Capture One 9

That my though too but she got rid of pipe which took that as spot removal doesn't do well
 
kennysarmy said:
T…the snow no longer looks white...
Click to expand...
•
Yes Jeff, this an observable phenomenon.

1, When seen against sunlight on a cloudless day, the snow looks white
with bluefish shadows as t it is reflecting the sky.
2, When seen against sunlight on a partially white clouded day, the snow
looks white with less bluefish shadows as t it is reflecting the sky + clouds
3, With the Sun in the back on a clear sky. these are the best conditions to
see blue shadows as the snow reflect deeper blue from the sky like here.

The only chance one has to see only white snow is on a bright day with
clouds horizon to horizon.
 
Last edited:
Kodiak Qc said:
•
Yes Jeff, this an observable phenomenon.

1, When seen against sunlight on a cloudless day, the snow looks white
with bluefish shadows as t it is reflecting the sky.
2, When seen against sunlight on a partially white clouded day, the snow
looks white with less bluefish shadows as t it is reflecting the sky + clouds
3, With the Sun in the back on a clear sky. these are the best conditions to
see blue shadows as the snow reflect deeper blue from the sky like here.

The only chance one has to see only white snow is on a bright day with
clouds horizon to horizon.
Click to expand...

But regardless of the shooting conditions surely if you shoot RAW you can fix your blue snow photos so that the snow is white.

Or are you saying you should leave a blue cast on the snow as that looks more realistic?
 
kennysarmy said:
Or are you saying you should leave a blue cast on the snow as that looks more realistic?
Click to expand...
The WB was sampled at many grey and white points in the same lighting
conditions throughout the scene.

Here, because of the angle of incidence, all the snow in the Sun is white
and the shadows are reflecting the blue sky. So there is no blue cast, just
shades of blue in the shadowy areas… At least on my monitor as I do not
see how her monitor is rendering colours, what I see is the signal before it
is going to her screen from my side of the line.
 
kennysarmy said:
To me she's made it too dark and the snow no longer looks white...
Click to expand...
Colour balance of processed edit looks exactly right here & wholly natural - but mid-tones look too dark on my display as well which affects how the image colours are seen.
 
Ok now confused with these snow images..
The first (original) looks to me how you'd see it if you was there..
The edit.. It's really dark and blue!

The small patch of very faint blue sky top left in original now looks like night time in the edit??
 
•
Cool Rog,

This is not the final rendition but a work in progress as stated before.
The post was meant to demonstrate the healing feature in CO9.
 
Cg_Girl said:
The small patch of very faint blue sky top left in original now looks like night time in the edit??
Click to expand...
•
Very good observation and remark.

The sky is lighter in the first because the scene is lighter.
…toning down the scene will tone down everything as
observable with your own eyes if looking at sunny snow
and blue sky. It is due to the wider tonal range of the light
conditions and is absolutely normal.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
The WB was sampled at many grey and white points in the same lighting
conditions throughout the scene.

Here, because of the angle of incidence, all the snow in the Sun is white
and the shadows are reflecting the blue sky. So there is no blue cast, just
shades of blue in the shadowy areas… At least on my monitor as I do not
see how her monitor is rendering colours, what I see is the signal before it
is going to her screen from my side of the line.
Click to expand...

Regardless of the image on this post...
My question remains, are you saying you should leave a blue cast on the snow as that looks more realistic?

I thought that's what you were suggesting, by saying that the blue is caused by the reflected light....when there is less cloud.

Personally I always try to make the snow look white, but maybe I've been doing it wrong...
 
andyscott said:
Your image will 'degrade' using tiff

However it will not be noticeable mostly, save an 80% jpeg and a 100% JPEG, print it and I bet you can't tell the difference.

Theory and practice application are somewhat different.
Click to expand...

I normally prefer to edit images as .psd to maintain layers and editing information so that I can return and make changes later, but it makes the files quite a bit bigger than tiff format.

Export an image once as an 80% jpeg and a small print @<10X8 will possibly be OK. Save it, edit it and re-save it twice more and it will be noticeably less good. I quite like to have prints, usually smallest is 12X8, but sometimes 20X30.
 
kennysarmy said:
you should leave a blue cast on the snow as that looks more realistic?
Click to expand...
•
Yes Jeff,

If the WB is done properly, the snow is white and the shadows may go
in shades of grey to blue depending on the sky covering.
kennysarmy said:
…I always try to make the snow look white, but maybe I've been doing it wrong...
Click to expand...
This can be done in "technical correctness" through a WB adjustment
layer but it would make the picture look weird/odd.

Otherwise at dawn or dusk when the sky will have a dominant orange-red
colour.
 
What best setting to save for highest jpeg for a3 pls for sending off to print

Are all u guys using this software?
 
rookies said:
What best setting to save for highest jpeg for a3 pls for sending off to print
Click to expand...
Pretty much any software can do a good job at that
since the codes are accessible to all developers.
 
What I am ask what best setting to export
 
Last edited:
Jpeg
sRGB (depending on who is doing your printing etc)
Scale fixed or your crop to A3
ppi 300 or more.
 
What you guys liking on this over Lightroom???
 
•
To me, five years ago, LR was just an other thing to evaluate. I was
then still with CS6 and I felt at ease with the UI but not with the pro-
posed solutions (catalogues that I hate at the highest level) and the
workflow.

So the images were piling up and I was still not fixed. I was in Holland
for a industrial shoot and I visited a store where a demonstration of
a danish camera system was going on. Strangely I was not attracted
by the gear but by what I saw on screen… it was called Capture One.

The guy just answered quietly all my questions and, side by side on an
other computer, compared C1 with other converters. That was it.

I took a few day to digest all that stuff and went for both. I mean that
I bought Capture One and a Phase One body and two lenses. Since
then, it is now CO9.0.35 and upgraded the back.

Why I love CO9? Have a look at my website and judge for yourself.
 
What your website address pls as not showing on iPhone
 
Last edited:
Those images looks great were they all done in capture and nothing else??
 
rookies said:
Those images looks great were they all done in capture and nothing else??
Click to expand...
•
As I said, since five years I am working in Capture One and nothing else!
The pictures that were worked in a pixel editor (Affinity Photo in my case)
are not on the site since they are projects for clients.

*** nothing else means RAW converting… of course, when I do panoramas
or stacking works, these are done in other softwares as CO9 is not for that!
 
so whats here that lightroom and photoshop cant do????????????
 
owenb said:
so whats here that lightroom and photoshop cant do?
Click to expand...
•
Visit their site, see the tutorials… do your homework! ;-)
 
All the major image development packages handle raw files differently. *Personally* I prefer lightroom, but I also use DXO Optics Pro the the Sony version of Capture One for raw files from my Sony camera. Each does some things better than the others (DXO is best for maximum fine detail, CO better for shadow recovery) and some things less well, but over all I find lightroom works best *for me*. I also do major editing in On-1 Photo 10 where I can use layers, purpose-designed erasing tools etc.
 
There is nothing that one does over the other so much.

They are both slightly different, its horses for courses, I just get to a better result quicker with Capture One. Also I don't use all of the output consumer stuff on lightroom, like flickr etc.

Lightroom does round trip to photoshop better, but nothing you can't do in C1

C1s colour editor is amazing.
 
as @ancient_mariner says, they just do things differently.

I run a post processing business for weddings,
Using the following RAW converters and photoshop, affinity etc.
Capture One Pro
Lightroom
DXO Pro Optics

Each job may need something the other can't do, for instance, one client may need just the sidecar files from Lightroom, others may want 16bit TIFFS, some want print direct.

One client maybe a macro photographer, one maybe a landscape photographer, most are wedding photographers.

I will just chose whatever tool gets the jobs done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top