RAW Software Makes a Big Difference

.. obviates the need for noise reduction processing to a great
degree. I shoot a lot of low light and almost never use noise
reduction.

G
Correct exposure will not prevent noise at a high ISO setting. It's the high ISO setting itself which introduces more noise compared to a low ISO setting.

A perfectly exposed shot at a high ISO setting will still need some degree of noise removal.
 
I will also say that Studio and Master at least do work - the output
looks like something your camera would have produced and that's not a
bad thing given how utterly competent the Olympus JPEG engine is.
They're just horribly slow and buggy (in Vista) so I wont waste time
on them when Photoshop works so well.

Regards,
Oly

--



http://www.pbase.com/olyinaz
Agreed. I use ACR in PS-CS3 and the fact that it works seamlessly in Photoshop is a major advantage compared to using a third-party raw developer which runs as a separate application, after which you still need to open the image in PS to perform additional editing functions which third-party raw developers don't have.

That's how I used to work with raw files before I got CS3. Now my raw workflow is much more seamless and faster.
 
I suggest every user of ACR to open same ORF with Adobe converter and
Phaseone C1 Pro side-by-side. What looks flat and underexposed in ACR
it is just excellent in C1 without touching any adjustments. Try some
adjustments as (more and more used) "clarity" - Adobe make best bokeh
poor, but not the same in C1. Oh, and that Oly colours! And more and
more things are MUCH better, you probably never ever start ACR once
you try C1.
It's unfair to criticise ACR for how the image looks compared to C1 Pro before applying any adjustments. ACR doesn't use specific camera profiles (C1 Pro does) so it's not a fair comparison. You prefer the default 'look' of your images in C1 Pro, but that's not to say ACR can't produce the same if you're prepared to apply your own adjustments.
 
Gotta throw in some praise for Capture One. It has great processing for highlights and shadows. Just the right amount of noise reduction and sharpening to keep those shadows smooth, and no color casts in recovered highlights. Wonderful stuff. Definitely worth a try.

--
Ivan

 
Especally the latest v4.6 release.
Makes an excellent product great, and far, far faster.

On the Leica User Forum it is getting fantastic reviews from some of the most talented and experienced photographers around.

I never know why its not that much followed here, as it requires so little adjustment to get perfect ORF conversions.

I have Bibble and I needed many more adjustments to get close.
Gotta throw in some praise for Capture One. It has great processing
for highlights and shadows. Just the right amount of noise reduction
and sharpening to keep those shadows smooth, and no color casts in
recovered highlights. Wonderful stuff. Definitely worth a try.

--
Ivan

--
Kind regards,
Rich Simpson
 
Especally the latest v4.6 release.
Makes an excellent product great, and far, far faster.
Yes indeed,

I would not have sung praise here of any Capture One version before their latest (recent) release 4.6.

Previous versions were slow and buggy, but this latest release is really very, very good (and very fast). Prefer it over ACR raw and also over Olympus studio, for raw developement of ORF. files, even if nothing else but I.Q. were considered.
And I'm only using the light version.

Chris
 
I'm always praising Capture One and rates C1 as the best RAW Converter available.

However I rate Aperture as a very good second and the best overall RAW application.

Timi
--
iThink, therefore iMac
 
I've been using it since my E-500 when it came free with my San Disk card. Beats ACR et. all in terms of IQ and now the interface is much better too...
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top