Originally posted by MJKoski If the settings used in that very article were the same for both on/off samples, then CO did something differently when processing the PS ON -image. For it shows the exact effect PS-RAW has - better definition and enhanced contrast. It does not require a magnifying glass to see something was going on.
That something is the basic de-mosaic algorithms along with Phase One derived camera profiles which includes different default levels of contrast, sharpening, brightness, saturation and noise levels. Phase One takes the camera into its own lab with its own equipment (used for all cameras) and runs a evaluation suite to determine Capture One's default camera profile. Just why would you think that Capture One is going to "look" like ACR?
By your logic, if a direct comparison of ACR vs Capture One where Capture One is viewed as the base, then ACR is "doing something different". Well, duh, that is to be expected. I have read several reviews of Capture One vs Lightroom and the complaints that Capture One is "over sharpening, over brightening, adding too much contrast" run rampant. Phase One and Adobe are not the same company, they do not de-mosaic using the same methods nor do they, by default, use the same sharpening, contrast, noise, brightness values. Which is why, when I took a workshop and PCNW, I made the statement that "out of the box, Capture One looks more like Kodak where Lightroom looks more like Fuji" in terms of my experience with film.
You do not buy different RAW converters and expect identical results. They are different, from different companies, and in this case, different continents/countries. Adobe does not make cameras or work with chip manufacturers to "customize" sensor hardware. Phase One does make cameras and used to engineer their own sensors. Phase One has developed a unique relationship with SONY to fabricate Sensors for only Phase One (TriColor, IQ4 and IQ3 Achromatic) camera systems. So they "tune" their software to perform like they want it too, they are not dependent on ACR or Adobe for anything.
Heck, if you go and use Lightroom 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (the limit of my purchases) and look at how images are rendered, they will be different. Just like what you will see between Capture One 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 20 (my set of Capture One versions). I see each different version as very similar to buying film back in the day, every one in a while Kodak, Fuji, Agfa, Ilford etc. came out with new emulsions that looked different than the earlier versions of film with the same name. With shooting digital (RAW) you get to experiment with shooting the same image with the equivalent (sorry, I do not mean to raise that words ugly head - but I digress) of a new emulsion. The web link is a very poor explanation of the difference between ACR and Capture One. The author is wrong about Pixel Shift.
Read this:
FYI, this article has been discussed at DPRreview already and the author has been informed that something does not quite add up. If I remember correctly, he shrugged his shoulders and said that he was happy with the quality as it is.
Read more at:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/32-digital-processing-software-printing/...#ixzz67NXTDsja
From a post, by Class A #8, in the article I listed above. The author knows it is wrong, he just does not care to "fix" it.
In other words, he is wrong - he knows it - but he is not going to rectify the page - He is allowing his fake news to live on. Don't be fooled.