Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
--I am sure this has been probably hashed to death, but I can't get a
reasonable index on any of the topics headings.
Thoughts or place to read discussions about RAW converters - vis a
vie the Canon bundled app?
--I personally use Breezebrowser most often. Both have free trials.
They both use the Canon SDK. It's the wrapper to Canon's actual
converter that makes these strong tools.
Yarc does add a proprietary technology called ARF to the conversion
process. Yet, I find Breezebrowser better for casual - in mass -
conversions for computer viewing and archiving.
Yarc may be the better tool for conversions for high quality
enlarging.
--I am sure this has been probably hashed to death, but I can't get a
reasonable index on any of the topics headings.
Thoughts or place to read discussions about RAW converters - vis a
vie the Canon bundled app?
John Mason - Lafayette, IN
--I personally use Breezebrowser most often. Both have free trials.
They both use the Canon SDK. It's the wrapper to Canon's actual
converter that makes these strong tools.
Yarc does add a proprietary technology called ARF to the conversion
process. Yet, I find Breezebrowser better for casual - in mass -
conversions for computer viewing and archiving.
Yarc may be the better tool for conversions for high quality
enlarging.
--I am sure this has been probably hashed to death, but I can't get a
reasonable index on any of the topics headings.
Thoughts or place to read discussions about RAW converters - vis a
vie the Canon bundled app?
John Mason - Lafayette, IN
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net
--I personally use Breezebrowser most often. Both have free trials.
They both use the Canon SDK. It's the wrapper to Canon's actual
converter that makes these strong tools.
Yarc does add a proprietary technology called ARF to the conversion
process. Yet, I find Breezebrowser better for casual - in mass -
conversions for computer viewing and archiving.
Yarc may be the better tool for conversions for high quality
enlarging.
--I am sure this has been probably hashed to death, but I can't get a
reasonable index on any of the topics headings.
Thoughts or place to read discussions about RAW converters - vis a
vie the Canon bundled app?
John Mason - Lafayette, IN
Peter Sills
Digital Focus
http://www.digitalfocus.net
I am sure this has been probably hashed to death, but I can't get a
reasonable index on any of the topics headings.
Thoughts or place to read discussions about RAW converters - vis a
vie the Canon bundled app?
Have a look at the url below.....I am sure this has been probably hashed to death, but I can't get a
reasonable index on any of the topics headings.
Thoughts or place to read discussions about RAW converters - vis a
vie the Canon bundled app?
Peter,Hi Peter,
Thanks for posting the link to your site and review; great
......well balanced and as I have just downloaded both, my finding
this thread was very timely!
I have tried BB and will try Yarc; as you say both software
developers seem like real enthusiasts about their respect products.
As a professional commercial photographer, I need every ounce of
quality from my D60 pix, so I am looking forward to seeing some of
my RAW images now via Yarc!
Thanks again
Peter
Peter Phelan Professional Imaging Ltd
UK
--Peter,Hi Peter,
Thanks for posting the link to your site and review; great
......well balanced and as I have just downloaded both, my finding
this thread was very timely!
I have tried BB and will try Yarc; as you say both software
developers seem like real enthusiasts about their respect products.
As a professional commercial photographer, I need every ounce of
quality from my D60 pix, so I am looking forward to seeing some of
my RAW images now via Yarc!
Thanks again
Peter
Peter Phelan Professional Imaging Ltd
UK
Please email me or post to our site if you have any questions
regarding YarcPlus.
Also note that YP allows you to set each pictute to completely
different settings and then convert them all in one batch. We call
this PBPC (PictureByPicture Conversion). So when converting from a
session of 100+ pictures some could be set to daylight WB and some
to a Master Gray card (for instance), but they can all be converted
at one time in one batch.
Enjoy and let me know if I can be of assistance as you evaluate the
products.
--
Regards,
Michael Tapes
http://www.YarcPlus.com
http://www.michaeltapes.com
Yes, BreezeBrowser's UI. It's in a different league.It could be my ignorance, but I actually prefer it's UI to Yarc's.
I haven't tried BreezeBrowser yet. Am I missing something?
Yes, but BB has a much beter interface, excellent HTML conversion,.Except for ARF, the resulting image is the same from all three,
since they all use Canon's SDK. The feature set (re: RAW
conversion itself) is pretty much identical, too - they all mirror
the features of Canon's SDK.
It could be my ignorance, but I actually prefer it's UI to Yarc's.
I haven't tried BreezeBrowser yet. Am I missing something?
Except for ARF, the resulting image is the same from all three,
since they all use Canon's SDK. The feature set (re: RAW
conversion itself) is pretty much identical, too - they all mirror
the features of Canon's SDK.
--
D60, 28-135 IS, 550EX
I have actually found Canon's interface to be very annoying,
especially with the requirement to register image locations all the
time. I tend to move stuff around alot and it made the software
crazy.
--Yes, BreezeBrowser's UI. It's in a different league.It could be my ignorance, but I actually prefer it's UI to Yarc's.
I haven't tried BreezeBrowser yet. Am I missing something?
Yes, but BB has a much beter interface, excellent HTML conversion,.Except for ARF, the resulting image is the same from all three,
since they all use Canon's SDK. The feature set (re: RAW
conversion itself) is pretty much identical, too - they all mirror
the features of Canon's SDK.
proper mangement of EXIF (to come in some future YP, I know) and
a high-quality image-viewing mode.
I purchased both BB and YP, but I almost always use BB.
Sometimes ARF helps, sometimes it hinders, and often I can't
see any difference (on the natural images I normally shot at low ISO).
--
D60. 28-135 IS, 100 macro, Sigma 15-30
--Thanks for the reply; I'll drop you a line separately re Yarc since
I am not sure if detailed posting is allowed here in the Forum?
However I have had a chance to try the software out briefly and
file conversion was great. I like the interface and indeed your
company's whole approach to development, user interface, support
etc.
I was aware of the individual pix processing you mentioned (you see
we do read all the info on the site an dManual etc!! ) and will
try some of this, along with the ARF etc.
I must admit on the studio raw pix I converted I could not see any
real difference between Yarc's and Canon's own conversion. However,
I am pretty fussy over all my work, shooting trannies for
commercial product pix for brochures etc. so exposures are always
spot on. I guess your additional processing power would come into
it's own with say location stuff shot under difficult conditions?
I did some photography for a London theatre company recently (did
not have the D60 then) and it will be interesting to see how the
camera copes with such varied stage lighting in future.
I am not sure at this stage whether it is best to just convert the
raw images and use RAW conversion software merely for that, or
whether the same kind of thing applies as to scanning?
Here, I try to do everything in the Silverfast scanning software so
that there is little or no adjustment needed once the image reaches
Photoshop. Since we are dealing with the digital negative, I
imagine the conversion software is as important as the scanning
software when scanning trannies.
I have seen scans from various scanners etc., but our scans with
Silverfast, scanning directly on the fly to cmyk are the closest I
have seen to the repro house bureau scans we used prior to the
digital revolution.
Therefore it is the scanning software which is the important link
in the chain. You can get quite good scans from a modest scanner
with the right software, but even a good scanner cannot produce
good scans with poor software.
Is the same true with RAW conversion software please? My test
images were just converted to 16 bit tiff, with no adjustemt, no
profile, and needed practically no further adjustment in Photoshop.
I merely converted to 8 bit then to our normal 3M Matchprint cmyk
profile.
Anyway enough of my chat ..........I'll e-mail you separately.
With kind regards,
Peter
--Peter,Hi Peter,
Thanks for posting the link to your site and review; great
......well balanced and as I have just downloaded both, my finding
this thread was very timely!
I have tried BB and will try Yarc; as you say both software
developers seem like real enthusiasts about their respect products.
As a professional commercial photographer, I need every ounce of
quality from my D60 pix, so I am looking forward to seeing some of
my RAW images now via Yarc!
Thanks again
Peter
Peter Phelan Professional Imaging Ltd
UK
Please email me or post to our site if you have any questions
regarding YarcPlus.
Also note that YP allows you to set each pictute to completely
different settings and then convert them all in one batch. We call
this PBPC (PictureByPicture Conversion). So when converting from a
session of 100+ pictures some could be set to daylight WB and some
to a Master Gray card (for instance), but they can all be converted
at one time in one batch.
Enjoy and let me know if I can be of assistance as you evaluate the
products.
--
Regards,
Michael Tapes
http://www.YarcPlus.com
http://www.michaeltapes.com
Peter Phelan Professional Imaging Ltd
Falmouth UK
http://www.peterphelan.com
I have actually found Canon's interface to be very annoying,
especially with the requirement to register image locations all the
time. I tend to move stuff around alot and it made the software
crazy.
I am not trying to change your mind. if you like Canon RIC then you should use it. But for the other readers I would like to point out some differences..It could be my ignorance, but I actually prefer it's UI to Yarc's.
I haven't tried BreezeBrowser yet. Am I missing something?
Except for ARF, the resulting image is the same from all three,
since they all use Canon's SDK. The feature set (re: RAW
conversion itself) is pretty much identical, too - they all mirror
the features of Canon's SDK.
--
D60, 28-135 IS, 550EX
