My First Fuji Images Processed By Capture One

I  had a recent photo shoot. I decided to use Capture One to process it.  When I was testing out various RAW converters for my Fuji cameras, I mentioned I loved Capture One’s skin tones. Funnily, for my first Capture One session, I decided to do the set in black and white.

I love black and white photos but have rarely processed my portraiture in black and white. So for this shoot, I put my camera in black and white mode and decided my set should be in black and white. Of course, the RAW would come out in color, but at least in my camera, I would know what the black and white photos will look like.

DSCF1636 DSCF1659 DSCF1671 DSCF1731 DSCF1792 DSCF1802 DSCF1864

The models were Haley J, Kimberly P, and Madison L.

My Thoughts

I think they look  underexposed. But I wanted to give it a darker feel. If I were to do these again, I would try upping the exposure or brightness setting in Capture One and seeing how it would turn out.

Also, I could’ve used the levels slider in Capture One to make the blacks darker. I don’t know why I didn’t think of that. I’m used to Lightroom’s black slider.

How Did I Process These?

If you’re interested in how I processed these, I used a “complicated” method: I just put the saturation slider to 0.  Yeah, it’s probably not the best way to do it, but I have seen  professionals who I respect use that method.

I guess I have more control if I used the black and white setting such as filtering certain colors. But this is my lazy, quick, and easy method. Also, I can put a slight blue tint to the shadows when I have the saturation at 0. I don’t know if I can do that if I use the black and white setting in Capture One.

If Lightroom does come out with the film simulations for the Fuji cameras,  hopefully, I can just use that. I love how Fuji’s black and white film simulation looks.

Next Version of Adobe Will Have Improved X-Trans Support?

According to Fuji Rumors, Adobe is planning to have better X-Trans support. It looks like it might be the next minor release of 5. Not only that, it will have the Film simulation modes.

Wow, that is a game changer. I love Astia for portraiture. It was one of the things I missed when switching from JPEG to RAW shooting.

I was getting used to Capture One too. I was ready to commit 100% to Capture One. Now Fuji Rumors drops this news to us. This will make my decision harder on which software to use. I would need to see how well Adobe handles the X-Trans of course. Hopefully, Adobe will release it before my 60 day trial of Capture One is up.

My Obligatory Fuji X-T1 Thoughts

Being a Fuji fanboy, I feel I need to give some thoughts on the official Fuji X-T1 release. There is a lot of info on Fuji Rumors. And Rico did a good review on it. 

I mentioned before, I won’t buy this camera. But there are certain things I am excited about. 

The EVF!

Wow, when I heard about the EVF, I got excited. Realistically, unless there is a major breakthrough, there is nothing more we can do with the sensors. The only way to improve the camera is improving the other stuff.

The EVF sounds like a dream come true. A second window to check focus? That sounds awesome. Bigger, better, clearer, and better than ever? That sounds great as well. Pretty soon, EVFs will have a major advantage over OVFs.

I hope they have a even better EVF for the X-Pro 2 and X-E3. If they do, I’m definitely upgrading just for the improved EVF. It won’t let me take better pictures, but it will make my life easier when taking pictures.

So that’s it. I only care about the awesome EVF that it supposedly has. Everything else is gravy.

Of course, real tethering support will be great too.

 

 

 

Capture One First Impressions

I was impressed by Capture One’s rendering of Fuji’s RAW files in my previous post. Since I had 60 days to try it out, I decided to put it through the paces with my recent shoot.

Obviously, since this is my first time with Capture One, there will be a lot of growing pains. There will be some getting used to with UI and its quirks. Maybe after my 60 day trial runs out, I’ll do my final thoughts on Capture One and see if I want to buy it.

Session vs Catalogue

Capture One has both sessions and catalogues. Lightroom only has a catalogue. If I’m understanding them correctly,  sessions are contained in its own box. So you can move sessions around from computer to computer if you wish. So each shoot can be a session where you can edit in different computers if you wish. Catalogue will just keep your entire photos in one place. I do like the session concept.

Workflow

As expected, my workflow was slower in Capture One. My Lightroom workflow was so fast. And that’s just me being unfamiliar with Capture One.

One of my main gripes was the Photoshop workflow. Lightroom and Photoshop were best buddies, since Adobe created both. But It’s not in Capture One.

I had export my files as PSD (or TIFF) and then open them up in Photoshop. After I make my edits in Photoshop, the PSDs don’t show up in Capture One! Is it suppose to? So it’s not part of my session. I had to create a batch action in Photoshop to get my photos processed to JPEG to publish. I need to figure this out.

My Favorite Feature Not on Lightroom

It’s the keystone feature. Man this is the best feature ever. Lightroom should add this in instead of trying to do it automatically. This makes straightening images better.

Other Quirks I noticed

I can’t pull up the darkest shadows in the curves function. That is weird. I had to use levels to do it. Maybe that’s the intended use.

I also miss my black slider and the white slider in Lightroom.

I’m not sure what the brightness slider does. I guess it’s decoupled with Exposure somehow.

I wish I can read tutorials about Capture One instead of watching videos. I know watching someone do it can be more helpful, but sometimes I don’t want to watch a video to learn how to do something.

 

So Far…

It’s weird. But it’s only because I’m not used to it. I think after 60 days, I should have a better idea and can make an informed decision.

Capture One vs Lightroom vs PhotoNinja vs Iridient for Fuji X-Trans Portraitures

We know that everyone complains about how Adobe handles Fuji RAF files. There has been alternatives such as PhotoNinja, Iridient, and Capture One. So I decided to try them and see how they handle RAF files for portraiture. Why portraiture? Because that’s the style of photography I do. I want the best RAW processor to get the best out of the X-Trans sensor. 

This isn’t just a pixel peeping exercise. Sure, certain software can bring out details better. They also render colors differently. So you have to figure out what gives you the best possible look that you’re going for.

Sample Images 1

The samples are straight out of the camera with no adjustments. These are at its default settings. Sure, maybe if we fiddle with stuff, we can get almost identical outputs. But I want to see what gives me the best starting point.

Since my trial license for PhotoNinja expired, I had to take a screen shot. So keep that in mind.

The following images are shot at f/4.0, 1/125 sec, at 200 ISO with my Fuji X-E1.

Capture One
Capture One
Iridient
Iridient
PhotoNinja
PhotoNinja
LightRoom
LightRoom

Right away, you can tell these are different.  They all have different tones to the image.

Let’s See These at 100%

These are screen grabs from each software. You can click on them to get a bigger size. For PhotoNinja, I had to take a screen shot again. Hopefully, you can still tell the difference.

Capture One
Capture One
Iridient
Iridient
PhotoNinja
PhotoNinja
Lightroom
Lightroom

It looks like Iridient captures the details better. The other three are about the same at its default settings. I  can’t get over PhotoNinja’s weird colors though.

Sample #2

The settings for these are f/4.0, 1/250 sec at 800 ISO using my Fuji X100s. This is lit using a flash. Once again, these are straight out of the camera using the software’s default settings. 

Capture One
Capture One
Iridient
Iridient
PhotoNinja
PhotoNinja
Lightroom
Lightroom

At 100% 

Once again, you can click on them to get a better view.

Capture One
Capture One
Iridient
Iridient
Photo Ninja
Photo Ninja
Lightroom
Lightroom

Wow, for these images, Iridient looks the worst. It looks weird. Is it the noise reduction that Iridient tried to give? I like Capture One’s output the best. It looks the most natural.

PhotoNinja’s version looks pretty good too. But I still can’t get over that weird tint the image has.

What Is My Favorite?

Capture One wins. The skin tone looks better compared to the other software. Detail wise, Iridient seem to pull more out. But Capture One does a great job. 

I like the look of Lightroom as well. But I think that’s because I’m so used to seeing Lightroom’s renderings. It looks  “normal” to me.

PhotoNinja’s output looks okay. The screen-grabs are accurate. There is no funny business going on. I just don’t like the weird tint in the images, especially in the first image.

Iridient is funny. For the first set of images, Irident seems to have the best output. For the second set, it gave the worst output. I’m thinking it’s the noise reduction since the second image is at ISO 800. I can’t believe it makes that much difference. Or maybe Iridient can’t handle the X-Trans II sensor of the X100s.

In the end, Capture One is my choice. It’s better than Lightroom for sure. Too bad it’s so expensive though.

It’s all personal preference. For Web viewing, all four softwares can give you a decent image. You need to do your own investigation on which look you like better.

What do you guys think? Which software gives the best look for your Fuji cameras?

Photographers and Their Websites

In most cases, I can tell if someone is a good photographer by looking at their Website. I don’t mean looking at their gallery, I mean looking at their actual Website.

To be a good photographer, you need a good eye. That means your eyes has to know what looks good from an artistic and design standpoint. If your Website looks like crap, then chances are, your photos look like crap too.

What makes a good Website? It needs to look good from the colors to typography. It has to be useable. It needs to be simple. It needs to be focused.

Also, with all the free, good-looking templates from Squarespace, Wix, and even WordPress, there is no excuse NOT to have a good looking photography site. It still boggles my mind when Photographers have Websites that looks like it’s from the 90’s.

Basic Skin Retouching Methods

I have learned several ways to retouch skin. Some are good and some are bad. I’m going to retouch the same image and describe each one.

The Original Image

This is the original image I’m going to use. The hardest part was finding a picture of a model that  had skin that can be retouched for this exercise. Most of my models had great skin.

Sorry LaCole for using your un-retouched pic. Fortunately, I don’t think she will even see this blog.

Here is the un-retouched photo. I shot this with my Fuji X100s. I cropped to her face to get a better look at her blemishes. I also fixed the exposure. Other than that, it’s straight RAW out of the camera converted using Lightroom.

LaColeNoReTouch

Before I begin, I didn’t put too much effort into this. I hate retouching. It feels tedious to me. I rather be shooting than retouching.

Therefore, these might not look good and sloppily done. It’s because they are. Also, I was doing these on my laptop with a dirty screen, using my touchpad. Those are my excuses if these don’t look good. Anyway, let’s get started.

Blur Skin + Healing Brush

This is probably the worst method ever. I learned this method early on from one of Scott Kelby’s youtube videos. I can’t believe he suggests this method. It is one of the worst methods ever.

Having said that, it is the fastest method. This took me less that 5 minutes to do. The only problem is that it destroys skin texture. It gives the porcelain doll look. I do not like it. It makes it look unnatural.

Also, some people abuse this technique so they blur the skin even more. It makes the image look ridiculous.

LaColeSurfaceBlur

How do you use this?

  1. Copy to new layer.
  2. Use surface blur in Photoshop. Scott actually says to use Gaussian Blur. I think surface blur makes a “cleaner” blur. So use that instead. You need to mess with the slider to get enough blur to clear away most imperfections while trying to keep things looking natural.
  3. Drop the opacity down in the blurred layer until it looks natural.
  4. Mask away the eyes, lips, and hair. That way, those will look sharp and natural.
  5. Heal away the rest of imperfections.

Frequency Separation

This is where you create 2 layers. One is the tone layer. The other is the texture layer.  You “separate” those frequencies.

That way, when you heal the skin, you don’t have to worry about the skin tone. You just have to make sure the textures match. So you can go to any place in the skin to get the sample for your skin to heal from.

This preserves skin tone and texture much better than blurring skin method or straight healing brush method. This takes a long time to do though. My image took about 15-20 minutes to complete. And I wasn’t even putting much effort into it.

Also, you can get a bad texture and screw it up. Also, when you have skin as bad as hers, it’s hard to find a good texture to start from. So it can look “patterned.” You would need to get into 200% zoom and do it more meticulously.

But if the model has good skin in most places, this is one of the best ways to retouch skin.

LacoleFreqSep

How do you do this? It’s too complicated to explain. Search “frequency separation” on Youtube and you can find a ton of videos from there.

Dodge and Burning

Dodging and Burning is what the best retouchers use in the industry. It completely preserves all skin textures. It is the most natural method.

The only problem: it takes freaking too long. Also, there is no way to do this with a mouse or touchpad. I had to bust out my Wacom tablet. If you hate retouching like me, this will test your patience.

However, I do use this method more often these days since it makes people look more natural. I don’t do it at a micro level too much though. I do it on a macro level.

If you want to do this properly, you need to zoom in to 300-400%. This is also the hardest method since you need patience and artistic talent. When you dodge and burn away the skin, you can lose tonality. But you can add tonality as well afterwards. Therefore, it helps if you know how to paint in shadows and light.

If you overdo this and make the skin super smooth, the skin will look blurred. So you have to be careful not to spend 8 hours chugging away with this method and have it look like something you could’ve done in 5 min. However at 100% zoom, you’ll be able to see each texture of the skin.

LacoleDANDB

So how do you do this? This is also complicated to explain. Create a 50% gray, soft light layer (search for this method on the Internets). Then you zoom in 300%, dodge dark spots, and burn light spots in the skin. Repeat until everything looks even.

This can get complicated. Like I mentioned earlier you may lose tonality. So you have to paint those back in. You may also lose skin color as well (like in my pic). So you would also need to paint those back in. It’s just too tedious and painful to do it correctly.

You should, however, do D&B on a macro level for all your images. It can help the image.

100% Zoom Of Each Method

Here are the 100% zoom of each method.

1. Blur

Blur
Blur

2. Frequency Separation

Frequency Seperation
Frequency Separation

3. Dodging and Burning

Dodging and Burning
Dodging and Burning

Other Methods

There are  other methods I haven’t shown.

  • Lowering clarity slider in Lightroom. This can look horrible if you’re not careful. But it can lighten up some blemishes if used well.
  • Going crazy with clone stamp on a new layer and dropping opacity.
  • Using portraiture and other insta-retouching software.
  • Many others I’ve forgotten about or not know about.

Final Thoughts

You wouldn’t use these methods exclusively. You would combine these methods to get the best possible results.

Honestly, I like the Blur method out of all 3 with this particular image. Yeah I know I wrote  it’s the worst method. But it looks the best to me. Perhaps it’s because it doesn’t look sloppy. I just can’t stand the over-smoothness of the skin though. Oh well. Maybe if I spent more time on the other methods.

Each technique can be used depending on where the image will be shown. If you need to show images to a client quickly at a small resolution, the blur method might be good enough. If you’re going to print big, perhaps the other methods can be good.

Besides using software, having someone with good skin, getting a good makeup artist, having good lighting, and other factors can help as well.

Other sneaky ways you can try is soft-focusing and/or using a high ISO can help make the skin look smoother–whatever you can do to lose the details.

Which Method Did You Like The Best?

Well, which ones?