CameraLabTester: Both collector and artist are the reall winners.
Without the media making them news fodder, they just carry on with their obscurity.
They are rich and make lots and lots of money, so no problem.
A different judge might rule differently - this is a case that might set a precedent and open the floodgates on re-issues of old 'limited number' prints. The judge decided on the basis of format. What was going through her mind? The collector bought an image, part of a limited number. Dye transfer or inkjet makes no difference, he did not buy the piece of paper, he bought the image on it.
For an artist to later on run another print run of the 'limited edition' image is breaking the implied contract between himself and the buyer of what a limited edition is. It is no longer a 'limited edition' and Sobel is right in arguing that his investment has been devalued, unless the market decides that the dye transfer smaller prints are better value than larger inkjet prints.
He should appeal and get another lawyer- presumably he has enough money for an appeal.
David G O Smith: If you want the closest to what the camera actually took, you could try dcraw. In Windows it is used command-line in All programs/Accessories/Command Prompt. There are batch commands available in the Windows Command Prompt environment to process a number of files one after the other.
dcraw offers various algorithms for demosaicing. PTLens will remove distortion and one's photo editor of choice will adjust color, saturation, etc.. dcraw does do some highlight recovery. If I remember correctly, it won't process RAW files that don't use the standard Bayer pattern.
My experience is that the combination of dcraw, PTLens and one's preferred photo editor will produce excellent results.
This method is best used with small numbers of files, not hundreds at one time.
Prefer Raw Therapee for a good implementation of DCRaw, which I agree does the best demosaicing.
Lucas_: Good review, although I'd like to see a comparison with Silkypix Pro5 which, IMHO, has a better NR engine than the three tested and superior graphics interface.
That may be so but the last time I used SP (V3 I think), the demosaicing was very clearly the worst of the better quality softwares. If you want to see what a good standard for demaosaicing is, start with Raw Therapee.
CollBaxter: Ieeeesh this looks like 4 steps form looking normal to homeless.
mobile camera sensors are like old comapct camera sensors of 5 years ago - they lack dynamic range and maybe sharpness from the lens as well.
The tricks shown in this article are a good way to cover up the limitations in the original image. Turning one image into two with different levels of exposure and then recombining doesn't do a better job that simply doing a complex curve adjustment with the original image in the first place. Obviously no additional information is created by creating two images formed from one image so one may as werll learn to work with the single original image in the first place and stop fooling yourself.
Referring to v6, the main reason I use DxO is its deconvolution image sharpening, especially with the Tamron 18 - 250mm and 18 - 270 PZD zoom lenses - it turns these into really good lenses, improving definition and contrast significantly. This function alone makes it worth the money.
Lens distortion corrections are are a strength and with super zooms, make quite a difference as well.
The automated processing is useful as well but fine tuning colour adjustment takes a lot of practice and I'm still not happy with how it manages shades of red.
Also it does not produce the best raw conversion contrary to what some say - it is inclined to show jagged edges. Noise reduction also is clearly not as good as that in LR, when one does an A-B comparison - LR has a killer Chroma noise adjustment, by way of comparison.
I prefer the speed and the highlight recovery function of LR as well, so v8 will have to pull a few rabbits out of its hat to justify an upgrade.
Scott Eaton: I'm sure we'll get the typical goose stepping approval by the Leica crowd, but I have to agree with most of the comments in that the images are under-whelming. Anybody owning the latest Nikon / Canon and knowing how to use something like SilverEFX will simply mop the floor with this thing - per pixel sharpness aside. However, one thing that might be worth experimenting with is Tri-Color exposures with still lifes. Net results should surpass an SD-1 with ease.
This should be called a Polaroid, based on how it has polarized the views of the readers!
I can see fine grain/noise in the clouds of the full size crop, otherwise, the image has the finetoned gradation of greys that one expects from $7k+ camera.
Nice to see that luxury products for the seriously well heeled crowd are still being made. There is no doubt that if you have the money, you should waste it.
Well done, nice shot, love the light rays. It is worth framing.
Superb. Brilliant. Stunning. Droolworthy. I could go on. What makes you think I'm impressed?
I think a Pentax K10/20 would have survived.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review