Adobe Photoshop Elements or Capture One for RAW ?

I tried two new things this weekend, shooting in RAW and Macro, both seem to have a steep learning curve. I've had a *ist DS since just before Xmas, and have spent a lot time getting used to it, using the jpeg mode. Being an avid watcher of these forums, I thought I would try using the RAW option that a lot of people appear to use. I dug out some of the old M42 macro gear I have, fixed it to the DS and started looking around for a subject. Gave up after an hour or so, nothing seemed suitable. Went off to clean out some kitchen cupboards, and 'BINGO', found the subject matter at last.






I then went to process the picutre with Elements 3 on the Mac, but found it difficult to use. I downloaded a trial copy of Capture One and found it a lot easier to use, I've since revisited Elements 3 and feel a little happier using it. My question is, should I stick with Elements 3, ( I have the latest RAW plug-in), or pay out more money for Capture One, and would I notice the difference. You can see a pic of the equipment I used and the full subject matter here,
http://web.mac.com/john_md/iWeb/ click on Photos 6

Kitchen cupboard, eh? Remind me to politely decline any invitations to dinner.

But a good first effort.

George

If you want more control over processing RAW files, than Elements, but want to pay less than for Capture One, have a look at Rawshooter Essentials (free!)

Rawshooter Essentials appears to be Windows only, I'm running OS X on a Mac. I'll probably need to to take a wider range of pics, ( other than the 'tattie' pics ), try Elements and Capture One, ( before the free trial expires ), and see which one I like best. I had just wondered if anyone 'out-there' had gone through the same process and come up with a preference. One of the problems I had with Elements 3, was that it was processing the RAW pictures without me having any input, I since discovered I had to disable 'Automatic ' in some of the options, so each time I use it I learn a little bit more. I must admit Capture One felt more 'Apple-like', very intutive and easy to use. I think I'll keep taking the pictures for now and as long as I save the RAW files, I can compare different software as I find it. I would like to try Apple's 'Aperture' but so far I don't think it's very Pentax friendly

One advantage of Capture One is that it is Matt (Matic)'s favourite convertor, so you will have a useful source of expert advice on this board.

G

G'day.
I've been using Photoshop CS2 for RAW files from *ist D and *ist Ds.

Very easy to use and does a great job.
Auto correct is very accurate.

Hooroo.
Regards, Trevor.
Australia

(Very kind of you George.)
Just to explain my reasons why it's my favourite (still)...

I've tried, I think, all the PC RAW convertors there are: dcRaw, Bibble Pro, Raw Shooter Premium (which I bought, thought I'd use but didn't), Adobe CS2, Capture One.

Yet everytime I come back to Capture One. The reason is this: image quality. Adobe CS2 is a close second when it comes to image quality, but C1 is much easier to create film quality output and is faster for processing a batch of shots.

I've commented on the various differences in detail on other threads, but this review (not mine) does help show what I mean. Just whizz to the bottom and check out the comparitive outputs. Don't forget that Capture One LE has exactly the same image quality (it just can't resize the output).

As with all RAW convertors, it takes a little time to master (say a couple of weeks of solid use at least), so whichever approach you take - stick with it

Personally, I wouldn't give up C1 for anything
If you want a quick start guide, check out: https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1765

BTW: Gruesome skin condition you've got in the macro!

Hope that helps!
Matt

Yes, I think your right, I'll keep playing with PS Elements and C1 for now and see how things go. I also downloaded a Beta copy of Adobe's new Lightroom, http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom/
It's a Mac only Beta, although the full version will be Mac & Windows. I've had a little play with it and was impressed by all the features. I guess I'll have to include this in my investigations!

I keep my files as .PEF and don't bother converting them i.e. I keep the original file as my negative.

I drop that into Extensis Portfolio, from here I can convert to .jpg

It is after that stage, where I am stuck for choices, stuck for knoweldge and confused by the choices.

I have OS X and Elements 3 amongst other graphics programs, I would like to find simple steps for Elements 3, and I mean dead simple for me, so that I can take 2 pictures - one is a nicely blurred photo which I want as the background and the other is an animal in a cage. All I want to do is somehow select (Magic Wand Tool?) the animal and use my background as the background i.e. amalgamate the two pictures. But how?

I have tried several articles and am confused.

I'm not sure if PS Elements 3 has the tools to do it but this is how I would do it in PS CS/CS2.

Open the foreground shot in PS and use the Extract Tool to 'cutout' the part of the foreground that you want to keep. This will then appear on its own layer with a transparent background. The extract tool works best with subjects having a well defined/contrasting edge. Hairy animals are more difficult.

Open your background shot as another layer beneath your foreground shot.

Alternatively you can use layer masking. Open both pics on 2 different layers with the foreground on top, then choose the appropriate tools/options to gradually reveal your background.

Lack of time prevents my giving detailed 'simple' instructions. Have a play with both and see how you get on.

Yes, all the tools you need are in Elements 3. Although I would open the background shot first, process it as required, blur, enhance, turn to b&w or what ever you want to do. Then open your foreground shot, select the portion you want, you dont have to be too accurate at this stage, select 'copy' and then 'paste' it on to your background picture. From here you can resize, move or apply filters and effects to this new 'layer'. Then depending on how accurately you selected your foreground you can trim the image using the eraser tool. Then save in any format you need


Here's an example, there were no cars in the original pic, the image of the car was copied and pasted a few times, resizing as I went.

Right Galoot armed with this I am going to have a determined retry, I really want to get to be able to do this and am armed with the knowledge that PSE v3 has at least everything needed, now I need to just get it sorted and then I will be a very happy guy.

It's not a difficult thing to do, but selecting the portion of the foreground picture you want to place on your background can be a little akward and time consuming. The more time you spend getting this right the better the final pic will be. As I said you can either make a careful selection before you copy and paste or tidy up the image once you have pasted it on to the background. You do have a "Magnetic Lasso Tool" for making a selection, but as Mannesty said in a previous post, "The extract tool works best with subjects having a well defined/contrasting edge. Hairy animals are more difficult."
I used this Magnetic Lasso Tool" for cutting out the images of the car above, and if you look closely some of the edges are not quite right and the car aerial is missing, but this was only a quick example to give you an idea of what you could do.

I am sure it is not so difficult.

However when I select with Magic Wand and copy and paste the Peacock, the background I want to remove (grey paving) is pasted as well.

If you look at EPHOTOZINE at my photos (spb2) there is a picture called "Peacock searching restaurant".

I opened up Elements 3 made a new blank file and filled it with colour grey. I then open my Peacock, try and select the whole bird with the Magic Wand, copy and paste to the other file ........ grey paving is pasted as well.

So I am doing something simple wrong.

The Magic Wand tool selects areas of similar colours, and is probably not what you need. The birds feet and some of the other colours are close to the colour of the paving, that is probably why it is being copied. if you use the tool above the Magic Wand, the Lasso tool, you will find that you copy what you select. There are 3 varieties of Lasso tool, try them all and see what results you get.