ACR vs/or C1-Pro is one preferred?

[carlos diaz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

First, as a new member of about a month, I would like to extend a personal thank you for all of the advice and goodwill from the membership of this forum. It has allowed a rather smooth transittion into the use and appreciation of my M8. The "conversations and debates" have been invaluable.........for the most part!

 

So beyond that, I am hoping for feedback ("next year" would be just fine) pro or con, regarding an investment in Capture One Pro. Of course I have CS2 but is ACR really enough? I am just at the end of my 30 day trial with C1-Pro and really have not used either program enough to be able to make an educated comparision. Some, on this forum, have spoken very highly of both C1-Pro and Raw Developer and maybe it's a simple matter of workflo preference. Any and all opinions and advice is appreciated!

 

and Happy New Year!!!!!

[adan]

I'll be interested to see what C1 users have to say, as well - since I tried it and saw no particular improvement in image quality, and ran into a lot of kludgy, non-intuitive workflow issues compared to ACR (with which, admittedly, I have a year's experience).

 

Things like - C1 (LE, as shipped with the M8) kept saving new versions of each picture at 10 Mbytes a pop, rather than simply saving whatever changes I made to settings such as WB, profile, lens correction, etc. in the metadata of the original .dng file (which is what ACR does). And providing no place (that I could see) to generate and save my own camera color profiles, which meant there was no simple one-click way to get the color I wanted from my M8 (as there is in ACR).

[Jamie Roberts]

Andy--

 

I don't know precisely about C1 LE, since I use Pro, but the C1 Pro version has a true color editor. You need to launch that, make changes, and then you can actually write out a modified ICM profile for your particular M8.

 

I don't do my edits there, but for minor global changes it's quite powerful.

 

In my view, C1 has better overall tonality and colour than ACR, and better workflow tools for handling a very large number of files at a time (250+). You simply apply all your settings at once to whatever files you have in your collection. You can save the individual settings (for instance, if you like particular curves).

 

C1 also has finer output and noise control than ACR, as well as, IMO, better shadow detail almost across the board. Oh--and you can actually apply an input profile, which is a deal-breaker for me and ACR (you just can't do it in ACR, though you can tweak controls).

[pascal_meheut]

The difference is important and here is an example. ACR is right picture and increase the chromatic aberration for instance.

The colors are also totally wrong unless you use a specific profile.

 

C1 workflow can be surprising at first but by reading the documentation and learning some keyboard shortcuts, it becomes much efficient than ACR.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Andy--

 

I don't know precisely about C1 LE, since I use Pro, but the C1 Pro version has a true color editor. You need to launch that, make changes, and then you can actually write out a modified ICM profile for your particular M8.

 

I don't do my edits there, but for minor global changes it's quite powerful.

 

In my view, C1 has better overall tonality and colour than ACR, and better workflow tools for handling a very large number of files at a time (250+). You simply apply all your settings at once to whatever files you have in your collection. You can save the individual settings (for instance, if you like particular curves).

 

C1 also has finer output and noise control than ACR, as well as, IMO, better shadow detail almost across the board. Oh--and you can actually apply an input profile, which is a deal-breaker for me and ACR (you just can't do it in ACR, though you can tweak controls).

 

 

I pretty much am a dead in the wool C1 fan but right now without a better profile for the M8 and the use of the IR filter it's just not cutting it without some global changes. So been playing with Raw converter Mac only and really like that. ACR color right now is pretty good with the M8 but i also think it is knocking the shoulder and the toe off and not getting the range of C1. So right now i have that internal fight which one i want to use right now but at the end of the day the best for workflow for me is C1

[gesper]

I have a Nikon D200 as well as an M8, and have experience with C1, ACR (including new CS3 Beta version), DxO, and Capture NX. For the M8, C1 gets me the best look the fastest, hands down. I like the potential of the new CS3/ACR, and Capture NX for the Nikon, but still fall back to C1 for the M8.

[woodyspedden]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a Nikon D200 as well as an M8, and have experience with C1, ACR (including new CS3 Beta version), DxO, and Capture NX. For the M8, C1 gets me the best look the fastest, hands down. I like the potential of the new CS3/ACR, and Capture NX for the Nikon, but still fall back to C1 for the M8.

 

My preference has been for the C1 Pro because I believe it renders the colors more accurately than any other converter. Also it has a very intuitive workflow and handles the 1DsMkII, Nikon D2X, DMR and M8, i.e. all my bodies, equally well. My biggest complaint is that there is no lens correction module and my understanding is that will be fixed in version 4.0 due out after the first of the year.

 

I just bought a MacBook Pro, my first Macintosh in over ten years. I bought a copy of Iridient Digital's Raw Developer upon advice of some friends and have been very very impressed with its' performance. Low cost ($99) and fully featured except for no lens correction capability. Very easy to change both input and output profiles which is great for M8 users since new input profiles are being developed every day as solutions to some of the more well known M8 problems. (e.g. Jamie Roberts magenta suppression profiles)

 

Woody Spedden

[carlos diaz]

Andy--

 

I don't know precisely about C1 LE, since I use Pro, but the C1 Pro version has a true color editor. You need to launch that, make changes, and then you can actually write out a modified ICM profile for your particular M8.

 

I don't do my edits there, but for minor global changes it's quite powerful.

 

In my view, C1 has better overall tonality and colour than ACR, and better workflow tools for handling a very large number of files at a time (250+). You simply apply all your settings at once to whatever files you have in your collection. You can save the individual settings (for instance, if you like particular curves).

 

C1 also has finer output and noise control than ACR, as well as, IMO, better shadow detail almost across the board. Oh--and you can actually apply an input profile, which is a deal-breaker for me and ACR (you just can't do it in ACR, though you can tweak controls).

 

Jamie, Woody, Guy and others thanks,

From the responses thus far, it sounds as though C1-Pro has advantages in terms of general areas like workflow, handling/processing larger quantity of files and it does sound more intuitive overall. It appears easier and more efficient, if that is a fair statement for me to make.

 

On the other hand comments like "better overall tonality and color", "renders the color more accurately" seem (with all due respect) in actuality subjective. I wonder if some may have comparison images, from tests they have done.

 

Jamie, you also state that C1-Pro allows for "finer output and noise control" and "better shadow detail". I may just not understand what your saying but what do you mean by finer output? and again, might you have examples that support the above? Again my appreciation to those more technically minded than I who have taken the time to make a more formal and scientific comparison between "raw developer" software.

Carlos

[tjv]

In my limited experience with the M8 and dealing with it's DNG files, I've found that C1 by far exceeds ACR in terms of rendering smooth colour transitions between highlight and shadows and overall colour. I can't explain why, but ACR, like someone else mentioned in this thread, seems to knock some important info out of the file. Also, and this is a big problem for me, every time I open a DNG in ACR it does some kind of compression to the file, cutting it down from 10 to about 6 mb. After that moment I can't open it in anything else but ACR. And who knows what data is being lost in the process.

I've downloaded the PRO version of C1 to see if it's worth buying. So far, except for a few things like defining an input profile on a file by file basis, I can't see too much of a difference. Something is telling me I'm missing something here. What exactly am I going to get if I pay the $450 odd to upgrade to it from LE?

From looking at the Phase One web site and reading the above it seems I'm mostly gaining flexability in workflow and the option of file tuning profiles for my own camera.

Ideas?

 

Cheers,

Tim

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Tim here is a feature comparision between the 2 . This should be a sticky

 

Phase One - Digital camera software - Digital SLR - Capture One

[carlos diaz]

In my limited experience with the M8 and dealing with it's DNG files, I've found that C1 by far exceeds ACR in terms of rendering smooth colour transitions between highlight and shadows and overall colour. I can't explain why, but ACR, like someone else mentioned in this thread, seems to knock some important info out of the file. Also, and this is a big problem for me, every time I open a DNG in ACR it does some kind of compression to the file, cutting it down from 10 to about 6 mb. After that moment I can't open it in anything else but ACR. And who knows what data is being lost in the process.

I've downloaded the PRO version of C1 to see if it's worth buying. So far, except for a few things like defining an input profile on a file by file basis, I can't see too much of a difference. Something is telling me I'm missing something here. What exactly am I going to get if I pay the $450 odd to upgrade to it from LE?

From looking at the Phase One web site and reading the above it seems I'm mostly gaining flexability in workflow and the option of file tuning profiles for my own camera.

Ideas?

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

Tim,

You ask some good questions.I haven't noticed the DNG to compressed file issue in ACR but maybe others can clear this up. As for the cost of upgrading to C1-Pro it is a bit pricey. I remember seeing in another thread that Sandisk was offering a slightly lower fee for C1 Pro when you purchased a 2 gig Utra-III card. I'll check into that...........

Carlos

[tjv]

Thanks Guy / Carlos.

 

Yeah, the thing that concerns me the most about ACR is the compression issue and cross companability for the long run. There are no options as far as I can see regarding turning this compression feature off.

 

As far as LE vs Pro is concerned, I'm wondering if it's even worth it since I'm opperating off a 14" Macbook. I do like having the option of the presets in the Pro version, even if what came with the trial version is rather limited. I suppose these custom sets are easy to add too, going towards justifying the Pro price tag.

 

I've only got about 100 DNG's to play with at the moment because my M8 got recalled by the New Zealand distributor only several days after I got it as they are handling the "upgrade" directly. When it gets back I'll try a few more practical tests in different applications. You guys in Europe / USA are lucky. In NZ it is impossible to get any form of IR cut filter without ordering from a Internet shop. The old motto of try before you buy can't exist here when dealing with "exotic" things like Leica's. That's why there forums are a valuable resource. They're a great place to ask questions and observe the results of others.

 

Thanks again,

Tim

[adan]

Since I piggybacked on Carlos' post, I'll say thanks for the responses as well.

 

Workflow: I find ACR's multiple-open-and-synchronize-settings and "previous conversion" button do fine for the limited batch-processing I do. But batch handling may be a good point in favor of C1 for those who need it.

 

BTW, I use Adobe Bridge, ACR and Photoshop CS2 as a "seamless unit" for all pictures. Find the image I want in Bridge - double click it (or them) and it/they open in ACR - do my RAW settings, hit the open button, and it (or they) open in Photoshop.

 

Smoothness and color accuracy: Without the ability to build my own profile, C1 LE is nowhere near as nice as ACR (carefully profiled by myself) for color accuracy - or at least getting the colors I want without significant Photoshop work afterwards. If the Pro version allows doing one's own profiles, that would be a plus. (Sorry, I'm just not interested in using the colors the Phase One, Leica, or Adobe engineers (or even Jamie, bless him!) think are right - only those that __I__ think are right). Smoothness of tonal and color transitions I will explore in more detail - I just registered my C1LE so I can continue experimenting with it.

 

DNG "compression" with ACR - This doesn't happen to me - my dngs are 10.1 Mbytes before AND after ACR has worked on them. Of course, I'm not doing any kind of "save" from ACR, just opening the image directly into Photoshop, and doing any "saves" from there.

 

I'm also not having compatability issues - at least C1 LE will open dngs that have also been opened by ACR. (?)

[tjv]

"DNG "compression" with ACR - This doesn't happen to me - my dngs are 10.1 Mbytes before AND after ACR has worked on them. Of course, I'm not doing any kind of "save" from ACR, just opening the image directly into Photoshop, and doing any "saves" from there.

 

I'm also not having compatability issues - at least C1 LE will open dngs that have also been opened by ACR. (?)"

 

Ok, now I'm really freaked out! I just can't seem to find anywhere that I could "uncheck" to stop this compression happening. Hmmmm.

As far as workflow is concerned, I agree with you. I really like the ability to work through Bridge and all it's other Adobe components. IMHO Bridge is the single best development for Adobe in years. And such a simple idea.

 

TIm

[steve_l]

If profiles are all you need from C1 Pro, don't forget the C1 trick someone mentioned here of installing C1 LE, then getting the trial version of C1 Pro, adding the profiles (Jamie's), and then returning to C1 LE, which will still have those new profiles available to it.

[gesper]

I agree with Andy that I have no trouble going back to C1 from ACR, but like him, I never "Save" in ACR (never necessary).

[KJB]

I've been happy with Adobe lightroom beta so far having become more familiar with it over the holidays. Much better than ACR (Adobe Bridge & CS2, no compression isues so far with lightroom) and closer to C1 but with many more bells and whistles like higher res previews that can go to 1:1 easily, fill light adjustments, vibrance, more user friendly interface (after you learn the layout), etc...

[adan]

Steve: I don't need canned profiles - I need the ability to create and control my own profiles.

 

tjv: I can't find any obvious control for compression either - mine just...doesn't. Windows or Mac?

 

Pascal: For color fringes I just use ACR's lens correction sliders (see attached image). In fact I have saved corrections for each of my lenses (except for the 50mm they all show some fringing without correction) so each is 1 click away. I can't find any lens correction tools in C1 LE - maybe the Pro version has them?

 

As to "smoothness" - I don't see any advantage to C1 in the second attachment - except perhaps for the highlights in the red ring at the bottom. Everything else looks smoother in ACR (note inside of horn, e.g.). If I knocked down the color noise more in C1, the woman's blue-green coat just turned gray. Which is why I need to be able to control shadow tint (more green with the M8) and hue/saturation for the RGB primaries, not just white-balance controls.

 

Not that one image proves anything. However, my impression is that C1 may have "smoother" defaults, but that ACR can be just as smooth if one knows how to drive it.

 

I did discover that just opening one folder of images with C1LE and processing ONE image not only left me with FIVE 30Mbyte tif files eating up space, but also 350 Mbytes of assorted previews and settings files and so on stashed away in a "Capture One Default" sub-folder. What a disk hog!! Fortunately Bridge revealed the offending space waster - and I trashed it.

[tjv]

Hey Aden,

I'm using a Mac. Basically, if I open a DNG in ACR but quit without touching any of the sliders the file size remains at 10meg. If, however, I press open so that I can view the converted image in photoshop, the file size drops a least a third. If I do some adjustments then press "done" to go back to bridge the file size again drops. Bizzare. Do you think this has anything to do with the fact I've chosen to save all date inside the DNG rather than sidecar .XMP files in the preferences menu? Can't be sure. I've also read Mr. Fraser's (RIP) great Camera Raw and CS2 books but it doesn't say anything about it either. AAAAARGH!

 

Thanks,

Tim

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Englander]

The preference for whether or not a DNG is compressed is controlled by the ACR "save" button and seems to influence how DNGs are saved throughout the Adobe environment, with or without Bridge involvement. At the bottom of the panel that appears in ACR when you click "save" is a format dialogue that gives you the option to save as Digital Negative (DNG) and also a box to check and UNCHECK depending if you want compression. Good luck,

 

Joe