photo editor for M10M

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

22 minutes ago, icon80 said:

In addition, C1 incorporates a layers tool, which allows non-destructive editing of specific areas and tonal values (dodging and burning), without making round trips out of the application to Photoshop or SEP.  One can generate multiple variants of the single DNG within the application, without creating the mega-sized files that come with each iteration of an image in an application like SEP.  The Grain Tool in C1 is also excellent.

All LR adjustments, global and local, are non-destructive; creating multiple virtual copies for different purposes and effects is also simple. One can revert back to any part of editing history. Plug-ins are also available for easy transition and workflow if desired.  I like using ImagePrint as an external editor for LR and it also offers a variety of useful editing/printing  tools, with superb profiles for all papers as well as full time soft proofing.  

There are many good software options these days. People tend to like those which they invest the time to learn, as long as they can get to their desired goals without undue pain.

Jeff

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[icon80]

On 10/23/2020 at 7:28 AM, Jeff S said:

All LR adjustments, global and local, are non-destructive; creating multiple virtual copies for different purposes and effects is also simple. One can revert back to any part of editing history. Plug-ins are also available for easy transition and workflow if desired.  I like using ImagePrint as an external editor for LR and it also offers a variety of useful editing/printing  tools, with superb profiles for all papers as well as full time soft proofing.  

There are many good software options these days. People tend to like those which they invest the time to learn, as long as they can get to their desired goals without undue pain.

Jeff

All of the above is true - and people should use what they are comfortable with.  I have used LR fairly extensively - and it is a great application. However, the last time I used LR, it did not have a capacity to work on different layers, which I find useful in editing different tonal areas of monochrome files, without going into a 3rd party application / photoshop - and generating a large TIFF or PSD file, separate from the original DNG. Each separate iteration of a monochrome image utilising layers would require a separate trip our of LR.  Perhaps I just didn't understand how to use the application..

[zeitz]

Skip LR and just use Bridge/Photoshop to begin with.  Everything in the LR Develop module is available as a Camera Raw Filter even after your original Camera Raw modifications.  If you start with .dng files, the user has the option of changes being stored in the .dng file or in a .xmp sidecar.  (Other raw formats have to use a sidecar.)  I have never used layers in Capture One, but I don't see how Capture One can save layers without increasing file size.

[250swb]

I think if the concern is how large the files are that can be generated it is in this day and age entirely another (user) problem and shouldn't be used as a downside for any programme. As for all the workarounds they strike me as any excuse for not admitting defeat and accepting that Bridge and Photoshop with a SEP plugin are the ideal combination in the situation (or any other situation).

[marchyman]

On 10/23/2020 at 5:31 PM, zeitz said:

I have never used layers in Capture One, but I don't see how Capture One can save layers without increasing file size.

Capture One NEVER touches your original file.   It is a design decision they've made.  Many (myself included) wouldn't mind if they did allow original file updates, e.g. fixing a bad timestamp because you forgot to tell your camera about a daylight saving time change.  But they don't.   If you use Capture One you live with that.

Image adjustments are stored in either a database or a folder dedicated for such data depending upon how you use Capture One.   The adjustments are instructions on how to modify the original image and as such they are small, usually less than 10 k bytes in my experience.  Adding a layer adds a couple to those instructions.  Layer masks, if present, may be held in a "mask" file.  mask files can be on the order of a Megabyte in size.

[zeitz]

When I use Capture One, I find my disk written with such files as .cof, .cop, and .cos and a set of folders that I didn't create.  The .cos file seems to be the equivalent of a .xmp file; but I can't open .cos with any text editor that I have to verify that.  .xmp files can be opened with a text editor and read by the user.  I would rather have large files than a bunch of smaller associated files and folders scattered around my drive.  If you use a .dng file or another propriety raw file, Adobe does not touch the original raw data; Adobe never did.  The .dng spec allows adjustment data to be placed inside the .dng file, but the raw data is not changed in any way and the adjustments are easily reversed.  The computer's operating system changes the file's date.  Other propriety raw files require a sidecar because Adobe can't write into proprietary raw, .nef for instance.  And the user has the option to use .xmp files even with .dng raw.

It sounds to me that Capture One has not implemented the full .dng spec.  (I also find it odd that Capture One has no hesitancy to work with Adobe's .dng format while it will not allow Adobe software to work with Phase One .iiq files.  But that is another topic.)

I am missing the point.  The icon80 didn't want the files to get large.  To me more files for each image are just as bad.  Further it is the user's option in Photoshop to flatten the image / merge the layers or keep them separate.  Capture One uses .tif (another Adobe product) for file distribution which preserves layers and produces big files.  While Adobe's .tif is OK with Capture One, Capture One does not implement .psd.

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The reliance on 'non-destructive' software does beg the question as to why you'd permanently alter an original file anyway? If asked I'm sure most people using Lightroom on LUF would trot it out as one of the great things about Lightroom, that it doesn't destroy your original file. But at the same time an equal number of people do so few alterations to their photographs the stages could be dealt with as a good old 'save as' command and not touching the original file at all. Not many people here are working in an ad agency or design studio where there can be a vast number of alterations to images, or even wedding photographers wanting to remove the lamp post appearing out the top of somebody's head. So the question 'why wouldn't you use non-destructive software' can be answered with 'why would you otherwise destroy your original, or version two, or version three...'?

[tom.w.bn]

vor 14 Stunden schrieb zeitz:

It sounds to me that Capture One has not implemented the full .dng spec.

Why do you think so? When you make the decision never to touch an original file that has nothing to do with the DNG standard.

 

[Luke_Miller]

15 hours ago, zeitz said:

When I use Capture One, I find my disk written with such files as .cof, .cop, and .cos and a set of folders that I didn't create.  

That occurs when using C1 in Sessions Mode.  In Catalog Mode edits and metadata are stored in the C1 catalog similar to Lightroom.

[marchyman]

21 hours ago, zeitz said:

but I can't open .cos with any text editor that I have to verify that.

Start your text editor.  I'll use the Mac's TextEdit as an example.

• Use the File -> Open menu.
• Navigate to a folder containing a .cos file and click on the file to open.
• Click the Open button.

The results look like this

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!

[zeitz]

10 hours ago, tom.w.bn said:

Why do you think so? When you make the decision never to touch an original file that has nothing to do with the DNG standard.

 

I can't find the Capture One user has the option to store edits in the .dng file.  This is what I meant by Capture One not implementing the entire specification.  You are right it has nothing to do with the user's preferences.  In the spec all the edits are reversible/removable, leaving all the original data unmodified, even the date the image was made.  So the spec helps the user keep the edits together in one place,  instead of sidecars and other associated files.  If the user wants sidecars (ie not touch the original file), he does not have to store any edits in .dng files, just use the associated sidecar.

9 hours ago, Luke_Miller said:

That occurs when using C1 in Sessions Mode.  In Catalog Mode edits and metadata are stored in the C1 catalog similar to Lightroom.

I don't use Catalogs, Libraries, Albums, Collections, etc.  I use Folders and Files which I can easily browse in Finder without opening any photo editor.  Thus I only use Sessions Mode.  And this is one of the reasons I don't use Lightroom either.  Bridge/ACR/Photoshop - I have total control.

[ZoomP]

thank for the comments guys.  I ended up just subscribed to the 3 first month free subscription to LR n PS.  Will likely continue.  Still love LR workflows.   Since I got DxO, I can use them as a plug-in for both.  

[Cayenne]

On 10/18/2020 at 2:39 AM, ZoomP said:

Just got my M10M.  Tried opening the DNG files with DXO3 but doesn't look like they have support yet.  Anyone tried?  What is the editor you're right now?

I'm using Capture ONe....I plan to try out the next version of On1 RAW too.

I just got mine a few weeks ago....what a blast camera!!

C

[Cayenne]

On 10/23/2020 at 7:02 PM, icon80 said:

All of the above is true - and people should use what they are comfortable with.  I have used LR fairly extensively - and it is a great application. However, the last time I used LR, it did not have a capacity to work on different layers, which I find useful in editing different tonal areas of monochrome files, without going into a 3rd party application / photoshop - and generating a large TIFF or PSD file, separate from the original DNG. Each separate iteration of a monochrome image utilising layers would require a separate trip our of LR.  Perhaps I just didn't understand how to use the application..

One other nice thing about using Capture One, or On1 RAW or the like is...you don't have to RENT your software like you do with Adobe.

 

I kicked Adobe to the curb when they went CC rental model only. There's plenty of powerful competitors out there now.

But like you said, whatever floats your boat.

Edited October 30, 2020 by Cayenne

[Cayenne]

On 10/25/2020 at 3:54 PM, marchyman said:

Capture One NEVER touches your original file.   It is a design decision they've made.  Many (myself included) wouldn't mind if they did allow original file updates, e.g. fixing a bad timestamp because you forgot to tell your camera about a daylight saving time change.  But they don't.   If you use Capture One you live with that.

Image adjustments are stored in either a database or a folder dedicated for such data depending upon how you use Capture One.   The adjustments are instructions on how to modify the original image and as such they are small, usually less than 10 k bytes in my experience.  Adding a layer adds a couple to those instructions.  Layer masks, if present, may be held in a "mask" file.  mask files can be on the order of a Megabyte in size.

I ran into this with C1 myself, wanting to change all EXIF type date.

I found a command line tool called exiftool.  

EXIFTOOL - Command Line metadata editing tool

I do a couple of short commands with it, that dump all of the metadata of the images in a directory to a .csv file that you can open with any spreadsheet program. I make the changes to all fields I want...save it to a different csv file format and then another exiftool command and it writes all the changes I want to the images...copying the originals next to it in case you want to keep the originals.

 

 

[jaapv]

On 10/26/2020 at 9:20 AM, 250swb said:

The reliance on 'non-destructive' software does beg the question as to why you'd permanently alter an original file anyway? If asked I'm sure most people using Lightroom on LUF would trot it out as one of the great things about Lightroom, that it doesn't destroy your original file. But at the same time an equal number of people do so few alterations to their photographs the stages could be dealt with as a good old 'save as' command and not touching the original file at all. Not many people here are working in an ad agency or design studio where there can be a vast number of alterations to images, or even wedding photographers wanting to remove the lamp post appearing out the top of somebody's head. So the question 'why wouldn't you use non-destructive software' can be answered with 'why would you otherwise destroy your original, or version two, or version three...'?

I never understood this either - I mean it is pretty stupid to overwrite the original file when saving one's work. Even "destructive" Photoshop allows going back to previous layers or reversing the history. 

[marchyman]

On 10/26/2020 at 1:20 AM, 250swb said:

The reliance on 'non-destructive' software does beg the question as to why you'd permanently alter an original file anyway?

 Image file formats make a distinction between the bits that make up the image and bits that make up metadata.   Think of it as smaller version of any mass storage device.   There is some kind of directory structure that says where the data can be found.   Changing the directory structure does not change the data.   Same thing with image files: changing the metadata does not require a change the image data.   Exiftool,  mentioned above, does exactly that.  You can add, delete, or update metadata an infinite amount of time without ever changing a single bit of the image itself.

The DNG format was defined by Adobe to enable just that feature on a general basis.   Instead of a separate XMP sidecar file the edits in the form of instructions on how to change the original data can be stored in the metadata portion of the DNG file.   Again, the original bits that make up the image are never modified.

The image portion of the file is copied when metadata changes are made.  Worry about unintended changes made while copying  can be mitigated in software at the cost of some speed.

All that said, I am mostly content with not touching the original image.   The reason is backups.  I do not want to fill up my automatic hourly/daily/weekly backups with 50 MB images because a couple of bytes of metadata changed.  My exception is adjusting timestamps when necessary, but I do that immediately after import and before the first automatic backup is made.  

[250swb]

15 hours ago, marchyman said:

 Image file formats make a distinction between the bits that make up the image and bits that make up metadata.   Think of it as smaller version of any mass storage device.   There is some kind of directory structure that says where the data can be found.   Changing the directory structure does not change the data.   Same thing with image files: changing the metadata does not require a change the image data.   Exiftool,  mentioned above, does exactly that.  You can add, delete, or update metadata an infinite amount of time without ever changing a single bit of the image itself.

The DNG format was defined by Adobe to enable just that feature on a general basis.   Instead of a separate XMP sidecar file the edits in the form of instructions on how to change the original data can be stored in the metadata portion of the DNG file.   Again, the original bits that make up the image are never modified.

The image portion of the file is copied when metadata changes are made.  Worry about unintended changes made while copying  can be mitigated in software at the cost of some speed.

All that said, I am mostly content with not touching the original image.   The reason is backups.  I do not want to fill up my automatic hourly/daily/weekly backups with 50 MB images because a couple of bytes of metadata changed.  My exception is adjusting timestamps when necessary, but I do that immediately after import and before the first automatic backup is made.  

Huh?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[tom.w.bn]

vor 16 Stunden schrieb marchyman:

All that said, I am mostly content with not touching the original image.   The reason is backups.  I do not want to fill up my automatic hourly/daily/weekly backups with 50 MB images because a couple of bytes of metadata changed.  My exception is adjusting timestamps when necessary, but I do that immediately after import and before the first automatic backup is mad.  

That's my main concern too. An image file is backuped once and only once. If a program made changes to that file (probably only adding some bytes of metadata) the whole file will be backed up again because the timestamp changed. 

[SrMi]

On 10/30/2020 at 1:37 PM, Cayenne said:

One other nice thing about using Capture One, or On1 RAW or the like is...you don't have to RENT your software like you do with Adobe.

 

I kicked Adobe to the curb when they went CC rental model only. There's plenty of powerful competitors out there now.

But like you said, whatever floats your boat.

I am paying for my C1 upgrades approximately as much as I am paying for the Creative Cloud subscription, which I would need to get anyway since PS is essential for me.

Note that canceling CC subscription disables "only" Develop and Map module.