"Best" RAW converter

chris gunn said:

FreakingGenius said:

I'm wondering what one would recommend for a good RAW converter.

Click to expand...

Silkypix is nice, but I use Rawshooter for birds and Moon shots,
for the feather detail and CA correction.

Click to expand...

Didn't you find the extensive lens aberration correction (including CA) and fine detail extraction controls in Silkypix Chris?

--
John Bean

PAW Week 38:
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/1082841/3/97517668/Large



Index page: http://waterfoot.smugmug.com
Latest walkabout (4 April): http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/1348582

Just googled this and not getting a clear site to find a download for this
--
Tom Bell
Dartmooor
Devon
UK

I like the colors in RawShooterEssentials. I happen to have a copy of this engine before RSP came out and Adobe entered the picture. I find it easy to use and the colors and spot on. The only drawback is that I have to convert the Raw to TIFF and then go to JPEG or GIF for the Web.
--



'Nothing could-be-finah-than-to-be-in-Carolina-in-the-morninnnnnn...'

Firstly, thanks to everyone for the advice and input.

Secondly, re: RSE: I didn't know that. I was considering this program, mostly b/c it's free, but it seems that this would be an unnecessary hassle.

How have people's experiences been with the included Pentax program (PhotoLab?)?

Don Allison said:

The only drawback
is that I have to convert the Raw to TIFF and then go to JPEG or
GIF for the Web.

Click to expand...

FreakingGenius.com

But as the newer Pentax photolab uses the Silkypix engine, how do the two compare with one another (on a conversion basis only)?

http://www.isl.co.jp/SILKYPIX/english/
--
Jim King - Retired Colormonger - Suburban Detroit, Michigan, USA; GMT -4h (EDT)



* * * * *
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

• Sir Winston Churchill

* * * * *
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.

• Albert Einstein

Don Allison said:

I like the colors in RawShooterEssentials. I happen to have a copy
of this engine before RSP came out and Adobe entered the picture. I
find it easy to use and the colors and spot on. The only drawback
is that I have to convert the Raw to TIFF and then go to JPEG or
GIF for the Web.

Click to expand...

What drawback is that? It's the same with all raw converters except for ACR that opens the pictures straight into Photoshop.
.
.

Ah, thinking while typing: You mean if you use the raw converter as your only picture editor? ...and just converts it using all possible settings to make a jpeg intended for immediate web publishing...

I never thought of doing it that way. probably because I have Photoshop and want to make use of it. My workflow starts with a conversion using some basic adjustments only (white balance and exposure and sometimes some fixing with highlight details), then I continue to work in Photoshop to make the best possibly out of the pictures (and then I use either trusty old non destructive TIF or PSD for intermediate savings if I know I'll go back later to the picture. This way I can easily do versions for the either printing or web publsihsing, or both. Maybe I should think this over - it's easy to get stuck in old habits. But God (?) knows my pictures often needs some editing, like work in layers or subtle color corrections for pleasing skin tones, or, mostly, different B&W conversions. No, I don't think I see the drawback. I do however note that we all do different things with our pictures and that is of course something that can be seen in our different workflows.

--
thank you for the reminder,

Jonas

Adobe light room as of today...still in beta vs 4 now, can read the files and does a very good job.

Another program is Raw Developer, which I tried last night. Does a very nice job.

If your Mac.... as of last night it did not read files from the K100d. Maybe it will after the announcement of 1.5 tomorrow.

El

sorry I meant aperture did not read files last night. 1.5 may.

el

I stared out shooting everything JPG, but have switched to shooting mainly RAW now because of the ability to reduce or boost the exposure and change white balance, etc.

I don't have any 3rd party software for processing RAW, I use only Photolab which came with my DL.

Everything on this page was shot in RAW processed with photolab
http://www.tracyharp.com/pentax3.htm

The middle two pics on the last full row of this page were shot RAW
and processed with photolab.
http://www.tracyharp.com/pentax2.htm

Can't remember beyond that which were shot raw and which jpg.

jim cowan said:

chris gunn said:

Silkypix is nice, but I use Rawshooter for birds and Moon shots,
for the feather detail and CA correction.

Click to expand...

CA correction I think I understand in RAW conversion,
but I thought the theory was don't sharpen too much
during RAW conversion. See the comment on feathers,
it made me wonder, are you doing most of your sharpening
in Rawshooter during the conversion? And if so, why/what/how?

I'm using PSE4 and adobe's 3.3 raw converter.

Click to expand...

The demosaic seems different in RS. It actually gets out more
fine lines such as in feathers. This is not just 'sharpening'.
The downside is it can create artefacts from noise which
Neatimage has trouble with.
Putting sharpness on zero (-50) is a good idea.

The CA correction in CS22 seems fine, with a lot of control, I
don't know how this compares to PSE4.
I don't have the full version of RS. The automatic correction often
does a good job automatically.

Of interest, IIRC Adobe bought out Rawshooter.

--
cheers!

Gunn

-- Get a big lens and get closer™.

http://www.dpreview.pentaxistDS.photoshare.co.nz

http://www.y3m.net/penwik/pmwiki.php/Main/PentaxLensWiki

John Bean (UK) said:

chris gunn said:

Silkypix is nice, but I use Rawshooter for birds and Moon shots,
for the feather detail and CA correction.

Click to expand...

Didn't you find the extensive lens aberration correction (including
CA) and fine detail extraction controls in Silkypix Chris?

Click to expand...

I'm afraid I don't have the full version. I thought I'd check out
the latest Photolabs first. I have downloaded it, but you have to
install the old one first, which means I'd have to find the CD.
I'm lazy 8-}

The default WB and CA and detail extraction from RS suits moon
shots I think.

Often though, such as for landscapes and people, I prefer the
colour and contrast handling in Silkypix. It has WB settings I just
can't get in RS, which surprised me!

--
cheers!

Gunn

-- Get a big lens and get closer™.

http://www.dpreview.pentaxistDS.photoshare.co.nz

http://www.y3m.net/penwik/pmwiki.php/Main/PentaxLensWiki

FreakingGenius said:

I'm wondering what one would recommend for a good RAW converter.

Click to expand...

I've been using Bibble for a couple of years and like it very much. I especially like the highlight recovery and shadow recovery ("fill light") features. I'm not as excited as their "perfectly clear" feature, though I can certainly see it's value for documentarian rather than artistic purposes.

I haven't had a chance to try the new spot healing, sensor defect (hot pixel, etc.) correction, and lens distortion, chromatic aberration, and vignetting correction, but they sound interesting.

I haven't tried the sharpening and noise reduction features, because I do that in Picture Window Pro and Neat Image respectively and haven't had time to really compare.

Greg

--
Brand loyalty is a character flaw.

Jonas: Exactly. I'm just use to the download of RAW files directly into Photoshop that I've gotten away from RSE. But I tend to llke the colors in RSE, and my PSE ACR always seems to overexpose my images to a point where it's difficult to bring them back. However, I must caution all who use RSE that DO NOT sharpen in this converter. To do so brings unwarranted noise into PSE when you're looking to make final adjustments. Just my findings here...and I'm really thinking about going to another developer aside from PSE4. It is absolute garbage IMO.
--



'Nothing could-be-finah-than-to-be-in-Carolina-in-the-morninnnnnn...'

--
------------
Joel - K100D/DS/SFX
http://www.pbase.com/joele

I also use PSE3 with ACR 3.5, but I find that PPL3 does an excellent job and is faster on my (slow) computer.
--
Russ
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rfortson/
Even bad photography can be fun

I just discovered today a FREE open source image editing program called the GIMP. The GIMP alone doesn't do RAW, but with a plug-in called UFRaw, it takes care of 90% of my needs. I can even clone out dust and burn and dodge and do layers and stuff. Very cool, and I don't think I could ask for much more out of a FREE program. Yay for open source. I picked up the link in one of the other forums, so a forum search for GIMP should turn up the website.

Good luck, though, open source stuff is tricky to get downloaded and installed sometimes.
--
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!

chris gunn said:

John Bean (UK) said:

chris gunn said:

Silkypix is nice, but I use Rawshooter for birds and Moon shots,
for the feather detail and CA correction.

Click to expand...

Didn't you find the extensive lens aberration correction (including
CA) and fine detail extraction controls in Silkypix Chris?

Click to expand...

I'm afraid I don't have the full version.

Click to expand...

That would explain it ;-)

--
John Bean

PAW Week 38:
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/1082841/3/97517668/Large



Index page: http://waterfoot.smugmug.com
Latest walkabout (4 April): http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/1348582