities.

    In case you scan negatives, good scanning software has decent dust removal functionality. That would be my focus. That is their strength.
    0
  • Robert Whetton
    [quote="NNN636934704713702443" wrote:
    I am not dealing with raw files as they are photos which were originally shot with a film camera (hence why I am dealing with dust on the prints.)

    Removing a spot/dust on a RAW image takes a little more processing power than correcting a few pixels, hence the 100 limit (probably a RAM thing)
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="Bobtographer" wrote:
    [quote="NNN636934704713702443" wrote:
    I am not dealing with raw files as they are photos which were originally shot with a film camera (hence why I am dealing with dust on the prints.)

    Removing a spot/dust on a RAW image takes a little more processing power than correcting a few pixels, hence the 100 limit (probably a RAM thing)



    I suspect that the general feeling is also that if one has this much work to do on dust/spots the chances are the PS/Affinity or whatever would be part of the workflow anyway.

    That said the Affinity Blemish removal tool seems to be mostly using cloning from another part of the image (Original, unadjusted?) where as for the Spot tool C1 attempt so work with data local to the point one is trying to 'fix'.

    So probably mostly much the same effect but from a somewhat different approach philosophy.

    That may make a difference.

    Another consideration is that C1 offers the potential to map sensor dust as part of an LCC correction file and apply that to multiple images as an alternative to using the spot tool.

    That would be the equivalent, at least conceptually, of correcting spots when scanning and is potentially a better approach for time saving that using the spot correction tool.

    That said I fully accept that this subject will continue to be discussed on a regular basis with differences of opinion expressed!


    Grant
    0
  • Kip Vaughan
    [quote="emorydunn" wrote:
    The two tools handle dust and spot removal in very different ways. Capture One's spot removal will always be "correct" even if adjustments are made later. Affinity (or Photoshop) are filling in spots with actual pixels, so if you modify the color of the base layer later none of the spot removal will match.


    I haven't noticed that in my own workflow. I just did a very extensive spot edit with hundreds of edits and I remember making edits to the larger picture during that time yet I didn't notice the spotted areas looking any different then the non-spotted areas.

    [quote="SFA" wrote:

    I suspect that the general feeling is also that if one has this much work to do on dust/spots the chances are the PS/Affinity or whatever would be part of the workflow anyway.


    It doesn't seem like I would have to keep leaving the initial tool so much to do the most basic of edits.
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    That said the Affinity Blemish removal tool seems to be mostly using cloning from another part of the image (Original, non-adjusted?) where as for the Spot tool C1 attempt so work with data local to the point one is trying to 'fix'.


    I never really use the blemish tool. The in-painting tool seems to do a good job without me having to continually sample new areas of the image.

    [quote="Bobtographer" wrote:
    Removing a spot/dust on a RAW image takes a little more processing power than correcting a few pixels, hence the 100 limit (probably a RAM thing)


    Usually there is a way to adjust for the amount of processor power or ram a user has. I often only use half the 64GB of ram in my computer.

    [quote="Paul_Steunebrink" wrote:
    Your comparison on price regarding a single feature does not add up in my opinion. They are so completely different tools each with a different toolset and only some similarities.

    In case you scan negatives, good scanning software has decent dust removal functionality. That would be my focus. That is their strength.


    But is Affinity Photo or Photoshop really completely different from C1? There is quite a bit of overlap and functionality from the programs gets moved over all the time. The comparison on price wasn't for just a single feature, I could start listing off many things Affinity can do including a full drawing program, full layout program and photo editor for half the price of C1 ($150) that then gets years of free updates. I am not necessarily opposed to spending $300 or $400 but it much cheaper software is doing much more. Of course there are good parts to Capture One it just seems to be falling a bit behind overall in my opinion.
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="NNN636934704713702443" wrote:


    But is Affinity Photo or Photoshop really completely different from C1? There is quite a bit of overlap and functionality from the programs gets moved over all the time. The comparison on price wasn't for just a single feature, I could start listing off many things Affinity can do including a full drawing program, full layout program and photo editor for half the price of C1 ($150) that then gets years of free updates. I am not necessarily opposed to spending $300 or $400 but it much cheaper software is doing much more. Of course there are good parts to Capture One it just seems to be falling a bit behind overall in my opinion.


    PS and Affinity are pretty much the same sort of products and come from a source with graphics editing at its core with scanned negatives added and then jpgs for digital camera.

    Later some RAW conversion applications were attached. In Adobe's case they also added Lightroom to fill in some gaps and add some DAM capability aimed at photo libraries.


    C1 started out, afaik, as a RAW converter for the Phase families of photographic hardware.

    Some further editing abilities were soon added to make it more generally useful to users who might also have non-Phase hardware. It started to have a life of its own and then Catalogues were added giving more DAM capability than was originally available without using a companion application.

    So the comparison of C1 with the whole functionality of Affinity or PS is not really useful for an assessment of future direction.

    As a part of a complete photographer's software toolkit discussing what it offers compared to other RAW converters is valid of course. But then one has to decide where everything ends up considering functionality, speed and image quality, etc., in relation to one's personal preferences and even needs. That may result in large differences of opinion depending upon who you talk to.

    All very interesting though.


    Grant
    0

投稿コメントは受け付けていません。