Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Aperture to Capture One Pro - the switch
- Thread starter hulk2012
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm really getting impressed with C1's rendering engine - out of the box it seems to be handling RAW files better then Aperture and Lightroom. I'm just toying with the the trial at the moment. It seems that C1 is discounted 50% for the time being - not sure how long that will last.
They have a trial, so I recommend you give it a whirl.
They have a trial, so I recommend you give it a whirl.
To me Capture One is too much the two trick pony. It seems to have a good flexible storage system allowing from referenced or managed catalogs of master files. It seems to have a good set of tools to edit files. What Capture One does, it seems to do very well.
Totally unimpressed with: lack of content aware healing/cloning, no radial filter (as in LR or Nik control points), no export to plugins with returning TIF or PSD files put back into the file system beside the original image, missing handling of maps/GPS coordinates, poor slideshow creation, poor web page creation. For me, too much is missing.
Totally unimpressed with: lack of content aware healing/cloning, no radial filter (as in LR or Nik control points), no export to plugins with returning TIF or PSD files put back into the file system beside the original image, missing handling of maps/GPS coordinates, poor slideshow creation, poor web page creation. For me, too much is missing.
So far I wouldn't say its flexible. You have the option of selecting managed or referenced. For referenced, there isn't an easy (or any?) way to move my files around, i.e., process and keep current year on my laptop, then move it to my external drive. This is a big one for me. I'm done with creating catalogs or libraries per year. I like how LR is able to handle my images completely.
To a degree, I was disappointed in how its noise reduction tools were handling some decidedly noisy images. This is what I use my plug-ins for so not having access to some great tools is another knock.
I may not be giving C1 a fair chance, but so far I'm seeing more negatives/missing features that I want, then the positives. Again the RAW processing engine is superior to ACR, but overall as a DAM, I'm finding it not fitting my needs. Lack of plug-ins and/or ability to process the images as I want them too is another strike
I really want this tool to work, but as I play with it, I'm finding myself thinking well, I can do this in LR. I couldn't even find a way to apply keywords on import. Maybe there's a way and being a tool noob I'm just missing it.
Understood. While I do continue to look at alternatives, right now LR seems to be top of the heap if you want to use plugins.
I guess this time next year after Photos has been introduced, things could be very different. If Capture One would do plugins, things could be very interesting.
I guess this time next year after Photos has been introduced, things could be very different. If Capture One would do plugins, things could be very interesting.
I test drove Capture One Pro, DXO Optics Pro, PhotoNinja and Nikon's Capture NX-D (beta) over the weekend.
Of the three, DXO produced the next best results to what I could achieve in Lightroom.
I started migrating to Lr about 10 months ago when it became apparent Apple wasn't going to do a whole lot more with Aperture. With last Friday's announcement, it came time to cut the cord totally.
Photos for Mac looks like it has potential, but it's six plus months away from being final. I've got work do do between now and then, and Lr is producing the best results.
Of the three, DXO produced the next best results to what I could achieve in Lightroom.
I started migrating to Lr about 10 months ago when it became apparent Apple wasn't going to do a whole lot more with Aperture. With last Friday's announcement, it came time to cut the cord totally.
Photos for Mac looks like it has potential, but it's six plus months away from being final. I've got work do do between now and then, and Lr is producing the best results.
I'm not super keen on the organization features, but it does great RAW stuff. At least with Olympus RAWs; it's pretty popular with Oly users.
I was also pleased to find it has a built in media browser so you can view photos with their app or any web browser. Not much you can do: some rating and labeling and white balance, less via the web. But it's sorta nice to have the ability to view. It would be GREAT if you could also keyword. I had thought it was only for use with their camera backs, but some here might also find it useful.
I was also pleased to find it has a built in media browser so you can view photos with their app or any web browser. Not much you can do: some rating and labeling and white balance, less via the web. But it's sorta nice to have the ability to view. It would be GREAT if you could also keyword. I had thought it was only for use with their camera backs, but some here might also find it useful.
Capture One rocks with my Olympus Raw files but the limitations might be too much for me to overlook (lack of content aware healing, plugins, user metadata, and even training materials and books). I switched to Lightroom back in March but am taking another casual look at capture one.
BUT Capture One went back to $299. Too steep for me.
BUT Capture One went back to $299. Too steep for me.
Last edited:
Capture One Pro was a studio software that somewhat grew and went into competition with Lightroom and Aperture. I happen to use it with reasonable expectations. I also use Photoshop and that is where my plug ins exist.
Where Capture One excels is with certain RAW files as compared to the other offerings. DXO too in some instances offers better handling of RAW files than Aperture or Lightroom.
I happen to use Fuji X series cameras and Capture One Pro does far better than Aperture and Lightroom. Honestly, it is no contest. However, I also wished Capture One handled 3rd party plug ins and improve the DAM features. It is very usable now but could stand for some improvement.
My alternative would be to use a software like Photo Ninja in a workflow with Lightroom (or Aperture). Photo Ninja is a very limited software but does amazing work with Fuji (and other makers) RAW files.
Given that the new Apple product coming up boasts plug ins, perhaps this would not be a bad choice with the right 3rd party additions. We shall see. I am curious about the DAM facet.
Where Capture One excels is with certain RAW files as compared to the other offerings. DXO too in some instances offers better handling of RAW files than Aperture or Lightroom.
I happen to use Fuji X series cameras and Capture One Pro does far better than Aperture and Lightroom. Honestly, it is no contest. However, I also wished Capture One handled 3rd party plug ins and improve the DAM features. It is very usable now but could stand for some improvement.
My alternative would be to use a software like Photo Ninja in a workflow with Lightroom (or Aperture). Photo Ninja is a very limited software but does amazing work with Fuji (and other makers) RAW files.
Given that the new Apple product coming up boasts plug ins, perhaps this would not be a bad choice with the right 3rd party additions. We shall see. I am curious about the DAM facet.
I agree on both counts, I have an Oly camera it its RAW processing is great, but I agree the downsides and price is too much to over-come. The price isn't 299 but 149 right now, perhaps its getting ready to release ver 8.
It being a studio app transformed into a DAM makes sense too, it excels at session based management where you would really see that sort of thing - in a studio. I largely given up trying to use C1 in place of Aperture, only because the DAM capabilities are so limiting.
Just downloaded the C1 Pro trial. This morning I shot some images of a barnyard that had the shadows of power lines going from side to side. In LR the cloning/heal tool lets me drawn over the shadow line and it clones it away. In C1 you can clone out a spot....but not draw a line following a power line, telephone pole...etc. The detail you can pull out with clarity is not close to what you can get with Dynamic Contrast filter in Perfect Photo.
The C1 Pro is not the package for me. I deleted the trial. I will stay with LR plus Nik and Perfecto Photo plugins for the foreseeable future.
The C1 Pro is not the package for me. I deleted the trial. I will stay with LR plus Nik and Perfecto Photo plugins for the foreseeable future.
I shot Nikon up to a D800 and now shoot Fuji XTrans cams. I am a long time user of Aperture and went to Lightroom for 2 years when Apple did not support XTrans. As soon as Apple supported XTrans, I went back. I have frequently tested C1s rendering engine but never switched as I was happy enough with Aperture.
My answer is C1 is superb to excellent on both the Nikon and Fuji side. The difference between C1 and Apple's converter is debatable as its a bit subjective. Both will generate artifacts in one place or another. But the color balance is a bit cooler and there's a bit more pop in C1. Adobe is a distant 3rd on both cameras. You don't hear this much but I felt the initial D800 renders out of Lightroom left a lot to be desired compared to C1. For Fuji, I could spend all day on a file out of Adobe and never match C1 or Aperture's initial render.
That's not to say Adobe is lousy software. I just found it took a lot more work to get to the same, if not lesser, end result than doing nothing other than hit the import button in C1 or Aperture. That's important to me. I loath over processed "art" and don't get any kicks from sitting in front of a computer and doing post.
What's your url do I can take a look at your aperture rendered portfolio? What made you stop using d800?
I'm an amateur. Shots on the web are restricted to a small group of other pros and amateur photographers, all friends. With all due respect, it will stay that way.
The reason I switched is I bought a Fuji X100 in the same month as the D800. That camera came as a huge awakening for me. For a tiny fraction of the weight and size, I was getting excellent files. More importantly, the camera was with me all the time. I discovered photos came to me, not when I decided to go out with a camera. In view of the fact, with the exception of one lens, my lenses were either FF manual or DX AF. Rather than invest more I sold it for what I paid for it as they were still tough to get at the time. I've never looked back, those with other criteria may feel different.
I'm on a 4 month trip at the moment with just an XT-1. First time I've left the X100 home since I bought it and I feel I left a friend behind.
I got you. I wonder what is your comparison in terms of picture quality between d800 and x100? Also you mentioned xt-1.. Is it better than x100 in your view?
I did a comparison between Aperture, C1 and LR just over a year ago and here's what I found... https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1542274/
Like most people have said, the C1 RAW processing is nicest out-of-the-box which can save you some time if you're processing large volumes of photos and don't need to do a lot of adjustments. You might find that C1's RAW conversion doesn't require any additional adjustments compared to LR/Aperture... they even seem to nail the sharpness on the initial conversion.
On the other hand, if you shoot a lot of high ISO stuff, then you'll appreciate LR's NR capabilities... It's second to none in this dept.
However, if you're like me and want more control over local adjustments, then you're probably using NIK Viveza and C1 is not even a consideration. NIK currently only works with Aperture, LR, or PS. And once you've got hooked on NIK's control point tone mask local adjustments, there's no going back to global adjustments or brushes.
I plan to stick with Aperture until the new Photos app is released and if it works fine for library management and basic adjustments, I'll switch to that and round-trip to PS/NIK for photos that need local adjustments.
The same applies to any of the other plugins that can work with Aperture/LR such as Perfect Photo Suite, Topaz Labs apps, and Helicon Focus. There is no loop from app to plugin and back to the same location with the modified image. As far as I have seen, this also applies to other DAM candidates such as DXO Optics, AcdSee Mac Pro, Corel PaintShop,....etc.
The only parallel product I see to Aperture today is Adobe LR. That is especially if you include features for slideshows, web pages, and book publishing. If you see others, let us know. We all want more choices.
http://blog.photoshelter.com/2009/06/digital-asset-management-and-t/
Last edited:
Looks like Capture One Pro 7 is 50% off this week for anybody interested.
http://www.phaseone.com/en/Online-Store/Capture-One-Pro-7.aspx
http://www.phaseone.com/en/Online-Store/Capture-One-Pro-7.aspx
The D800 is a fabulous camera with a sensor that delivers a depth in an image I've not seen in the digital world. Its also highly adaptable in environments that require high iso's. Not to mention all of its other attributes from controls, to lenses to performance. Yes, there is a noticeable trade-off in the quality of the files. Its not pixel peeping differences, its right there and obvious.
However, with a decent fast zoom, its a bear to carry around. I'm retired, love to travel and have no desire to lug it around anymore. Even if it were a DX series, its not like hanging an X100 or XE1/2 over your shoulder all day long and not minding if you didn't take a shot.
I've had an X100, XE1 and XT1. I happen to like XTrans. I get excellent raw renders out of Aperture. Its tough to be specific as there was a PP learning curve that I went through with the xe1, but I'm more pleased with where I am on raw with the XT1 than the XE1.
For jpeg, I prefer the X100 and now have it set to jpeg only unless I'm in difficult lighting/contrast environments where I want more latitude in the files.
Ray2,
I fully understand where you are coming from. The wife and I retired. She could not longer drag around 50 pound rolling bag of 7D, 5DIII and a stack of L lenses. We sold them all off this spring and went M43 with Olympus E-M1. We can now carry our camera kits and our rMBP in Tenba Messenger bags over our shoulders.
I fully understand where you are coming from. The wife and I retired. She could not longer drag around 50 pound rolling bag of 7D, 5DIII and a stack of L lenses. We sold them all off this spring and went M43 with Olympus E-M1. We can now carry our camera kits and our rMBP in Tenba Messenger bags over our shoulders.
I have to agree about NIK. I used to make mask in Photoshop. I had toREALLY want to fix a photo to bother with that. But NIK makes it easy. I can make changes the completely alter the composition. Thinks like turning a bright distracting object to the same color as the background, takes 30 seconds so I actually do it. Brushes are so clumsy after using this.
But I'm holding out for "Photos". Apple just might make it sow plug-ins work and we can still do non-destructive edits. I'm REALLY hoping for both at once. Rather then the current method of using TIFF or PSD.
After Photos comes out we will even then have time to decide what to do.
They've been running this promotion for the month of July, I have no idea when it will end. This is why I've been struggling with my choice of software now that Aperture is getting killed off.
I like a lot of what LR has to offer, but I'm not so sure I want to embrace the subscription model that is most likely coming down the pike. The more I think about it, the more I don't like that.
I bought LR5 and have never looked back. That said I'd not be so happy if it was subscription only.
Trouble is I am now so bought into the LR workflow it would be hard to switch to something else. I guess it's the same for you Aperture boys. Hopefuly Photos will be all you hope it will, and not just iPhoto pro.