Ingo Posted March 8, 2016 Share #1 Posted March 8, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Have a look at this very interesting threat in the Phase One forum. http://forum.phaseone.com/En/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=22200&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&sid=b652e77a8bb28abfed9c367dfef9fab5 I'm a C1 user because I own a Phase One and would appreciate to have support for the SL in this software. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 8, 2016 Posted March 8, 2016 Hi Ingo, Take a look here Capture One - Profile for SL. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Joshua Lowe Posted March 9, 2016 Share #2 Posted March 9, 2016 No offense to those who enjoy using C1 but that is amateur hour stuff in those postings. Making the customer act as the intermediary between two companies that bicker like a couple of old hens? No thank you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted March 9, 2016 Share #3 Posted March 9, 2016 It seems like the SL just isn't much of a priority for Phase One. Or there's baggage between Phase One and Leica that is getting in the way. Adobe supports the SL, Apple supports it, Iridient Developer supports it. So do others ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted March 9, 2016 Share #4 Posted March 9, 2016 I've loaned Phase One my SL for a week. This should solve the problem. scott 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafikiphoto Posted March 9, 2016 Share #5 Posted March 9, 2016 I received the following reply from support today: "This is something we are currently working on and we will release it as soon as we can." Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjdrijfhout Posted March 15, 2016 Share #6 Posted March 15, 2016 Great, thank you Scott, on behalf of all SL/C1 users! Also through the C1 forum, PhaseOne now confirming that a profile will come 'quite soon' (http://forum.phaseone.com/En/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=22200&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&sid=cd1eeecd99ab5fcd326731ec7092c014&start=15). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trond Posted March 17, 2016 Share #7 Posted March 17, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Deal all, CaptureOne 9.1 with support for Leica SL is now available for download at phaseone.com. Best regards Trond 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted March 17, 2016 Share #8 Posted March 17, 2016 Yup. Here's the difference: You'll see a new profile for developing DNG files, "Leica SL Generic," which gives this (white-balanced with a click on the grey card at left): L1010864 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr instead of this (using the previous default "generic DNG" profile: L1010864 1 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr scott 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul925 Posted March 17, 2016 Share #9 Posted March 17, 2016 Now it'll be interesting to see a comparison between the renderings by PhaseOne, Lightroom, and the (also) newly released DxO version that has support for the SL. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elopezso Posted March 19, 2016 Share #10 Posted March 19, 2016 So, what's the upshot? Does it work as well, better or worse than Lightroom? How accurate are the colors? Thanks Yup. Here's the difference: You'll see a new profile for developing DNG files, "Leica SL Generic," which gives this (white-balanced with a click on the grey card at left): L1010864 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr instead of this (using the previous default "generic DNG" profile: L1010864 1 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr scott Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted March 20, 2016 Share #11 Posted March 20, 2016 So, what's the upshot? Does it work as well, better or worse than Lightroom? How accurate are the colors? Thanks I don't use LR, so perhaps someone else will answer that part of your question. The ColorChecker colors are cleaner in the new profile, as you can see above. The concern that I had was with skin tones with fairly light complexioned people (too reddish before). I've gone back and reprocessed a few of those, and see improvements, so the new profile does more than just increase saturation. scott Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted March 20, 2016 Share #12 Posted March 20, 2016 It seems like the SL just isn't much of a priority for Phase One. Or there's baggage between Phase One and Leica that is getting in the way. I guess not supporting the S is their statement about Leica. They did seem enthusiastic about getting SL support in the release. I got my SL back from Denmark the same day that 9.1 was made available for download. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erlingmm Posted March 20, 2016 Share #13 Posted March 20, 2016 I guess not supporting the S is their statement about Leica. They did seem enthusiastic about getting SL support in the release. I got my SL back from Denmark the same day that 9.1 was made available for download. S as an MF camera is in direct competition with their own camera backs, that's why it is not supported, unfortunately. But to they think not supporting S will push people towards XF? Me thinks not, rather it would draw people into the C1/XF ecosystem and possibly make the curious. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgrayson3 Posted March 20, 2016 Share #14 Posted March 20, 2016 I was an enthusiastic C1 user and an Adobe hater. Now I have an S and suddenly Lightroom is looking much better. --Matt Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted March 21, 2016 Share #15 Posted March 21, 2016 I am delighted as a confirmed C1 liker and LR hater, that FINALLY Phase One have got round to an SL profile. I arrived back home yesterday evening from over two weeks in Myanmar with over 2000 SL shots (and about 250 C112 shots) and was not looking forward to having to tweak them all manually as the DNG default profile was very hit and miss. I feel sorry for S users that this is still not supported. I can only suggest that you should do as I did, organising an email, support site and Facebook pressure campaign (on Phase One's Facebook page) for C1/SL users, to shame them into SL support. I did this via posts on the LUF, various Leica pages on Facebook and Phase One's own Facebook page. P1 admitted to me just before I left for Myanmar, that they had had to cave in on the SL due to the pressure applied to them and that Version 9.1 would include SL support. Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted March 22, 2016 Share #16 Posted March 22, 2016 I'm glad for you all, whatever silliness there was about Phase One and Leica support. I still prefer Lightroom anyway, however. When I've tried it, I find C1 to be a workflow mess... I get exactly what I want out of LR with very little effort. The defaults in LR 6.4 for the SL seem to be spot on to my eye. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted March 22, 2016 Share #17 Posted March 22, 2016 I'm glad for you all, whatever silliness there was about Phase One and Leica support. I still prefer Lightroom anyway, however. When I've tried it, I find C1 to be a workflow mess... I get exactly what I want out of LR with very little effort. The defaults in LR 6.4 for the SL seem to be spot on to my eye. Just like I feel about LR I agree the workflow on C1 can seem a bit quirky but as user for around 14 years, I am very used to it. Wilson 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomtom Posted March 22, 2016 Share #18 Posted March 22, 2016 Tried both... Lightroom and c1. It seems to be very clear when it comes to shadow recovery and sharpening.... When in lightroom the Details of the sl files are already falling appart c1 still has room for processing.... Also the sl files opened in c1 look contrastier and sharper as opened in LR without beeing touched. Wonder why there is such an difference. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted March 22, 2016 Share #19 Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) Tried both... Lightroom and c1. It seems to be very clear when it comes to shadow recovery and sharpening.... When in lightroom the Details of the sl files are already falling appart c1 still has room for processing.... Also the sl files opened in c1 look contrastier and sharper as opened in LR without beeing touched. Wonder why there is such an difference. I alomost never use any sharpening: I usually decrease it from the LR defaults, which are too aggressive IMO. I've pulled shadows up 5-6 stops with no problems. If I'm farther off than that, I need to reshoot anyway. LR defaults are neutral on contrast, C1 seems to have contrastier defaults. Not ot a lot of difference in the end products for me, which is what matters. I only rarely use the defaults ... If I were going to do that, I'd use in-camera JPEGs and save the trouble of raw conversion! Edited March 22, 2016 by ramarren Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomtom Posted March 24, 2016 Share #20 Posted March 24, 2016 I use a lot of the old canon FD Lenses.... and unfortunately they are a bit soft... so need a little bit of sharpening. for some works i would like to choose the inCamera jpegs... but unfortunately there is a bug in the in-camera jpeg conversion with strange coloring of the highlights.... i think there is already a thread somewhere here about this issue. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.