Looking for:
Capture one pro 12 rumors free download |
Capture one pro 12 rumors free download
That means Capture One doesn't have to expect huge sales to justify investing in this port. Porting to Android would require a bigger commitment. Photoshop for Android by Adobe is available on the Play store.
As is Lightroom mobile. And On1 Photo Raw. I also would like to challenge the statement saying that Apple customers are 10x to x more willing to pay for something. That to me frankly sounds like something you pulled out of thin air.
I'm an Android user and I'm just as likely to pay for software on my tablet or phone as the next guy is. There was a time when developing software for Android was a bit harder because of the greater variation in hardware platforms. But franky those days are long gone, which is why a lot of other companies do not have to pretend Andoid users don't exist or are somehow not worthy of consideration.
Michael Berg Look more carefully. The only kind of Photoshop available for Android is Photoshop Express, which is a completely different beast in all but name. I think it's less to do about the size of the Mobile market or even the tablet market but the size of the high end powerful tablet market.
Android has a huge share of phones, but this really is made more for a tablet experience than a phone experience, and iPad has a better coverage and this is partly a response to them already supporting the next biggest competition in terms of tablets Windows Surface tablets, which they were supporting already.
As others mentioned, it's much easier to port a Mac app to iPad than it is to port Windows to Android, and the wide range of Android devices with a wider range of specs makes it even more complicated to support. Considering the iPad edition wasn't until apple announced M1 processor powered iPad Pros that C1 announced they were developing for it, I wouldn't be surprised if they said minimum support for iPad is something with an M1 chip.
I really doubt this could run on a Fire tablet. If you really want to run everything on device, you really should be looking into browser based solutions. This is possible with modern browsers that offer a virtual machine with full access to the underlying hardware. Witness photopea, onshape, sketchup and even Lightroom as examples of how to do things right. Developing beefy, native clients are really a thing of the past IMO.
The browser should be the only required component on the target device. Oh well. Maybe you're all right and I'm wrong. I just think that as one of the leading providers of professional solutions in this segment, a company like Capture One would be able to come up with something more original and ambitious than "you have to own a very specific model of an iPad". That's just yet another platform to maintain. Browser based solutions utilizing cloud VMs require a solid internet connection, which is not always possible on shoots.
LR's tablet App is not quite a browser solution and RAW processing has some particular complexities which Photopea, Onshape, and Sketchup do not handle. When wanting to use a mobile device it may be outside a controlled studio where wifi or cell coverage might not be a guarantee.
C1's market has a higher percentage of professionals compared to other programs though recently they have been making some choices that may draw a wider audience so choices they make are often geared towards what is used on a professional set or shoot. They expect to see high end Surface Tablets with intel processors and iPad Pros more than they expect to see Amazon Fire tablets.
The entire point is that the software runs locally in the virtual machine that the browser provides. There is no requirement to be online see Photopea for example. As for the size of the files from PhaseOne cameras this is a problem that isn't solved by running a local app. Photopea provided the bare minimum of adjustments for RAW files. This is a lot more computationally intensive. All processing is to be done locally, so IO is not an issue.
Demosaicing, gamma adjustments, color conversion, noise reduction, sharpening, plus a multitude of adjustments with a range of complexity both globally and locally over MP is a lot of processing. Photopea is just an example of how complex, resource-demanding applications can in fact run in the browser. There are no "inherent" problems with performance or storage to overcome, and the features you mention are not missing due to lack of capability in the runtime. Browsers today offer incredibly powerful, sandboxed runtime environments that are able to achieve the same level of performance as native apps.
Loading a mp file is no easier or harder here than doing the same thing in Swift. I'm sure Capture One has their reasons for going iOS only, but the strategy they have chosen excludes a huge chunk of the market and gives them yet another platform to service and maintain. That cost is passed on to you. It is true browsers do not have the same level hardware control for graphics, such as webGL support is pretty common, but openCL which is more needed for actual computation as photos aren't drawing cubes in space is kind of dying and CUDA and Metal are not available in the browser.
A running complex computations in Swift will be faster than those written for a browser. And with Apple specifically you have a standard level of hardware. A VM browser still needs to translate the code to run on your hardware and a Fire tablet is not going to be thee same experience as your Galaxy Tab S8 Ultra.
There will be cases where you are limited by power or RAM. Photopea is not a raw processor so it doesn't have complex features that support a raw workflow. There is no technical reason why it couldn't though - if it wanted to be a raw processor, that is.
You can get perfectly reasonable performance out of any recent Samsung tablet for running these kinds of apps. Well Javascript compiles to the exact same bytecode as Swift so I'll have to disagree with you on that one. Maybe you have access to some benchmarks that I don't.
Yes Photopea is not a full raw processor, but you have yet to point to anything that is a browser based full web processor. Maybe in 5 years but not today. Are you trying to argue a false equivalency or do actually think runtime compiling that JavaScript does has no impact on performance? You can write a program that takes several minutes to hours to compile in Swift or Objective C, you cannot do that in JavaScript and have an enjoyable experience. Keep posting inaccuracies and I will counter. OK so this mag is "free".
But it has in the past kept an editorial line that was more or less independent of suppliers. No longer it seems. Why didn't DPR contact a few users of C1 to get a perspective on this gush? DPR is slipping, I'm afraid. Pretty soon -- if not already -- the best parts of the mag. DPR has always reported press releases as news. I like that it is separately priced.
I dont have an ipad and dont plan on it. Nor do i care for live. But having more options for people who have needs is a good thing. I do have capture 22, grant i still prefer to edit in lightroom 6 with dng conversion. You'll be waiting forever. First, CaptureOne will not support a direct corporate rival. Especially given Hasselblad's past attitude towards PhaseOne backs.
Second, Hasselblad will not share their "colour science" with PhaseOne, given that it is one of the very few USPs they still have - even if it is probably just smoke and mirrors. And anyway, how many extra customers would CaptureOne acquire from such an investment?
I can't see that it would add much if any profit. Why not use Lr or Photoshop? So they're not letting in Hasselblad through any back doors. No way. For now, yes. I can't imagine that this would be that difficult to compile an ARM64 version in addition to x I'm not renewing my subscription, it's getting too greedy like Adobe. Sucks because they were the best alternative. Prepare to pay up This company wants more, more, more since they were acquired by an investment company.
Time for Nikon to develop an enthusiast compact camera and an NX Studio app then. So that I can just use those. They've focused on the Apple user market for a reason. People in that space are used to paying more. Apple offers frameworks to help but its adopting those and the tweaking that gets you. They should be focusing to getting the bug ridden v22 resolved before this scant requirement. Support don't respond when you raise a ticket and you can't contact them directly, its very poor service.
I received an "inquiry" about my ticket from last moth a day or so ago. If that is really the case, then hiding from being shelled is just a bit more important than answering wimpy users. I do not own any Apple products, so I don't really care about this sub product. The other target group is on exactly the opposite end of the spectrum: hobbyists who want something convenient. A company with limited resources is going to follow the money.
I have had several "tickets" open with CO about issues that are unique to Windows. The response has been poor with many tickets basically stating, "it is your system that is the problem - the ticket is being closed". The current emphasis is on Apple products, with Windows systems being essentially ignored. CO's eyes are not on Windows - it is all Apple.
I doubt that CO even has developer devices that are up to date. I have had them say they will not investigate an issue because I was using a more current version of Windows 10 them they claimed they had in house. This was three months after the feature release OS upgrade was available from Microsquish.
I'd get an iPad if C1 works well with that and an iPhone. Just hope it integrates well with with cloud between devices and all. Guess it's time to start seeing what wifi hard drives work well in the meantime. Weird considering in this very news post it states "Capture One will also bring its software to iPhone in , adding another element of versatility to the ecosystem. Their website also states "Capture One for iPhone Adding to your choice of devices for a smooth on the go workflow, bringing Capture One to iPhone will add another element to the full circle of flexibility and freedom across platforms.
What many Apple distractors don't get is how seamlessly their desktops, tablets and phones interact. As an apple user, I wish it were really that easy. If you keep all your photos in the Photos app and spend a mint on an iCloud plan, then it is almost seamless. If you use other apps, you are at the mercy of their cloud compatibility and sync, which means you are back at same problem you'd have running another OS. Sure, but once you involve third party software, it's not apple ecosystem.
I can sync files between literally any platform using the right software and services. It still helps if all your devices run the same apps with the same interface.
Otherwise you are right, you may as well link iOS and PCs. I find value in my 2TB of iCloud storage precisely because it makes my workflows, photo and otherwise, plus my device backups simple, reliable and seamless.
I was wondering how this system will share pictures for collaboration. I kind of like that the RAW negatives are stored on the main desktop and only smart previews are shared across the cloud. Collab across platforms is awesome, but the actual implementation matters. I hope Capture One gets a good system. Well Apple is only easy and seamless if you use their applications and services in the very strict and limited way Apple is allowing you to do. There is zero flexibility in that system, I am using Apple for 30 years and in the beginning they got the syncing really good but then changed it and I tried so often to integrate it in my workflow but it always ended up being a productivity killer.
So it can be great if you like it exactly the way Apple implemented it or it's worthless. In addition to my Photo Library which I access with any number of third party processing applications my entire documents folder is seamlessly syncronized via iCloud. Hated that. But now, with iTunes gone, it's easy.
Can use iCloud, or if the devices are on the same network an app called iMaze. Sure there are other solutions. On the other hand, if it works well for you in the PC world, then there is no need to change. Never break what works :. That is partly well implemented partly it's made hard on purpose.
You need to be moderate in IT to set it up but then it works flawless. So I like that part on Apple a lot. They also offer an Windows Application that can do limited iCloud syncing although it's bad. Credits to them for even offering it. Well let me tell you: both macOS and Windows are weird systems. I love macOS for it's workflow integration, this is really bad on Windows. And I love Windows for how it maintains compatibility, for it's professional features, how it's possible to troubleshoot so much that just wouldn't work on macOS at all and the powerful hardware I get.
Well, you are much deeper into IT than I am. Probably my computing needs are also much lower than yours. I simply want things that work without having to tinker.
It would be better news if they got off their butts and made C1, 22 perform as good as their prerelease marketing. Though this Linux user is happy with the open source options available and does not need another accelerating repeated cost. But if ridiculing a free platform is being upvoted I'm probably in the wrong thread.
Seeya payers. I actually would, but one of my Eizo monitors is too old, so that Colournavigatior 7 does not support it. Finally it runs under linux, but not me :. The issue with Linux.. You can not really port it to Linux, it's too messy. The problem is that there are not many Linux users, and most Linux users do not pay for software. There have been publishers who gambled on linux and all say the same thing.
Hard to want to dedicate a team to Linux, when the total sales won't even cover the salary of one developer for a year. Honestly it might take MORE work than mac or PC because there are so many distros to cover and near infinite build options for linux. It is highly unlikely that with current Linux adoption that they would develop for the Linux platform. Linux is a niche, and photographers that want to use Linux is a niche of a niche. There needs to be more users to make developing Capture One make any financial sense to Phase One.
I use at least six paid software on Linux. Usually Linux users are more generous in paying. There are more articles if you research. The idea that Linux users don't pay comes from Linux being free. For majority of the Linux users, "free" is not the forerunner in choosing Linux. I have all three Mac, windows and Linux and Linux is my daily driver.
Starting from my hardware, everything is premium. Experience shows that commercial software for Linux is almost always a flop with very little sales. The ones who do are making good money. Most of the Linux guys started their journey with open source apps and as we all know, it is hard to break a habit even if it is less than ideal.
Linux market share on desktops and laptops itself is highly debatable since there is no official count anywhere. It is a chicken and egg problem companies won't make it until there are enough users, and users won't come until there is enough software for now.
However, developers are slowly migrating to Linux for its ease of use for software development except the apple ecosystem such as iOS. That leaves the creatives, something no one can say for sure until one of these companies takes a bold step.
I am using Linux and I am using windows for stuff that will not run on Linux. I have bough Capture One and would be happy if it would run on Linux and I would not be forced to swap to windows for that purpose. But as I sayd, one of my monitors is too old to run on Linux. And also my sound card Maya44 lacks some funktions in linux. I think wo should stop calling it Linux and name its flavors. That would make the diversity and complexity more transparent. That said ist is an awesome OS overall.
That already happens to an extent, such as Ubuntu which, while free, has a company behind it with paid support if needed. Well, C1 costs as much as you choose.
Especially given their SLOW release of lens profiles. Missing like half the RF lenses. Only 5 profiles for Nikon Z. No profiles for Panasonic FF lenses. With modern lenses, profiles are no longer optional in most cases. So if there is no lens profile, the software is effectively useless.
Not sure why it is so hard to get profiles made. So subscription-only, just like Adobe. Wasn't it Capture One that had an option to import externally created lens profiles? Or was that Lightroom? I don't know because I haven't had that problem since Adobe went to a subscription model. RF is a bit of a special case compared to the other mirrorless mounts because it seems no one has any access to the profiles besides Canon And they might not even be embedded in RAW files like with most other formats, so they definitely need to create them from scratch.
On other MILC mounts Adobe uses some or all of the existing profiles but still ties them program updates which is somewhat annoying IMO, they could push those out much faster Adobe and Capture One are literally the only development programs that have some semblance of a relationship with lens makers like that and some direct access to profiles etc btw.
Every other program out there uses a 3rd party open source lens correction database AFAIK except for DxO which makes their own from scratch too. I think Adobe uses vignetting and CA info from the E mount profiles but then creates their own for geometric corrections but Adobe isn't very transparent about any of it, I like the way C1 handles it better but YMMV depending on system, needs, etc.
If that means you have to set up your own lab to make them, then it is a cost of doing business. I'm not sure whether Adobe or C1 is more timely with their in house profiles, probably comes down to brand, Adobe definitely has broader support The whole backroom dealing situation between either and the camera manufacturers is annoying, why doesn't anyone else get to do so? Capture One for me overplayed their cards with the terrible introduction of the HDR and Panorama options.
Seldom I have seen such poor execution of features in a software package aimed towards professional photographers. Both the HDR and Panorama features are mere useless in the current implementation. I still have to fall back to photoshop to execute these tasks. Add the price hike they forced upon us and I am starting to linger back to Lightroom and Photoshop.
Check out the full list here. But Capture One Pro 12 adds more than just Fujifilm film simulation profiles. I have made a quick comparison between in-camera, Lightroom and Capture One Pro film simulation, based on the last Capture One Beta software available. I will re-test it with the final version, and update this article, if I see relevant changes.
NOTE 1 : Images are compressed for web use. Today Capture One 12 got officially released. Capture One Download Capture One 12, as well as find resources and tutorials at: www. Powerful, refined interface Capture One 12 introduces a newly re-designed, contemporary interface, designed to make Capture One easier to use during long editing sessions and to make discovery, experimentation, and customizability easier than ever.
New iconography better conveys tool functionality, and the new slider design, the spacing of the tools, and font size increase improves both the look and the usability of the program. The result is a new environment that feels more welcoming for new users while being more customizable for power-users. Revamped menu system Every menu item in Capture One 12 has been evaluated, categorized, and organized according to its logical function and grouped along with associated tasks, which makes it easier to find the desired controls and settings, and brings the Mac and Windows menu options into alignment.
Luminosity masking One of a trio of new masking tools, Luma Range allows users to quickly create masks based on the brightness of pixels in an image and is the most powerful luminance masking tool of its kind. This masking technique is particularly powerful in landscapes and high-key portraits, as it allows for nearly-instantaneous masks in complex scenes based on brightness—eliminating the need to tediously paint complex masks.
Once a luminance range is created and adjusted using the precision mask-adjustment tools, nearly any editing tool can be applied to the mask. The masks created with the Luma Range tool are dynamic and can easily be tweaked and modified at any point in the workflow.
Unlike a hand-drawn mask, Luma Range adjustments can be applied from one image to another, and the effect will be based on the luminance of each image. This functionality is a huge time- saver as it eliminates the need to create precision masks for each frame in a shoot. The new Luma Range selection masks open up an incredible range of editing possibilities, from selective noise reduction to precise color grading.
Linear Gradient Mask Capture One 12 takes gradient masks to the next level, allowing for editable, moveable, rotatable—and best of all—asymmetric gradient masks.
❿ ❿
