Support Nikon D600

Questions, comments and suggestions regarding Capture One 6.x, 5.x and 4.x for Mac and Windows

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby PhaseZero » Sun Oct 21, 2012 11:37 am

What happens if you convert Nikon D600 raw files to DNG with AdobeDNGConverter v7.2. Are these DNGs also not supported from C1?
CaptureOnePro v6.4.4 + MediaPro v1.3.1 + IDimager (RIP) + IMatch + Mobjects
VistaHome-32bit, 2Core-P8600@2.4GHz 4GB, Nvidia 9800M-GTX + Win7pro 32bit, 4Core-Pi5-M540@2,53GHz 6GB, ATI-Mob HD5650
PhaseZero
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby mikekatz » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:53 pm

Hi Grant

Interesting discussion!

Right off the bat, I have to say that Nikon surprised everyone with the very early shipping date of the camera, and that it's understandable that it will take some time. There's no argument about this at all, at least on my side.

I do agree with most of what you say. what I'm trying to say, though, is that the market is changing rapidly. This is not a Ferrari vs Ford situation. This is a situation where, because of advancing technology, Ferrari (CO) owners can now usefully make use of Ford-type (LR) technology which Ferrari does not offer. In addition, in some ways the Ford technology has overtaken, or is pretty close to, the equivalent Ferrari technology. Ford cannot yet produce a Ferrari, because they lack that one big feature (image quality). However, given the lack of resource constraints you mention on the Ford side, it's quite possible in the near future that Ford can get to make that super car as well as Ferrari. And, if and when that happens, Ferrari may find their market completely eroded.

SFA wrote:Mike,

Whilst I agree with your overall view I don't think the business model is comparable between, say, Adobe and just about anyone else. The nearest comparison might be Corel but ...

That observation is for the very reasons you give really. Adobe does have a wide spread of software products - but no hardware that I am aware of. The spread of products and length of time they have been in the business gives them a large development organisation and a huge industrry presence starting, of course, with the PDF give away stuff.

Realistically the bulk of the RAW conversion business for Adobe is but a small part of their overall reach in the areas of image manipulation and "desk top publishing". They are, by design, a 'cover the market' operation. They pretty much have to be to achieve maximum penetration and dominance in the wider market.

However the fact that people (like us?) choose to use other similar products across Adobe's entire sphere of software influence suggests that people like alternatives to Adobe for a number of disparate reasons. Some people like to have multiple products available because they feel that product A is better at some things then product B an vice versa. Nothing at all wrong with that. Others will have different reasons for not preferring Adobe products.

The introduction of new 'technology', or the support for it, is not something that one should expect. It's a 'nice to have'. But in the end if, say, Ferrari refuse to make a people carrying for a large family just because one of their customers asks for one, now, that is their commercial decision (or, just possibly, technical decision that makes the the commercial decision irrelevant). So the prospective customer goes to Ford or GM who have such products. If he asks Ford or GM, as a new convert, for a supercar he may well be disappointed, although both companies do, from time to time, offer products that might claim such a title.

I have no idea if anyone on the internet keeps a record of which products (esp. RAW converters) support which new innovations and when they do so. Does anyone else have any suggestions for a source?

A very quick glance at a Google search a couple of days ago seemed to suggest that D600 support, unless self created with some sort of technical tool, only existed for Adobe RAW converter tools and, by some sort of default file handling, for Photo Mechanic in part (not a product I know much about.)

I saw suggestions that Apple's Aperture does not yet support the D600. If any company had the apparent customer support argument to address and the resources and industry connections to do so it would have to be Apple. Are they behind the curve?

As I said before - for a number of reasons, not the least being long term support of their own proprietory development approaches, it is probably about time that that onus to provide easy new product adoption was put back onto the manufacturers. They should either provide better software products themselves or, if they don't care to do that, make the adoption of their new technologies easier for third parties.

Whilst their direct clients make no fuss about the software the OEMs provide and continue to buy the products (then bin a proportion of the cost because they never use the software) the OEM's will not care at all for the individual users but will very likely take note of what the large corporate clients suggest. The agencies and similar, Most of whom are likely to be large Adobe Suite users one way or another.

One has to assume that anyone criticising Phase One for apparently being slower than Adobe to make new product RAW conversion support available are being critical because they don't, for some reason, like the Adobe product or the way it does things. There would be no point in complaining otherwise - just use the Adobe product. So might it be possible to live with the issues for a few weeks? If not, how about delaying the purchase of the latest greatest body rather than be a very early adopter? Might save a few dollars as well as the market price stabilises after the launch excitement.

And yes, I do understand that people don't want to disrupt their work flow - so why do so? What is the NEED to adopt the greatest as soon as it is released rather than a few weeks later when integration will likely be smoother?


A few of my thoughts for what they are worth. I have no doubt there will be many differing opinions.


Grant
Regards
Mike
mikekatz
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 11:20 pm

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby SFA » Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:34 pm

Mike141 wrote:Hi Grant

Interesting discussion!

Right off the bat, I have to say that Nikon surprised everyone with the very early shipping date of the camera, and that it's understandable that it will take some time. There's no argument about this at all, at least on my side.

I do agree with most of what you say. what I'm trying to say, though, is that the market is changing rapidly. This is not a Ferrari vs Ford situation. This is a situation where, because of advancing technology, Ferrari (CO) owners can now usefully make use of Ford-type (LR) technology which Ferrari does not offer. In addition, in some ways the Ford technology has overtaken, or is pretty close to, the equivalent Ferrari technology. Ford cannot yet produce a Ferrari, because they lack that one big feature (image quality). However, given the lack of resource constraints you mention on the Ford side, it's quite possible in the near future that Ford can get to make that super car as well as Ferrari. And, if and when that happens, Ferrari may find their market completely eroded.




Hi Mike,

Anything is possible! (and the analogy is more than a little strained of course!)

However Ford has built (or had built for them as many motor manufacturers do) a few high performance cars in their time. Just never stuck to it. Heck they even bought Aston Martin and Jaguar/Land Rover but then sold on. Both companies, one highly specialised something like Ferrari are, the other up market but somewhat more broadly based, are doing well it seems - especially Jaguar/Land Rover.

Ferrari is a slightly odd one in that they are what they are but are also involved with other up market names for marketing purposes and, of course, are part of FIAT group. As are Chrysler .... gets confusing doesn't it!

Personally I don't see major manufacturer thinking, other than in Germany, trying to encompass the widest markets apart from a little badge engineering. It's certainly not technically impossible of course but the management philosophies are different and the skills transfer and economies of scale probablby non-existent. So why would a mass market brand use it's own brand to try to reach a niche market that prefers to but from companies that most people have never heard of?

Back to earth ...

The software market is incredibly influenced by disruptive technologies. (As is hardware, perhaps more obviously. It's physical and visible for a start.) A hugely successful company can disappear almost overnight. Sometimes this will be through an acquisition from which the product lines may or may not survive. At other times the management just gets things wrong, for whatever reason, and takes the wrong road.

In my time I have seen companies ignore their customers and fail, follow customers with every idea they come up with and fail and take a middle road with some failing to grow but other being very successful. (But not always with their original customer base in tact ...)

In terms of RAW converters - I really don't understand why the camera manufacturers seem to get so little stick for their attitude to software requirements. If they have a minor light leak in very specific circumstances the world hears about it within days. Battery problems? Yep, the world is told and expresses its disatisfaction. Focus issues. Millions of people take to the internet and express their disgust abnout the manufacturer.

Poor supplied software to convert RAW files? Wel, yeah, we know. The manufacturer stuff, when provided, is rubbish and most people think it always has been. Unusable for even a few weeks while waiting for something better to come along. So let's go and give .... some third party a lot of stick even if it is nothing to do with them?

So, how about this sort of problem being thrown back at the manufacturers? Why don't they ensure that third party connverter vendors get full support to implenet whatever is required as models and technology changes? Perhaps they think that nearly everyone outside the agencies uses the software they supply and they are happy with it? Has to be either that or they don't care - so which?

If the manufacturers choose not to listen then as consumers we will at least be fully aware of their attitude and so able to make a decision about when to upgrade. Or maybe even whether to upgrade at all. Either way there seems to be little point in aiming all the criticisim at the middleman who has very little say in the matter.

My view, for what little it is worth.

Grant
SFA
 
Posts: 6470
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 9:32 pm

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby Christian1521 » Mon Oct 22, 2012 6:42 am

SFA wrote:In terms of RAW converters - I really don't understand why the camera manufacturers seem to get so little stick for their attitude to software requirements. If they have a minor light leak in very specific circumstances the world hears about it within days. Battery problems? Yep, the world is told and expresses its disatisfaction. Focus issues. Millions of people take to the internet and express their disgust abnout the manufacturer.

Poor supplied software to convert RAW files? Wel, yeah, we know. The manufacturer stuff, when provided, is rubbish and most people think it always has been. Unusable for even a few weeks while waiting for something better to come along. So let's go and give .... some third party a lot of stick even if it is nothing to do with them?

So, how about this sort of problem being thrown back at the manufacturers? Why don't they ensure that third party connverter vendors get full support to implenet whatever is required as models and technology changes? Perhaps they think that nearly everyone outside the agencies uses the software they supply and they are happy with it? Has to be either that or they don't care - so which?

If the manufacturers choose not to listen then as consumers we will at least be fully aware of their attitude and so able to make a decision about when to upgrade. Or maybe even whether to upgrade at all. Either way there seems to be little point in aiming all the criticisim at the middleman who has very little say in the matter.

My view, for what little it is worth.

Grant


I agree with that the camera manufacturers view on customers suck, it comes to how they handle RAW converteres but also when they release a new model. They can never tell us when we will get it. When I buy I car they will tell me exact what week to get it in. It may take time, but they will tell med.

But back to CO. They are doing the same. They may come out with support today, or in 6 months, but they wont tell. They are really tight lipped and as customers we have to wait and see, and its exactly that attitude that forces the customers to change supplier, to one who either delivers fast or at least tells its customers how long the wait will be.

As a product manager I produce a roadmap that sales use with customers. I conduct webinars to talk about my roadmap (with a different degree of transparency). What I dont do is to tell the world to go away until I am done.
Christian
Christian1521
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:41 pm

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby SFA » Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Christian,

I sort of agree about the roadmap but when I was involved with that sort of approach with major customers (those who were likely to funhd the development process to get what they wanted sooner) they would still find reasons to be frustrated. It didn't help that they mostly had differnt needs and priorities and we had to manage all of that into a single 'product'. Supporting multiple versions had proved to be very inefficient and we had consolidated to a songle product base but even that was a painful experience and a moving target.

We actually spent as much time managing expectations as we did with the development team cutting code and testing.

There were so many variables to allow for that if we offered a time frame that was acceptable to the pushiest clients the chances were we would not be able to deliver more often than not. Or we would deliver but then fixing the problem delayed everything else.

Roadmaps become very general. Projects, even without the potential disruption of new products that the camera manufacturers like to surprise us with, were managed privately with those paying the bills and became fully public only at completion. Howver we would be able to tell people, what was likely to be coming in the future though not when. Which is pretty much the same thing that we see here on the forum. (Fortunately we did not have to deal with an open forum back then, but we did have a user group that could be hijacked now and again.)

As far as I can tell most companies in the RAW conversion field are very wary of giving dates for availability but it is usually safe to assume that they will be able to provide a solution, despite the disruptive influence of the manufacturers, at some point reasonably soon after a new model's availability. That is provided that the new release is not so different to what has gone before. If you get into completely new sensor designs (or old one mashed to disrupt what was available before) or release product that totally relies on, say, lens distortion correction to overcome design conflicts, then it is not unreasonable for things to take a little longer. Or indeed a lot longer. Or even not bother at all.

If you business model is like that of Adobe it is just possible that you cannot ignore the numbers of user who might get around to using RAW files on their removable lens system camera. At the consumer level, sell a million units, how many users will shoot RAW? How many of them will use other than the supplied software? Of that number how many will be users of which converters?

For DSLRs at the consumer end the considerations are likely to be similar. Numbers probably fairly low but a large enough share of the market might make it viable to be in place early with the latest tweaks in beta form.

Pro stuff .... a different game. I don't know how the markets split on that but I assume that 'Pro' clients will be part of any developer's development and beta testing program. It certainly works that way on business software applications - I beta test for an organisation in the data extraction market - but that sort of beta vs the Adobe public beta release policy may be a little different.

Other companies, not the least Adobe, seem to have been getting around the issue by allowing people to create their own conversion table files (or ICC profiles in C1's case) by one means or another. That might cover the short term until an official release is provided. Indeed the official release may be based on the work of some of the early adopters. Whether all new manufacturer releases are open enough to make this a solid long term policy (and so justify diverting resources to create the analysis 'tool') is another matter. I doubt the manufacturers are likely to commit to such a path and indeed they probably cannot do so for any meanful period into the future. So we ar left with the firefighting that we see today, at least for the predictable future.

So whilst I fully accept your argument for an open roadmap policy in principle the practicalities of such a thing, in my view, are challenging in an open forum environment. Perhaps less challenging in and closed forum with captive clients and prospective clients in a business environment if well managed.

What we know is the C1 people would like to be able to support all cameras and intend to do so unless the technology is so disruptive or the apparent demand so light (or likely to be so light) that it would not make much sense to make it a priority at any level.

What we don't know is how complex and demanding the development needs are for a newly released camera. And so we don't know how long it may take to introduce something usable. In fact not just something that is usable but preferably something that is the final solution in order to ensure so far as one can that any work performed will have longevity. An interim solution that then requires re-work of image edits when the final solution is released is unlikely to be met with enthusiasm. Well, not more than once ...

So, I still say that the manufacturers are the ones that shoud be first in line for early adopter 'observations'. They should at least come clean and explain why they don't seem to be as helpful as they could be to recognised and respected 3rd party vendors. To do so would seem to be in their interest as far as sales are concerned - but maybe not?


Grant
SFA
 
Posts: 6470
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 9:32 pm

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby Knud Erik » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:06 pm

Frankly I'm a bit confused by this thread all together. I feel as though we have been completely upfront and honest about how we handle camera support as well as how we are approaching this specific camera. The long time users of our software should know from experience that if a camera comes out on the first of the month, we likely won't have support by the 15th. We're a very diverse company, not just a software company, and support for cameras takes time. As this camera is only a month old (announced the 13th of Sept), it will invariably take a bit longer for us to meet your needs. Looking to the past I'd say 90 days is about the average turn around time (pending demand).
Please be patient, as stated earlier we're working on it and I hope we can have it for you soon. (and even counting from the 7 people on this thread, demand is still quite low :wink: )


Hi Drew
Thank you for an answer that seems relevant. I hope you will make a priority to the D600, so you will not need 90 days. It is not only the users that have an interest in that - I hope PhaseOne also can see an interest in that too, otherwise you might learn from many of the comments in this thread.

You write that you are a "bit confused by this thread all together".
I would recommend you to reflect a bit on your way of responding to this thread. Your first answer was
Support for the camera will come but demand sets the priority.
As demand is light, so is the priority.

I think most people will understand this as you will wait until you have seen a higher demand (that hardly can be measured). As I understand your last answer that this is not the case. Do you understand that some of us have been confused?
Knud Erik
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:01 am

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby Christian1521 » Sun Nov 04, 2012 8:16 pm

And what he failed to tell us is that the support is there in version 7. It works and I am probably on my way to upgrade, despite the way PO views its customers.
Christian1521
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:41 pm

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby designdef » Fri Nov 09, 2012 4:08 pm

Capture One is probably THE most expensive raw converter out there, does this not mean you should be leading the field in terms of support for 'just released' camera models? If not, what is the high price justification? This rather laid back attitude has gone on for years, I remember asking would my Panasonic LC1 and Sony R1 be supported, must be 8 years back now, the reply was always "it is on our list of cameras we wish to support in the future" it really seems to be a corporate auto reply! I was thrilled at the release of COP7 especially as I had been waiting for Lens Correction to be added to the list of adjustments, and finally it came, but despite claiming "using bespoke profiles for popular medium format, DSLR and ILC lenses." CO only supports 19 Nikon lenses, the rest you have to work out yourself!
19 Nikon lenses may seem reasonable to some but the excellent PT Lens application ($25!) works well, has been going for years and supports 100's+ lenses - if they can do that, what's the problem Phase One?
designdef
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:52 pm

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby NN200843UL3 » Tue Nov 20, 2012 2:52 pm

Does Capture One still not support NIkon D600 raw files?! If not... does anyone know any software that does?!!!
NN200843UL3
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:33 pm

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby Christian1521 » Tue Nov 20, 2012 2:54 pm

NN200843UL3 wrote:Does Capture One still not support NIkon D600 raw files?! If not... does anyone know any software that does?!!!


Try reading my previous post, 2 posts above yours.
Christian1521
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:41 pm

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby Ptit_gars » Mon Jan 07, 2013 2:47 pm

Any news on a support of the D600 in C1 6.x ?
Ptit_gars
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 1:33 pm

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby Drew » Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:04 pm

Ptit_gars wrote:Any news on a support of the D600 in C1 6.x ?

Support was added in Capture One 7.
Kind Regards,
Drew
Phase One
Drew
Crew
Crew
 
Posts: 4370
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:34 pm
Location: Copenhagen, DK / NY, NY

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby Ptit_gars » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:23 pm

Thank you for your answer. :wink:

The problem is I'm more interested by C1 Express 6, and even if I were interested by C1 Pro 7, the price between the two soft is a real problem, even if we just talk about an upgrade (for the moment, i use C1 3 LE). There is no possible alternative for the moment or in the near future for the previous version of C1 7 ?
Ptit_gars
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 1:33 pm

Re: Support Nikon D600

Postby lightrack » Mon Feb 25, 2013 4:15 pm

Support was added in CO Express 7 that was released today. It took 5 month to get D600 support in CO Express
lightrack
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:20 am

Previous

Return to Capture One 6.x, 5.x and 4.x Software



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests