Panasonic GM1 support?

Discussions, questions, comments and suggestions regarding Capture One PRO, Capture One DB and Capture One Express 8x and 7.x

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby SFA » Sun Apr 13, 2014 8:45 pm

jknights wrote:
Keith Reeder wrote:It is what it is, Chris.

There are, as I see it, two "likely" (I use the word in its loosest sense) reasons why a given Raw converter is slow to provide support for a niche camera.

Either:

  • there's some hidden agenda and an agreed policy of deliberately delaying support purely out of spite, malice or "other" (I read just yesterday on the Adobe Lr forum that the lack of Linux support was some grand, evil scheme involving Adobe, Microsoft and Apple, to keep down "enlightened" Linux users and their choice of OS!), never mind that this would drive away users and lose the software company income;
or

  • they're doing their best to maximise limited development resources, which necessarily means putting those resources where they'll benefit most users of the software - which by extension, maximises benefit to the company and its shareholders.
So, conspiracy theory, or simple economics?

I know which one I'm picking...


:lol:
And in the second case if they have started development in a particular 4GL or other language that isnt/wasnt supported on Linux it is much, much more difficult and costly to jump ship to provide support for a third OS.


A third OS with a number of variants and an underlying ethos of stuff being free or almost free.

So that attractive proposition is for a commercial organisation to increase the complexity of its operations for both development and support for real income whilst eroding some of its current earnings as it does so.

Yep, makes complete sense to me.



Grant
SFA
 
Posts: 7146
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 9:32 pm

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby Drew » Mon Apr 14, 2014 9:59 am

NNN634281212310876220 wrote:Would you consider providing 'preliminary support' for the GM1 on the basis of your GX7 profile?


Unfortunately I think that may cause more frustration than it solves. I'll suggest it but based on past "preliminary" support introductions I don't think the suggestion will be well received. I think we'd much rather have the camera in-house, test it for a day and build profiles to our standards as appose to cutting corners... but, the worlds not perfect so maybe we'll get backed into that corner. Time will tell.
Drew
Crew
Crew
 
Posts: 4370
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:34 pm
Location: Copenhagen, DK / NY, NY

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby ChrisM » Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:46 am

Drew wrote:
NNN634281212310876220 wrote:Would you consider providing 'preliminary support' for the GM1 on the basis of your GX7 profile?


Unfortunately I think that may cause more frustration than it solves. I'll suggest it but based on past "preliminary" support introductions I don't think the suggestion will be well received. I think we'd much rather have the camera in-house, test it for a day and build profiles to our standards as appose to cutting corners... but, the worlds not perfect so maybe we'll get backed into that corner. Time will tell.

Just a thought: As long as you were to indicate that support is "preliminary", meaning final support will follow, I don't assume it would cause frustration with anyone. When I shot the Olympus E5, I also recall first support being explicitely called "preliminary". Nobody raised the matter, I only remember an expression of gratitude by a poster, when you finalized E5 support, mentioning that files now looked much better.
When however support is presented without a disclaimer such as "preliminary", you would expect it to be the final support, am I wrong?
It might still be improved upon silently in the background, but it might also be not, and anyway no one would ever know, let alone have a clue about Phase one's intentions.
A disclaimer like preliminary was used frequently in the past. When it is not used, improper support might cause frustrations, yes. This all would also apply to the Panasonic GM1, I reckon.

Chris
ChrisM
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 12:29 pm

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby Adam52 » Sat May 24, 2014 7:08 am

in the past a Workaround used to be Converting the files to DNG format using Adobe DNG converter but even that doesn`t work with GM1 files (or Stylus one and other converted RAWs from latest Pan and Olympus cams) . this I really don`t understand, Adobe DNG converter made it able for me to stay with Version 5 of C1 long past its replacement date .

if Capture one 7 handles DNG files, why doesn`t it handle ones from the GM1 and Stylus 1 when it handles Native files from cams with the same sensor / RAW format such as the GX7 and XA2
Adam52
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 10:00 am

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby NNN634292912424565347 » Sat Aug 09, 2014 7:34 am

I am an author about photography, Photoshop and graphic design. I like to use a lot of different cameras and I have to do so. I do not want do make it depending on the software I use which body I can buy and which not. I also do not like to have to use different software to develop my RAW files. A main advantage of third party software over the manufacturers is that you are not limited to their bodies.
Some say that C1 is professional and the GM1 is niche. Well, if you are searching for a camera that combines the smallest size with the best image quality I am sure there will be no other body that is more pro than the GM1.
C1 does support cameras like the D3000 series or the D5000. Their image quality might be good but Nikon castrates their software so much that working with them is frustrating from a professional point of view. The GM1 is much more professional than them.
Some say the GM1 is niche. Well, that is a funny kind of view if you are using C1 which is itself a niche product. From professional RAW software I expect to be not limited in using professional hardware (and the GM1 in fact is much more professional than a lot of cameras that are supported by C1). I understand that this is for the money: If your camera is popular it will be supported no matter what crap it is. If you are looking for a niche body beside mainstream – bad luck.
I don’t like Lightroom (the mainstream product in RAW development). But it seems that there is no alternative. It seems that adobe supports all cameras or almost all. I don’t like its UI. But if you are working with ACR, Aperture, C1 and DxO all together and without prejudice you will find that you can get out professional results on every software. Sometimes this is better sometimes that. Sometimes it depends on the kind of image. Most pros work with Lightroom. I think they are not stupid.
I decided using C1 as my main software to handle my image workflow. Now I am not sure anymore. Which camera I like to buy next will also not be supported by C1? I use MFT instead of the main popular brands Canon, Nikon and Sony. Being debarred from my main software is no good view. In my opinion it is not a professional view.
Last edited by NNN634292912424565347 on Sat Aug 09, 2014 10:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
NNN634292912424565347
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:34 am

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby SFA » Sat Aug 09, 2014 2:09 pm

NNN634292912424565347 wrote:I... Most pros work with Lightroom. I think they are not stupid.
I decided using C1 as my main software to handle my image workflow.


??

In the world of software development we really can't expect to compare a dominant company like Adobe which has a wide market of products and therefore some economies of scale and content sharing potential with a company like Phase.

In the marketplace for photography and on through to the world of design and publishing Adobe have built a significant and influential position over a couple of decades. Their products are the 'easy' route to adopt even when people are not entirely happy with the results for their personal preferences. The scale of their marketplace means that they HAVE to support just about anything thrown up no matter whether it makes fiscal and business sense to do so - and then continue to support it for some years to come.

There was a time when camera manufacturers would bundle Adobe products with their cameras even at the budget pocket snapper level. I have a copy of PS Elements V2 that came with a Pentax Optio for example. Does that still happen? Presumably the relationships between camera manafacturers and software creators have evolved somewhat in the past decade. In the case of the 'big name' wide portfolio software developers it would be interesting to understand who pays who for the privilege of camera support especially for early access to new hardware.

So far as I can tell most people who are into photography use more than one piece of software and that also applies to RAW processing. I would guess it is likely to stay that way for a while - unless one player becomes totally dominant.

Based on the recent results of the main camera manufacturers and trend for more and more people to be happy enough with their smart phone to ditch the idea of a dedicated camera being a social requirement, the RAW processing market may not support a lot of growth and could in fact shrink. Developing a RAW converter would then become even more of a niche activity in a niche market. And an expensive one.

That may change things in terms of how quickly developments occur and how much the products cost. It will be interesting to see how people respond if that happens.


Grant
SFA
 
Posts: 7146
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 9:32 pm

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby NNN634292912424565347 » Sat Aug 09, 2014 11:10 pm

What ist your point, Grant? What do you want to tell me? If I like one software to evolve most of my RAW files I have to choose something different than C1?
Using multiple RAW tools is not efficient! You need to know different reactions of different tools with different UIs different shortcuts and you have different workflows. I know what I am writing about. I have used Lightroom, C1, DxO and Aperture for RAW editing and Photoshop, OnOne, Topaz, Macphun, Portrait Pro, Nik and Exposure for fine tuning.
If I go on tour with different cameras evolving the shots in two (or more) different tools is not the kind of convenience I am looking for.
I am looking for a solution that works best for me. Using software that does not support the cameras I am using is no good solution for me. If widely RAW support in C1 is not assured than C1 is not the right product for me. And we are not talking about some Chinese no name product. We are talking about a Panasonic mirrorless camera. I think I can remembered that it was voted as one of the gear of the year at dpreview and the GM1 gets great feedback all around.
NNN634292912424565347
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:34 am

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby SFA » Sun Aug 10, 2014 3:31 am

NNN634292912424565347 wrote:What ist your point, Grant? What do you want to tell me? If I like one software to evolve most of my RAW files I have to choose something different than C1?
Using multiple RAW tools is not efficient! You need to know different reactions of different tools with different UIs different shortcuts and you have different workflows. I know what I am writing about. I have used Lightroom, C1, DxO and Aperture for RAW editing and Photoshop, OnOne, Topaz, Macphun, Portrait Pro, Nik and Exposure for fine tuning.
If I go on tour with different cameras evolving the shots in two (or more) different tools is not the kind of convenience I am looking for.
I am looking for a solution that works best for me. Using software that does not support the cameras I am using is no good solution for me. If widely RAW support in C1 is not assured than C1 is not the right product for me. And we are not talking about some Chinese no name product. We are talking about a Panasonic mirrorless camera. I think I can remembered that it was voted as one of the gear of the year at dpreview and the GM1 gets great feedback all around.


The point is that you cannot expect every company to support every camera - unless they are of such a size and influence that they effectively drive the industry. You may not get your wish for a single product that supports all the file types that you are using at any particular moment.

To do that, for most commercial software developers, might be commercial suicide.

For Adobe it might be commercial suicide to be selective so perhaps they feel they have to support anything that is put on the market. More or less. Providing they can do so without breaking any licence requirements. But their interest in doing so goes far beyond just RAW file conversion. In fact in the long term they may have, through DNG, a device that they might think of as a way to gain ever greater control over the marketplace for image editing. Only they know if that is how their strategy has been formulated. It will be interesting to see how things develop.

I quoted from your original post where you seem to suggest the solution to your immediate need - most pros work with LightRoom (or at least an Adobe product of some sort). That seems to be equally true even for many of the C1 users who fully expect that they (or their clients) will want to take the files into PhotoShop for further editing.

On that basis, even though I understand that we might prefer the results provided by C1 for initial RAW conversion, the lack of support for one camera type - whatever the reason - is hardly the end of the world and not really a valid reason for criticising a developer's commercial decision (or. perhaps, inability to find a way to deliver results that achieve the quality they wish to provide for some reason.)

As I said earlier and as your list of the applications that you use or have used seems to support, I doubt that you will find a single application at any point in time that will guarantee being able to supply satisfactory (to yours or my eyes) for all the cameras that are and have been available AND for them to be up to date (or even ahead of the dare) for new product releases. Unless someone (Adobe?) persuades all of the manufacturers to use a single standard for RAW files and their conversion from data values into interpreted images.

Or maybe the client expectations will change over time as the "smart phone cameras are good enough" idea comes to be accepted so that we can all give up on RAW files and just use in camera jpgs. That might solve the problems and I suspect that 99.9% of people looking at an image would not see any practical difference - especially once it has been run through PhotoShop or one of the styling plug-ins and presented electronically in a low resolution file on their smart device.

With the philosophy out of the way ...

Phase work on the basis of demand as recorded in their Support Case database and allocate resource to requests according to popularity. (And whether or not they can obtain samples of hardware for testing and development.)

That is what they tell us and I have no reason to doubt that they follow the process as closely as they can. At the same time products from some manufacturers are likely to be supported anyway, with or without specific requests. Even within that I would assume that some products are worth special attention and other not so much.

Presumably the positioning of the GM1 in the market may not make it an automatic candidate for RAW support efforts and they have not yet had enough Support Requests to move it up the list. If so that would suggest that C1 users are not often using GM1s or most GM1 users are not concerned about the lack of support.

Alternatively there may be some sort of technical challenge to getting things to work as would be required, or for some reason the hardware is not available or maybe there is some sort of Intellectual Property constraint that is causing delays. We don't know.

Surely it is disappointing for you but as I wrote earlier I think you may find yourself constantly disappointed based on your stated expectations. Either way if you want to get close to a better understanding of the C1 development team's position about GM1 support I would imagine that you are more likely to get that via a Support Case than through this User to User (or so intended) forum.

In summary, I sympathise with your wish to have a single RAW developer for all of your files and to some extent I envy your opportunities to work with so many products. But I see some benefits to not working with the latest greatest technology and not expecting to have 100% product support just when you feel you need it. I doubt it is cost effect to offer that level of support even even if it would be technically feasible and we should accept such situations for as long as they last and adapt our approaches accordingly.

In my opinion.



Grant
SFA
 
Posts: 7146
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 9:32 pm

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby NNN634292912424565347 » Sun Aug 10, 2014 7:06 am

Thank you for your detailed answer, Grant. I understand the problem for the software developers in this special kind oft market. Otherweise: Does the costumer have to understand the needs of producer or does the producer have to understand the needs of the costumer?
As a customer I have needs and I am looking for a product that solves my problems. If the solution requires that the product costs a view euros more I don’t care. I need some kind of reliability that my hardware is supported by my software. Otherwise it would be some kind of game of dice. I think it is the assignment of the producer to offer a product that fits the requirements oft the costumer.
Supporting popular cameras no matter what crap they are and dropping good products because they does not sell enough is not good for the markets and costumers. It strengthens the big brands and disadvantages the alternatives (like Olympus, Fuji and Panasonic). If one manufacturers succeeds in the end the costumer looses.

I have contacted Phase Ones support.

Markus
NNN634292912424565347
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:34 am

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby SFA » Sun Aug 10, 2014 10:43 am

Hi Markus,

You make some perfectly good points and I can only agree but I personally think reality suggests that the way the overall market works is unlikely to encourage 100% coverage for all people all of the time.

It might be possible, technology changes such as totally new sensor designs permitting, to attain close to 100% most of the time if you have the scale of market share like Adobe (for example) or are prepared to make use of a general de-mosaicing tools (like dcraw for example) and can be certain that that tool will always keep up to date. (One might also consider device drivers and operating systems in that set of dependencies too.)

But there is no guarantee that such a strategy would be sure to offer much benefit. Maybe none - and you lose control of your options. Phase have their own hardware to support - I doubt that relying on external suppliers for ever more of the software for a RAW converter would be entirely acceptable for them but you never know how things might develop.

I very much doubt that the camera manufacturers would see competitive advantage in standardising the technology and methods right now - though if the market continues in its current direction that might start to look attractive especially if the number of manufacturers contracts.

As for paying for the benefit of 100% coverage - well, you and I might find that acceptable to some extent depending on how much we would be paying for support for products we would never use. But it seems that most people would not actually agree with us and still claim to make decisions based on saving a few units of currency on software despite often having paid many thousands of units for their photographic equipment and supporting computer systems.

One other thing that puzzles me is why the camera manufacturers feel they have no need to provide better software with the camera package. If they did it might not help you (and others with a wide selection of equipment from different manufacturers) in your search for a single tool that will be good enough for all devices but it may allow some partnerships (other than Adobe) that make is easier to close in on the "100% coverage at all times" objective.

That would be a nice wish I think although I doubt that the players in the market would abandon market politics and relationships and competitive agreements in order to satisfy a requirement that is, mostly, not an historically important issue for the greater part of their customer base who will often have been single brand users. (In the traditional Pro market they may have been multi-brand users but for a small selection of high end equipment. That would restrict the number of bodies/technologies that would need to be supported.)

It will be interesting to see if anybody feels they have the ability (and commercial need) to reach for the objectives you would like to see achieved. Maybe, if the market technology continues to develop and diversify, a new opportunity will come to be and new relationships will form. It may be some time yet before that happens if it happens at all.

Just my thoughts of course, nothing more.



Grant
SFA
 
Posts: 7146
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 9:32 pm

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby NNN634292912424565347 » Sun Aug 10, 2014 4:40 pm

That are a lot of good points, Grant. Especially why camera manufacturers does not take partnerships with software developers. To bundle the bodies with software from Phase One, DxO, Corel or ACD Systems could maybe break the domination of Adobe. I think a further growing domination of Adobe will be a problem for consumers as for camera manufacturers. Monopoly is never good for customers.
As I said I don’t like Lightroom. I think it is a good tool that can produce professional results but the interface and the handling is far away from being professional. There is no way to customize it to your needs apart from taking your logo in the header and—great news for all Lightroom users!—you can now put an own image to the start up screen.
But as an author and course instructor in photography my readers and listeners want hints wich software they should use to evolve their RAW files. Now I am in the absurd situation that I don’t like Lightroom but I have to advise it as best solution to their needs. It is much cheaper, you can get professional quality out of it, there is more support in the internet than on any other program and it is the only solution that nearly guarantees that their next camera will be supported. :
Markus
NNN634292912424565347
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:34 am

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby SFA » Sun Aug 10, 2014 9:20 pm

NNN634292912424565347 wrote:That are a lot of good points, Grant. Especially why camera manufacturers does not take partnerships with software developers. To bundle the bodies with software from Phase One, DxO, Corel or ACD Systems could maybe break the domination of Adobe. I think a further growing domination of Adobe will be a problem for consumers as for camera manufacturers. Monopoly is never good for customers.
As I said I don’t like Lightroom. I think it is a good tool that can produce professional results but the interface and the handling is far away from being professional. There is no way to customize it to your needs apart from taking your logo in the header and—great news for all Lightroom users!—you can now put an own image to the start up screen.
But as an author and course instructor in photography my readers and listeners want hints wich software they should use to evolve their RAW files. Now I am in the absurd situation that I don’t like Lightroom but I have to advise it as best solution to their needs. It is much cheaper, you can get professional quality out of it, there is more support in the internet than on any other program and it is the only solution that nearly guarantees that their next camera will be supported. :
Markus


Markus,

I understand your dilemma.

I bought LR back at version 1 time and liked some parts of it up to version 1.4.

But then I discovered other software that I found more intuitive and better suited the way I really wanted to work at that time.

Move on a few years and I discovered Capture One and immediately liked how it worked and what it offered - although it was some months before I realised that I had not understood everything that was possible (I suspect I still have things to discover that may be useful to me as well as things that are maybe not so important for me right now.)

I know that there are times when C1 does not offer things that might be useful. I also use another application that does some things that C1 does not BUT does not offer some features that C1 does.

I'm not into Graphics Editing (as in Photoshop) and find some of the work done in PS very interesting but unintelligible to my mind. I don't think the right way to easily understand PS at its cleverest.

So I like C1 and similarly designed and GUI'd products but recognise that they have limitations compared to the needs of the complete Graphics editing market.

I suspect that what will become the major part of the Raw converter and Graphics market, by value or number of users, will as some point become accepted as a compromised by sufficiently adequate in camera process (or camera system process which might include automated cloud based services). In which case the problem (and maybe the drive for quality) will go away.

I am hoping that such a time is far enough in the future that it does not worry me or so close that we can all benefit without seeing any reduction in the existing potential of quality standards and just enjoy the advantages. Somewhere in the time between those points would be too annoying to enjoy!


Grant
SFA
 
Posts: 7146
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 9:32 pm

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby NNN634292912424565347 » Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:58 am

Phase One told me that C1 will support the GM1 and that it is on the list. They also told me that they trie to support all requested cameras and the GM1 will be supported with the next update.
NNN634292912424565347
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:34 am

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby PhaseoneUser55657 » Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:52 am

I think the biggest problem that Phaseone/Capture One is going to have is the growth of their user base. As the user base grows the number of people people different cameras will also grow. In the past CO really only had to deal with the very high end professionals using their MF backs, then fast forward a little, and they started supporting the second cameras of the MF users. Go a little farther and more professionals with just 35mm started, so they catered to them. Now as people are not happy with LR and Aperture going away, (and no clear direction of what photo.app will be), people are looking at alternatives. And these people are going to want ALL their cameras supported. I think most people will wait a few months for a new camera to be supported, but after that they are going to start to bitch. And lets not talk about the bitching that will happen if their old camera is not supported.

My suggestion to CO developers, would be to pass off support of the RAW conversion of unsupported cameras to the OS, and initially put a little dialog saying so, and even a flag of some sort on the little preview, like you do for ratings or adjustments have been applied. I believe this is what they do for Media Pro on both platforms. I am not saying this would be easy, or it might not be possible, but if CO wants non-bitchy customers they are going to have to do something.

Robert
PhaseoneUser55657
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 2:19 pm

Re: Panasonic GM1 support?

Postby Adam52 » Wed Aug 13, 2014 12:46 pm

"""""The point is that you cannot expect every company to support every camera - unless they are of such a size and influence that they effectively drive the industry. You may not get your wish for a single product that supports all the file types that you are using at any particular moment."""

No but when a camera uses the same sensor and basic system as another in the range (in this case of the GM1 - the GX7) then it`s easy to add support, even if it`s only "preliminary" - often the only difference between RAW support is the camera info in the EXIF data - I found this out in the Capture one 5 days by hacking the RAWs to claim they were from a different camera , they worked perfectly - Prime example was when the D90 came out, if you hacked the file to say it was from a D300 , Voila - same with the D700 (to say it was a D3) ........... I`m sure that even if things weren`t perfect at all ISOs with the GM1 using the GX7 profile, it`d be 1000% better than using the compromised DNG file
Adam52
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 10:00 am

PreviousNext

Return to Capture One 8.x and 7.x Software



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 6 guests