Capture 1 the new and great.

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm a bit put off by some of the English-language tutorials. Example: Keystone Correction Tool.

 

Why an Australian accent? (Just a question, not intending disrespect. Does that pass for "standard English"? Must be a case of "Well, here in Denmark, we like it." I don't want to cost anyone a job; sounds like a nice guy with a pleasant voice, but not the accent I'd expect from Denmark. Just takes a moment to get over it, but an interesting choice.)

 

The name "Keystone Correction" is wrong. A keystone is used to lock the two sides of a stone arch, and has a single shape: wider at top than at bottom. You get "keystoning" when projecting, not when shooting. (Check Wikipedia or dictionary on this.) In fact, after naming the tool "Keystone Correction Tool," the initial description says it can "eliminate perspective distortion," closer but still in error because this isn't in any sense "distortion," but derives from the definition of perspective itself. "Perspective Adjustment" or "Perspective Correction" would be more accurate.

 

The Keystone Correction Tool video even suggests using Photoshop's Content Aware Fill (1:36). They're telling me how great the C1 version of perspective correction is, and suddenly they direct me to the competition! Isn't that considered bad style in any business? Suggestion: re-shoot the building so that this 'little snag' doesn't occur, and avoid mentioning the more versatile competitor. (In fact, it's not uncommon to run into this kind of thing when tweaking perspective, and it hadn't occurred to me to try Content Aware Fill. )

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Oh, well. At least PhaseOneDK (not sure I like that moniker) promises me (0:15 - 0:21) that the "keystone correction tool ... can turn almost any image into an architectural masterpiece." Wowsers!

 

That's just bad writing in any language.

 

I have a hard time trying to learn about the program with such slip-ups. Just me, I know; none of this says anything about the application itself.

 

 

But if these tutorials are designed to show me why I should buy Capture One 6, they're missing the mark in my case.

[erl]

Howard, I'm with you on the C1 help files in particular, but any software I have ever encountered is not good at explaining the use of their product. In the case of C1 6Pro, I believe the software to be good, but rarely ever consult the help videos. The only accents I have encountered are American, definitely not Aussie.

 

"Keystoning" is generally accepted as a descriptive term to explain the convergence of verticals in an optically formed image. The use of the term in naming the tool in C1, I think is about as correct as the use of terms such as 'portrait' and 'landscape' in the computerized world we live in to describe what is really vertical and horizontal! Portraits and landscapes, at least in my cameras can both be either vertical or horizontal.

 

We must learn to live with technical people 'misusing' artistic descripters I fear.

 

P.S. A keystone is in fact that wedge shaped stone at the top of an arch to apply outward pressure on inward leaning stones of the arch such that the whole arrangement does not need a prop to support it. It really is not related to the problem of converging verticals with which we are familiar.

[ho_co]

Erl--I agree grudgingly in regard to "portrait" and "landscape." On the forum I once referred to holding the camera 'vertically rather than horizontally' and someone didn't understand the reference.

 

You and I agree on what a keystone is and how it's used, and that it isn't related to our problem of converging verticals.

 

My guess is that (through laziness) the term "keystoning" entered the post-processing field from the digital projection business, where it actually applies: When one tilts a projector upward toward a screen above projector level, the top of the image does spread out just like a keystone; "keystoning correction" is then applied in the projector or the projector software.

 

The mere fact that a term is often misused ("generally accepted") doesn't mean it isn't misused. And improper reference to "keystoning" bugs me.

 

BTW, I have calmed down since the previous post. I tried a couple of the other C1 6 introductory tutorials, and the one on "Keystoning Correction" was the only one I found offensive.

 

 

As to the accent of the speaker, I'll take your word that he's not Aussie, but please take mine that he's no Ammurrican. (I hesitated about assigning him to you guys, but couldn't find a better match. Maybe he's Hawaiian. )

 

 

I hope you get your computer woes straightened soon.

[Jamie Roberts]

Howard, I'm glad you've calmed down

 

Keystone correction for the keystone effect is exactly what C1 applies. Yes, it comes from projection:

 

Keystone effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

but it's obviously applicable to the inverse: pointing a lens and capturing something in a way in which induces a similar distortion when shown.

 

Language changes all the time, and jargons even more so. You may not like it (and I don't all the time, and the older I get) but it doesn't make it wrong

 

Oh--Photoshop isn't competition for Capture One either, even if some of their functions overlap. It's a rare photographer with a RAW workflow that doesn't actually own both a RAW converter and, of course, Photoshop.

 

As for Peter Eastway's Australian accent, well, that's because he's from Australia! He's a genuinely great landscape photographer, and a genuinely great guy (I've met him a number of times at WPPI, where he always cleans up in the landscape category).

 

Phase One is extremely lucky to have someone with his photographic expertise and achievements showing off RAW conversion techniques. If he says something identifiably Australian (which I've never heard him do) or use the word "Keystoning" I'm prepared to forgive him that just because of the wealth of information he imparts (see aforesaid "great guy" statement).

 

Bio:

http://www.panasonic.com.au/products/information.cfm?detailsID=414&contextID=6

 

Portfolio:

Peter Eastway Portfolio

[ho_co]

Thanks, Jamie.

 

Glad you say the speaker is Australian; my belief on that was wavering. I don't know the work or name of Peter Eastway, and don't remember seeing identifying information on the 'C16P What's New' page. Just heard him. And had enough interest to watch more of the demos, as I said above.

 

I still say one doesn't mention another brand when pitching a product. I understand the advice, but the flash went through my mind, "Well, if I'm going to use the Content Aware Fill command, why don't I just start in Photoshop?" I doubt that I'm the only one who thought that.

 

I agree that the transference of the term 'keystoning' is occurring, and am aware of the Wikipedia article. Indeed, my posted recommended "check[ing] Wikipedia or dictionary on this." I think the article you mention is the same one I pointed another forum member to a year or so ago when making the same usage point I'm making now.

 

I've never heard people refer to railroad tracks or buildings "keystoning" at infinity. As for "obviously applicable to the inverse," I don't think you'd accept my saying "When that happens, just insert the battery and then put it back in."

 

I've had a bit of training in linguistics; I know that things change, that I'm picky and that I err. But to me, "perspective correction" is a better match for the tool than "keystone adjustment."

 

And don't get me started on all the stupid names Photoshop and Lightroom use; I'm likely to vent my ire on those on the forum as well.

 

But I do appreciate your response to my diatribe and your offering solid pointers to sorting it. Or is should that be 'stuffing it'?

[erl]

Ah hah! The Aussie is revealed, thanks to Jamie.

 

Howard, you were right. Of course that one video is one I have not seen so just proves you (me!)_ can't generalize. With any luck the rest are US guys, maybe. Or maybe I was just plain wrong!!

 

Peter Eastway is a big name here in Oz. Very commercially successful too. I find some of his work a bit heavy on PP, but it is beautifully executed. I think I would be proud if I could achieve his results consitently. No surprise he is being exploited by Phase One.

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks, Erl. I don't think the page where I found his contributions mentions him (Mittelformatkamerasystem und RAW-Konverter Software). And the sound was just a surprise, nothing more; very pleasant voice, very general accent, not over-the-top.

 

Just curious--

Anyone else bothered by CaptureOneDK as a logo or trademark? (image posted above)

 

Might as well mention another peculiarly-named function: How about "Puppet Warp" in PSCS5? No way to guess what that's supposed to do from the name IMHO, but when you discover what it does, it seems well named.

[Guest mc_k]

...I agree that the transference of the term 'keystoning' is occurring, and am aware of the Wikipedia article. Indeed, my posted recommended "check[ing] Wikipedia or dictionary on this." I think the article you mention is the same one I pointed another forum member to a year or so ago when making the same usage point I'm making now...

 

The effect of tilting a camera up or down is called "keystone distortion"; check something a little more scholarly.

 

I'm not sure how Wikipedia works, but apparently anyone can write the articles, and it shows. I know everyone cites Wikipedia, but they shouldn't.

[erl]

The effect of tilting a camera up or down is called "keystone distortion"; check something a little more scholarly.

 

I'm not sure how Wikipedia works, but apparently anyone can write the articles, and it shows. I know everyone cites Wikipedia, but they shouldn't.

 

The problem with any written text, it has been written by somebody, often more than one. Credibility is what one needs to look for. Some quite famous best selling texts are, in my view a bit dubious in places. After all, what do I know about the writers of the Bible or the Koran? At some point, trust needs to be tempered with credibility. Wikipedia is no exception. Clearly it contains some good as well as not so good information. Canning it out of hand is not sensible, but believing it blindly is also foolish.

[ho_co]

The effect of tilting a camera up or down is called "keystone distortion"; check something a little more scholarly....

I think you may be missing the point, _k.

 

"The effect of tilting a camera up or down is called 'keystone distortion,'" is it?

 

Well, now, that's the reason I mentioned it in the first place, isn't it?

 

That's where the question begins. Your answer takes us back to Humpty Dumpty: "A word means what I want it to, neither more nor less." Cute when Dodgson writes it, but dumb when someone uses a circular definition as an argument.

 

So tell me, when did "keystone distortion" enter the OED with that definition?

 

But you are right, the usage doesn't yield to scholarly study; it's sloppy and wrong both grammatically and from the standpoint of actuality. As you say, one should find "something a little more scholarly" to check. Just let wrong usages lie.

 

Put simply, you make an assertion with no citations. I made a complaint with examples and explanations.

 

Good luck to you in learning the language!

[ho_co]

... I know everyone cites Wikipedia, but they shouldn't.

Okay, let's forget the bad grammar.

 

You say here that no one should quote Wikipedia. Thanks. Absolutely BRILLIANT.

 

Since you disallow Wikipedia, I'm sure you'll list for us those sources you do accept, won't you?

 

So far, you seem to reject a source when it disagrees with what you think it should say. Rather a limited view, wouldn't you say?

 

 

Have you checked the accuracy of Wikipedia? Do you know how it compares with, say, Encyclopædia Britannica? (Oh, sorry. I forgot your 'monographs only' rule. I guess since the latter is also written by many people, you'll say it has no authority. Still waiting for your list of acceptable sources.)

 

But if you were to admit the comparison of Wikipedia with the Encyclopædia Britannica, you'd be aware that the accuracy of the two has been compared by experts in various fields. The finding was that both show about the same number of errors per page, four.

 

 

 

_k, Please cite a couple reference works which hold, as you do, that "The effect of tilting a camera up or down is called 'keystone distortion.'" As I mentioned above, I've checked several and haven't seen any that agree with you.

[Guest mc_k]

...You get "keystoning" when projecting, not when shooting...

 

Here, this is from p. 3 of the standard book on photographic optics:

 

"If by accident or design we hold the camera during exposure in such a way that the film plane is not vertical, then vertical lines in the object will appear to lean toward each other in the photograph (keystone distortion)."

 

Same usage in the other book I checked. I was not trying to define the term, but tell you that it applied to more than just projectors.

 

Anyway my criticism was directed at Wikipedia, not you.

[Guest mc_k]

...

But if you were to admit the comparison of Wikipedia with the Encyclopædia Britannica, you'd be aware that the accuracy of the two has been compared by experts in various fields. The finding was that both show about the same number of errors per page, four.

...

 

Why would you want to reference something that has four errors per page?

 

The article you are citing has one footnote, to another web page. Is this more like a professional article or a term paper?

 

There is a professional literature--books, articles, pop. magazines--why not use it?

[ThorkilB]

There are a ton of LR samples out there that show how it colours things, and I know, Thorsten, that you have a DMR to content with too

 

I'll try to get to some from the new C1 in the next couple of days.

 

As for sharpening, C1 supports a lot of different sharpening options (and they always have). I don't personally touch the defaults much, because I tend to resize and re-profile, then sharpen, in PS for printing anyway.

 

Jamie...does it mean that you would, perhaps, come up with 2 examples done with LR3 and C1 6?. I would like to see this… so please

Sorry for my bad English (but I'm Dane.....)..(even though I should apologize more hefty for the bad result of COP 15 in Copenhagen, which means that we all in a short moment will sit with our bare feet’s 1 m under sea-level...and still discussing bad pronouncing, bad spelling or even bad tutorials...)(but keep smiling though, tomorrow will be even worse..)

Thorkil

[ho_co]

... from p. 3 of the standard book on photographic optics .... Same usage in the other book I checked....

 

Thanks, _k. What are those books? I've quoted sources you reject. You've cited sources without even naming them.

 

The usage seems to depend on one's sources. For example, the term "keystoning" doesn't appear in the index to Scott Kelby's Lightroom 3 book.

 

You're obviously used to hearing the term used that way, so whether it's 'right' or 'wrong' doesn't strike you. I don't hear the folks I travel with refer to "keystoning" this way and am bothered by it.

 

I'm not arguing that the usage isn't there, but I am complaining (uselessly, perhaps ) against incorrect usage.

[Guest mc_k]

Thanks, _k. What are those books? I've quoted sources you reject. You've cited sources without even naming them.

 

The usage seems to depend on one's sources. For example, the term "keystoning" doesn't appear in the index to Scott Kelby's Lightroom 3 book.

 

You're obviously used to hearing the term used that way, so whether it's 'right' or 'wrong' doesn't strike you. I don't hear the folks I travel with refer to "keystoning" this way and am bothered by it.

 

I'm not arguing that the usage isn't there, but I am complaining (uselessly, perhaps ) against incorrect usage.

 

No, I'm sure you're mistaken. Check, for example, Steve Simmons, Using the View Camera, which may be easier to find: "The tilting of the camera means that the plane of the film and the plane of the building are no longer parallel, which will cause a keystone effect..." (p.52).

 

Sorry about the original post.

[Guest mc_k]

Now if I could only find a book on C1 ... ???

[ho_co]

If you find one, let me know.

 

LuLa sells a 5-1/2 hour Capture One 5 Tutorial video. I haven't watched it, but it's interesting to see someone as partial to Lightroom as Michael Reichmann doing Capture One training. At one point (still in the days of Lightroom 2 if I'm not mistaken) he did admit that C1 produced better results with some cameras than the Adobe products.

[erl]

Now if I could only find a book on C1 ... ???

 

That is real wishful thinking!

 

I'm sure there is a whole lot more in that software than I have yet discovered. Would be nice be 'pointed' at it.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[JHAG]

anyone using c1 on a macbook pro? i do and find it very unstable -- that is it crashes a lot. no such problem with ps or lr. also find it the dng files take a much longer time to come through in c1 vs lr3.

 

You must have a system problem somewhere.

I had many crashes with C1 4 under L and SL with my previous iMac and Mac Book Pro.

Since C1 5 and SL on both machines (iMac 2.8 i7 and Mac Book Pro 17 2.8), never ever had a problem since about 4 months.

You may try an archive-install of your system + a complete cleaning with Onyx.

WIll take about 1 hour and might be worth it.

 

Besides, C1 5 with both Mac is real fast.

 

Now about that colour debate, to me (and Jamie knows it, we discussed it), the best RAW processor by far, for colour management, is Raw Developper.

But its abilities for picture management and fine tweaking are limited