Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/60/9972860/html/smf/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
Capture One Pro workflow headaches
The DAM Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 18, 2021, 07:13:08 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
28033 Posts in 5147 Topics by 2903 Members
Latest Member: kbroch
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  The DAM Forum
|-+  Workflow Discussions
| |-+  Tethered Shooting
| | |-+  Capture One Pro workflow headaches
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Capture One Pro workflow headaches  (Read 14909 times)
andris
Full Member
***
Posts: 149


View Profile WWW Email
« on: January 27, 2008, 02:12:05 PM »

(I realize that those of you using Capture One Pro already know this, this is more for people considering the program for future use)

Capture One Pro (from http://www.phaseone.com/) is somewhat of an industry standard for high volume tethered capture.  It's a great app, but sadly it doesn't dovetail nicely with the Bridge/iView workflow pioneered by Peter for the major reason that it doesn't support .xmp sidecar files.  All raw adjustments and metadata added on set are stored only in C1P's internal cache, and are only embedded in files once they are processed out of C1P to TIFFs or JPGs.

It would be great to work with the photographer/client on set to determine the look and feel they're going for through exposure and curve adjustments.  It would be great to add metadata like model names (that are easy to find out on set, but a pain to figure out later) directly to the images at capture time.  Sadly, unless you stick with C1P throughout your workflow this isn't really practical.  Even a C1P/iView workflow doesn't really work, since raws imported into iView won't have the C1Pro metadata embedded.   

With the introduction of Capture One 4, Phase One seems to be indicating that this problem will change.  The new version supports DNG export (though this was really buggy last time I tried it).  However, Capture One 4 is not a tethered capture application  For that we need Capture One Pro 4.  Phase One is being cagey about predicting a release date for the new pro version, and based on how long it took them to get C14 out the door...I'm not holding my breath.

I'm still using C1P on set.  Basically, I just check focus and exposure and set a capture white balance so the images come in looking in the right ballpark for the client looking over my shoulder.  When I get back to the studio, I run the images through IIP to get the bulk metadata in place and I go to work color correcting before I batch out proofs.  Definitely less than ideal.

When I get some time, I'm hoping to check out Lightroom as a digital capture app.  I've seen some posts on this here in the DAM forum and need to go back and read them.  My big question is one of performance:  How does it keep up with high volume?  Anyone care to comment?  Based on this post at 'Death to Film' http://www.deathtofilm.com/2007/09/07/just-the-facts-maam/ I'm optimistic.  These guys are using a screaming fast rig (an 8 core mac with 8 GB of ram!) but their performance reports are pretty impressive.

Andris
Logged
Bruce Van Inwegen
Newbie
*
Posts: 37


View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: February 11, 2008, 12:03:57 PM »

It would be great to work with the photographer/client on set to determine the look and feel they're going for through exposure and curve adjustments. 
Hi again, Andris.

FWIW, unless you can duplicate the same ambient lighting conditions and monitor calibration on location that exist in your studio editing environment, you will be setting yourself up for frustration regardless of what RAW processing software you use.

The first commandment of Color Management:

Thou shalt not do critical color/density corrections in an uncontrolled uncalibrated environment!

I don't remember if it was Andrew Rodney or the late, great Bruce Frasier who crafted the concept of trying to measure a moving object with a rubber ruler. 

So true...so true...!

 Cheesy



Logged
andris
Full Member
***
Posts: 149


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #2 on: February 11, 2008, 02:00:51 PM »

Hi Bruce,

I guess I wouldn't agree that correcting and adjusting digital proofs is color critical work.  Since we shoot color cards, getting images in the ballpark is a one click correction, and since they're only batch corrected proofs in the ballpark is all we need.  Since we're only talking about non-destructive edits applied to raw files, there's really nothing to worry about.

I think what you're missing about the lightroom/C1P difference is how raw adjustments are stored.  C1P stores its raw adjustments and any applied metadata in it's internal, proprietary database making the information inaccessible to any other programs that may lie down the line in your workflow (iView, Bridge, Lightroom, etc).  Lightroom, however, is capable of writing adjustments and metadata to xmp sidecar files readable by other applications

This key difference means that any work I do on set (applying metadata, doing basic color correction, basic exposure adjustments) isn't wasted.  What I was getting at with the exposure and curve adjustments in my first post is that every photographer obviously has a different desired 'look and feel.'  Some like light and airy, some like cold and lifeless, etc.  If this look and feel can be saved as a lightroom preset, it can be applied to every incoming capture.  This means that what the client/photog see on the screen is closer to what the final product will be.

C1P, by contrast, only allows you to set a capture white balance to be applied to all incoming captures but not a capture curve or capture exposure adjustment.   Even then, the capture white balance is only retained in the C1P database but not exported to the raw file (which retains the camera's original white balance setting).  This severe limitation makes a lot of extra work down the road if I want to use Adobe Camera Raw's more powerful raw adjustments on files from a shoot captured with C1P.

Thanks,

Andris
Logged
Bruce Van Inwegen
Newbie
*
Posts: 37


View Profile Email
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2008, 03:22:55 PM »

Much clearer now that I get where you are going and where you've been.

Lightroom just might be the ticket though I'm not familiar enough with it to comment on its batch renaming abilities.  I use Bridge/ACR as for my production work-flow, and ACR is very similar to the develop module in Lightroom. Given your volume, I'd suggest you stay away from Bridge 'till they get the stability issues worked out.  Too bad though, since Bridge is a bonus rather than an additional investment.

Bruce
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!