Fuji X-Ploits; X-Trans Sensor and Capture One Pro; Part IV

X-T1 image converted from RAW to TIFF in Capture One Pro 8 (click to enlarge)

Lately, I've been writing about my experiences in testing Phase One's Capture One Pro 8 software in conjunction with my X-T1 X-Trans files.  My three previous posts on the same subject can be found here, here, and here.

For this last post on the subject, I wanted to determine, primarily for myself, as to whether it is better for me to just open the X-T1 RAW files I judge as "keepers" in C1P, have the program automatically apply my newly determined default settings, then export the files as 16-bit TIFF files, subsequently to be imported into Lightroom CC 2015 and edited non-destructively there...or...fully edit the files in C1P save as a 16-bit TIFF, import into Lightroom as finished images.

I experimented on several image files, some which had all of its data fit neatly between the sides of the histogram (0-255 values) and others which had either some highlight or shadow detail lost as the edges of the histogram showed truncation (we know that a lot of that is recoverable if the file is a RAW file).

Here is what I found.

Whether or not I made any adjustments in C1P, with a bit of work I could make both versions of the images look almost identical in Lightroom CC 2015.  Not a lot of work, but the kind when you keep comparing two images, go back and tweak a bit, compare, tweak, etc.  Almost identical but not identical.  Either method seems acceptable.  If you didn't compare some of the fine detail in the highlights in both images, you would never notice. And I'm talking about some really fine detail.  Even at 100% image size you would hardly notice.

Additionally, I could successfully recover highlights and shadows in Lightroom whether or not the RAW file showed them blown out in C1P.  Now, I didn't test extreme images, but ones of white painted boats on a summer day with full sun, cascading water in full sun with shadows under foliage, etc.  The histograms showed much of the white blown out and little detail visible in the shadows (in the cascade image) in the RAW images.  I processed the same image file in C1P, one with no adjustments and the other bring the highlight and shadow detail back within the histogram.  In Lightroom, I edited the version that had no adjustments and was able to pull down the highlights to show almost the exact tonality as the one adjusted in C1P. Not quite the same, but really, really close.  I could pull pretty much the same detail out of both.

When testing the cascading water surrounded by heavy foliage with both highlight and shadow detail lost, I was able to recover all of the shadow detail as well as the highlight detail in the water.  But the water in the image adjusted in C1P just looked bit better, to my liking.  It might not to you.  The water had more texture and "character," is the only way I can describe it.  I think another way to describe it would be to say the highlights in the cascading water image had less micro or local contrast in the highlights, thereby showing more subtle tonalities than the image which only was adjusted in Lightroom.

After a number of tests, I think I would settle on this methodology for editing my images when using C1P:  With images where the histogram shows no potential loss of highlight or shadow detail, I would just open them in C1P at my new default settings, then save and export as a 16-bit TIFF.  From there, import them into Lightroom and make any other tweaks to my taste.  End of story for those.

One room schoolhouse converted in Capture One Pro 8 (click to enlarge)

For those that show some loss of highlight and shadow detail, I would recover some of it, not all of it.  The reason is that when recovering all of the highlight detail in C1P, the TIFFs start to look a bit like an HDR image.  I actually had to increase the "Highlights" slider in Lightroom to bring them back up a bit to where I thought they should have been. Knowing that I can recover highlights in Lightroom if necessary, I would tone them down somewhat in C1P by drawing most of the histogram back in, but do the rest in Lightroom. I think that would be a good compromise to get the look I like.  Your mileage may vary.

I think keeping the TIFF as close to the RAW file as possible has some advantages as anything I do in C1P changes those pixels forever.  It is destructive editing as is Photoshop.  By saving most of my editing for Lightroom, I then keep more options open in its non-destructive editing process.  So, color, saturation, contrast, clarity, cropping, straightening, etc., to me, would be better off being done in Lightroom as I could then go back and change those things at any time—or make multiple versions of the file with little memory penalty.

Here is what I think I would do if I were to incorporate C1P into my workflow for my X-Trans sensored cameras.

I would import all images into a folder on my desktop.  Open C1P, create a new "session" with these new images.  I would then look at them in the "viewer" as I would in the Lightroom Library module and pick out those images that I would call "selects" or "keepers."  I would then open each one, apply the default settings in C1P, adjust highlights and shadows if necessary, then save as a 16-bit TIFF in the same folder.  I would also add 5 starts as a rating to each.  (I wouldn't do this for all the images, which could number in the hundreds, but only for those few I deem as the best and worth of spending time to edit.)

From there, I would import that folder of RAW and TIFF images into my Lightroom catalog, adding key words, copyright metadata, etc., as I now normally do when I import directly from my memory card.  

One of the reasons I wouldn't convert all of my X-Trans image files in C1P and save as 16-bit TIFF files, is that the TIFF files are about 3 times the size of the X-Trans RAW files. Additionally, many X-Trans images look very good when converted from RAW in Lightroom and any additional images I may want to edit in the future could very well be done successfully in Lightroom.  In the future, I'm hoping Lightroom will get better when dealing with X-Trans files.

Bottom line for me:  Capture One Pro is an excellent image editing software program.  It is very powerful, fully featured and does an excellent job with X-Trans files.  I have absolutely no complaints on how well this software does.  I had fun learning and using it. That being said, I am just not able to convince myself to add the expense of buying C1P ($299.00 US), adding all of the steps enumerated above to my editing process as well as creating many files that have had to be destructively edited and saved at three times the size of a RAW file.

After my trial period expires, I will give up my access to C1P, but keep in mind that it is there if I need it in the future.

Thanks for looking. Enjoy! 

Dennis A. Mook 

All content on this blog is © 2013-2015 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.