Actually I think they do - and some features are Mac only (like tagging which is missing on the PC). Maybe the capture histogram is only available on the PC.... but it's not worth anything anyway as it is just a reflection of the output histogram anyway

You'll find the current Silkypix interface a bit different to C1 - but it's worth persevering with

Matt

Just to start off... I'm using Windows XP with 2Gb of RAM on a Xeon quad processor C1 is about the same speed as SP. I also use them both on a Centrino Tosh laptop running XP with 1Gb RAM - and it's perfectly usable.

I prefer Silkypix over Capture One LE for a number of reasons:
* Lens control: arbitrary rotate, barrel/pin cushion, distortion etc
* Chromatic aberration controls
* Film emulation (Provia, Velvia, Astia etc)
* Fine control over colours
* Built in noise reduction (excellent for ISO1600)
* Flexible sharpening algorithms
* Upsizing direct from RAW
* Handles K10D and DNG (C1LE now does... finally!)

However, there are a few niggles that I have. And these are points you need to bear in mind when comparing the relative speeds of the packages:
* Silkypix renders the complete image to the preview window. This can be a bit slow, especially when you've piled on sharpening and noise reduction etc. However, they "stagger" the processing so you can still work with the UI while it processes. C1, on the other hand, normally shows a quick render on the display (except when showing at 100%) - you are meant to use the "Focus" loupe to see the result. To be honest, I like the C1 way of working as it's quicker

* C1 allows processing of RAW files on a queue while you work with the next image. Silkypix allows you to flag images and then process as a batch (and you can't do anything while that's happening). Again, I prefer the C1 method.

That said - even though there are some things about C1 that I prefer - the Silkypix image quality is better than C1, IMHO and I spend less time in Photoshop It can cope with very high ISO images and get very, very respectable results which I can't get out of any other RAW converter I've tried to date means I'm sticking with it

(And for the record I've got C1LE, Lightroom, Pixmantec Premium, and Adobe CS2)
Matt

Dan,
Just install the Pro (demo) version then. And a few extra colour spaces appear in LE... No hacking required

But, as I said, AdobeRGB will suit 99.9% of people, especially as you normally have to convert the resulting image back into something with a smaller gamut anyway (monitor or print)

Matt

DOH! Daniel's absolutely right
The "Capture" tab has the "capture histogram" which is affected by the exposure controls etc

(I've been using Silkypix for a long time now...)

In any case, I usually judge whether I've got a good shot by the shape of the right hand edge of the histogram. When you adjust the exposure etc, if the right edge looks like a slope, then you're ok - the RAW was fine. If the right edge looks like a cliff, then the RAW has been clipped as well.

If you want to use the "ProPhoto RGB" you should find it in the Color Management Settings of Capture One.

However, now I use Silkypix, I only ever use AdobeRGB, and generally as 16-bit TIFF. There's not usually a problem because: (1) Silkypix has some rather excellent film response curves, (2) I'll end up with something close to AdobeRGB in the end anyway (see my points above).

Regarding 16-bit JPG - this is only in JPEG2000 which, AFAIK, is encumbered with various patents and royalty issues As they say, there's no such thing as a free lunch

Matt

Thomas,
Here's what happens:
* RAW in camera is just that
* The histogram display in camera has gone through two processes: (1) white balance, (2) colour profile

In Capture One (or any other converter), the same applies:
* The output histogram display is affected by
1) White Balance
2) Exposure compensation
3) Curves
4) Film response type
5) Colour profile

If your colour profile is set to sRGB then you are very likely to clip the reds. Even the in-camera JPG will likely clip in the red channel with sRGB enabled. AdobeRGB will give you a wider gamut that tends to give more headroom in reds. ProPhoto will give you tons more room (but you'll have to output to 16-bit TIFF).

Capture One does have a capture histogram that should be representative of the RAW data (and not the processed result).

Bear in mind these points though:
* White balance and colour space do NOT affect the RAW data at all (they are merely tagged onto the RAW)
* The WB and colour space DO affect the embedded thumbnail (which is where the camera histogram comes from, AFAIK)
* Changing the WB can effectively change your exposure - so you have to edit the two together
* If you choose a wide gamut colour space then you will have to make a compromise sooner or later... when you come to save for web or output to print.

The skill comes in deciding, based on the image content, how to contain the blown areas, or when to decide that blown areas are ok

HTH!
Matt

Brian,
The front image is very soft, IMHO Makes it look very out of focus even.

When you've done the gallery, it may be a good idea to pull in a random photo or two onto the front page (easy if you're using PHP).

Matt

It's "something in Windows". Windows file viewer is a bit yeurrrgh.
The viewer in Windows is also notorious for modifying the file without you knowing (hit Nikon filess I believe!)

Use IrfanView

Matt

ROFL!
I see you are today
Matt

I'd beaten you to it
https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4530

Matt

ROFL @ Stevo