Silkypix DS Pro Foveon: Share Your Tips & Tricks

dlj

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
312
Reaction score
89
Location
CA
It seems like there's just a handful of us rigorously trying out the new Silkypix RAW developer, but I thought it might be helpful to have one thread for just us Foveon users that are putting it through its paces.

I figure we can share our discoveries as to what works and doesn't, so that by the end of the beta trial period, we can provide some meaningful feedback, and make a knowledgeable decision as to how useful this product really is.

I encourage anyone to post their tricks & tips, rants and UI commentaries. Comparisons at 100% might also be helpful.

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

SETTINGS
In a nutshell, here's what I've found:

The colour control is probably the best I have seen anywhere, and its possible to easily 'match' a scene's hues from memory.

The default settings are pretty good, but in certain scenarios, they can lead to a tiny bit of 'Bayer Mush'. If you increase the sharpening and/or noise removal more than the default, you do so at your own risk, and must tread carefully. My default setting is for Outline Emphasis Sharpness of 2 (way below the default, because we don't use an AA filter), Detail Emphasis on default, False Outline on Zero; I only use Normal Sharp.

For Noise Removal, my default is False Colour Control 46, Neat Noise 0, Noise Reduction around 2 or 5 (undecided). Noise Level Min defaults to 6, and Noise Cancel Min is default (78). I will raise Noise Level Min according to the documents noise level as required, but typically from between 10 to 20.

Exposure is usually about - 1/2 (I often expose to the right), camera white balance, average contrast, Film Colour 'A' (Agfachrome?), Saturation 1.06.

Highlight Control is shifted way over from Luminance to Chroma emphasis (12), and Saturation vs Hue is at 66 (hue bias). Luminance Restoration is 66 (above average), and Dynamic Range Expansion is +1.5 EV.

All Tone settings are default, but this is one area I immediately jump to for tweaking problematic images. I will typically raise Black Level to 1 or 2, lower Contrast Center (but watch for darks posterization!) and sometimes raise Gamma and/or Contrast a detent or two.

The Fine Colour Control is the greatest emergency colour reclamation tool, and I love it. That's only touched when needed, but is a huge help when you do need it.

Create a 'Custom Taste' reflecting this (adjusted to your preferences) and make that your new default, and you'll find you can fly through huge groups of photos with fantastic quality, only pausing to adjusting things that truly need special attention, which is how it should be.

I have found the quality at least meets SPP3.52, and often exceeds it, anywhere from ever-so-slightly to 'OMG that was too incredible to be automatic!'

Perhaps I'm forgetting things to check though:

I've been looking at high & low contrast objects looking for nice crisp micro-contrast edges at the pixel level, and recreating colours without losing detail any object detail, range of colour differences extracted, looking for halos, blurring and mush, noise & posterization.

Am I missing some obvious things?

FEATURE REQUESTS

I wish there was a way to apply Lens Aberration values according to rules (eg., at 'Wide Zoom focal lengths and Wide Open', backing off as apertures and focal lengths move towards 'normal'.)

Totally rename and reorganize the UI menus & controls! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
 
At least two interesting tools and options for me (not talking about all other things of course).
  • Dodging tool - can be used instead of SPP fill light (only positive FL though). Noone in the world doesn't know exactly, what parts of image that tool 'dodges', but for many images result seems pretty good.
  • Changing contrast center - used with histogram allows achieve better balance between light and dark objects. In SPP for that 3 operations are needed - exposure, highlight and shadows correction.
What I would like to see (besides UI changes - actually this is not important and unlikely to happen anyway):
  • Possibility to have (or define) more or different sectors in fine color controller - I've some shots, where I'd like to separate colors, placed in same sector :( I've seen editors, where any region on color circle can be shifted.
  • Some kind of NFL - negative fill light :)
--
Arvo
Sigma/Foveon information collection and little gallery:
http://www.stv.ee/~donq/sigma.htm
http://www.stv.ee/~donq/images.htm
 
One important tip - can someone please tell me (and others who have been similarly impressed by the processing of Foveon images) where we can download the trial?
We would like to try out the product and join this very interesting discussion
Thanks
 
At least two interesting tools and options for me (not talking about all other things of course).
  • Dodging tool - can be used instead of SPP fill light (only positive FL though). No one in the world doesn't know exactly, what parts of image that tool 'dodges', but for many images result seems pretty good.
Thanks ArvoJ. I agree completely - I wish there was a brush, or at least a better explanation. It has helped many images for me a lot too, but I don't understand it well enough to properly control it (I do have experience burning & dodging incidentally, both 'analog' & digital). Sometimes I feel like I'm playing the old game 'MYST' swishing away at levers, stopping when I get a 'jackpot'.
  • Changing contrast center - used with histogram allows achieve better balance between light and dark objects. In SPP for that 3 operations are needed - exposure, highlight and shadows correction.
Also feel similarly, but again, I still don't completely understand the extent to everything I'm changing. The only bad side-effect is occasional posterization in the darks.
What I would like to see (besides UI changes - actually this is not important and unlikely to happen anyway):
  • Possibility to have (or define) more or different sectors in fine color controller - I've some shots, where I'd like to separate colors, placed in same sector :( I've seen editors, where any region on color circle can be shifted.
YES - (Echo, echo, echo). This is too cool to waste on such broad palettes. How about being able to define the 'region' monitored (because you're right, sometimes you can affect other areas of similar hue). I've never seen this kind of targeted offset before, but now I can't live without it. If it could be more granular, you could even easily fix certain hues to match corporate spot colours, without doing it all through a bitmap editor, and it could automatically apply to an entire shoot.
  • Some kind of NFL - negative fill light :)
Sigh. Yes, it's magical when it fits, and you can't get the same look out of Silkypix.
 
I have gotten some nice film-like results with ISO 1600 on SD14 with this Silkypix beta:







The same images developed with SPP were pretty messy and unusable unless converted to black and white.

Under Noise settings, Keep False Colour turned up all the way. Add a small to marginal bit of neat noise and leave the other noise settings around their defaults.

It's still grainy but reminds me of a nice uniform 1600 ASA film kind of grain if that makes sense. I still did a bit of toning and sharpening in Photoshop. I agree that the sharpening in Silkypix can be a overly harsh if you're not careful.

Overall though I have been very impressed with how Silkypix handles noise / high ISO. In SPP, even at ISO 800 I could get those wierd splothches of colour that I find near impossible to remove. In Silkypix, they aren't present.

I also like Silkypix's AWB guesses, which seems to get it more right than most others. The advanced WB controls (the click out box down at the bottom) is really great too, especially for those more used to SPP's colour wheel.

Love the dodging, similiar to fill-light but more natural. As for other tips, I suggest playing with the more advanced tool buttons that pop out windows for fine-tuning. I was very happy to find Curves there myself :)

--
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaeming/
Which of my photographs is my favorite? The one I'm
going to take tomorrow.
  • Imogen Cunningham
 
About contrast center - I use it with tone curve (I erroneusly said histogram in previous post), checking 'Display graph on tone curve'; makes understanding its effect simpler. This setting is probably unique for every picture.

About NFL - I often use it in range -0.1 to -0.3, makes flower and other nature shots better (esp while using older M42 lenses). In Silkypix this can be somewhat acheived using gamma and contrast corrections, but result is different anyway.

I've usually only few images to process and play with some better ones maybe an half of hour or more, using different editors; I don't batch process images and have thereby no favourite settings to tell.

About MYST - they are some of very few games, what I've played on PC at all :)

--
Arvo
Sigma/Foveon information collection and little gallery:
http://www.stv.ee/~donq/sigma.htm
http://www.stv.ee/~donq/images.htm
 
Fantastic ArvoJ:

I understand this at last. Thank you.

I thought (because of the goofy interface) that the 'Display graph on tone curve' only applied to the Black Level. Now I see that it (when moused-over) reflects all 'Tone' settings. I can actually understand this now.

I spent a couple hours last night processing some new shots, and doing 100% and 'Fit' side-by-side compares between SPP3.5.2 and this copy of Silkypix. I was able to batch 19 of the files using the default settings, and it was somewhat slow (took about 8 or 9 minutes), but was well-behaved in the background, so the batching works nicely.
 
The same images developed with SPP were pretty messy and unusable unless converted to black and white.
Agree - B&W grainy was usually the only way to go, although I did try some tests a couple weeks ago where I experimented a lot , and got a passable but blurry ('over' noise removed) 1600 ISO colour image, but I had to play a lot with NoiseWare or NoiseNinja, and SPP. But nowhere anything as nice as yours.
Under Noise settings, Keep False Colour turned up all the way. Add a small to marginal bit of neat noise and leave the other noise settings around their defaults.

It's still grainy but reminds me of a nice uniform 1600 ASA film kind of grain if that makes sense. I still did a bit of toning and sharpening in Photoshop. I agree that the sharpening in Silkypix can be a overly harsh if you're not careful.
I will have to try that. I was able to do miracles on some noisy images in Silkypix, but when I then compared output to SPP, Silkypix created total 'mush' on a bunch of intertwining vines. I find sharpening is not necessary unless dealing with real problem images. I didn't fully understand Silkypix's Noise removal (aside from the confusing documentation and interface), so I will try your settings.
Overall though I have been very impressed with how Silkypix handles noise / high ISO. In SPP, even at ISO 800 I could get those wierd splothches of colour that I find near impossible to remove. In Silkypix, they aren't present.
Yes, your proof is in your ISO1600 pix.
I also like Silkypix's AWB guesses, which seems to get it more right than most others. The advanced WB controls (the click out box down at the bottom) is really great too, especially for those more used to SPP's colour wheel.
I can't believe the colours I get on first opening an image. It might have taken me ages and multiple applications before to tease them out in a half-hearted way, but now, its just plain easy.

Thanks
 
In SPP there is no (adjustable/manual) noise control. In Silky pix
there are as much as 5 sliders. I'm totally confused. Can someone
explain the difference and appliances/purposes of the different sliders:

False color ctrl Neat noise
Noise reduction Noise level
Noise cancel

Secondly, there is a huge differences between SPP an SilkyPix when

no noise reduction is applied at all (all sliders value=0). I really get a different

noise pattern to SPP (with full sharpness applied, as from SilkyPix these are related). What is the reason for that, a different RAW interpretation, or does SPP apply some kind of noise reduction, which cannot be ?

Example of low light shot:



--
regards,
Daniel

http://www.flickr.com/photos/portier/
 
Daniel,

I think the noise/sharpness settings might be one of the most interesting things in the program. I was just playing with them. Seems like with all sharpness and noise reduction set to min, you get very raw data. I find that only moving the "false color ctrl" in noise reduction up until you get rid of obvious noise and get smoother colors (about half-way to the default for most of my shots, and leaving all other noise/sharpness at min gets results that seem like SPP 1.1 on SD9 photos. I just got an SD9, and decided to install SPP 1.1 to see what happens, I tried some comparisons between it and SPP 3.5.2, and you can see details obliterated in 3.5.2 by the internal noise reduction programmed into 3.5.2 that is not in 1.1.

So as long as your photos are focused sharply, SilkyPix might be able to provide even better details in the end result.

As far as what all the other settings do, I'm not completely sure yet, but I'm continuing to play. I plan to send an email requesting that they add the SD9 and SD10 formats to the program as well. This might be the best raw processor out there, although the number of settings is rather huge.
-John
In SPP there is no (adjustable/manual) noise control. In Silky pix
there are as much as 5 sliders. I'm totally confused. Can someone
explain the difference and appliances/purposes of the different sliders:

False color ctrl Neat noise
Noise reduction Noise level
Noise cancel

Secondly, there is a huge differences between SPP an SilkyPix when

no noise reduction is applied at all (all sliders value=0). I really get a different

noise pattern to SPP (with full sharpness applied, as from SilkyPix these are related). What is the reason for that, a different RAW interpretation, or does SPP apply some kind of noise reduction, which cannot be ?

Example of low light shot:



--
regards,
Daniel

http://www.flickr.com/photos/portier/
--
http://www.johnlindroth.com/gallery/
[email protected]

My future starts when I wake up every morning ...
Every day I find something creative to do with my life.
--Miles Davis
 
these images are large, since they are screen shots, but you need full resolution to see it.

In a flower shot I took in 9/27/08, and have never gotten an acceptable output from SPP 3, 2.5 or 3.5.2, I had to try in SilkyPix. For me, the ultimate test.

I playing with sharpness/noise, here's what I found. First all settings to min for sharpness and noise.

then only adjust 'False color ctrl'

here's none:



here's the default:



here's where I like it, just getting rid of the noise, but keeping as much real signal as possible:



here's MAX - notice the red bleeding into the green on the left:



And here's the result, after setting other settings where I liked them:



I could never get the drops to look right before. This was a very red rose in a bright orange morning sun. You can see the orange/yellow in the droplets on the rose, and the red of the rose reflecting in the droplets on the leaves.

I'm sold - to me this is software worth buying, even if some items show up in Japanese.

-John
--
http://www.johnlindroth.com/gallery/
[email protected]

My future starts when I wake up every morning ...
Every day I find something creative to do with my life.
--Miles Davis
 
May be, this question is already answered:

On their site I didn't find Sigma RAW mentioned even for the Windows version.

There is a Mac version available - but also there isn't Sigma in the list of supported fileformates.

The software seems very promising! But a lot of graphical people are on Mac...

Johannes
 
MAC version of SP4/SP PRO is under development. First public beta has been released few weeks ago. However there is no Sigma support yet and it's only in Japanese ;) But it's only a question of time.
May be, this question is already answered:

On their site I didn't find Sigma RAW mentioned even for the Windows version.

There is a Mac version available - but also there isn't Sigma in the list of supported fileformates.

The software seems very promising! But a lot of graphical people are on Mac...

Johannes
--
Ricoh Film & Digital Forum
http://www.ricohforum.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7597032@N05/
 
John;

This is exactly the kind of helpful examples/tutorial I was praying we might see. This is so helpful - thank you! Between your guide for a nice lower-ISO exposure, and the earlier high-ISO shots, I'm finally getting a good feeling for how to 'tune' this False Colour Control setting. It's so cool that you can fine-tune the noise-removal to get rid of just enough noise to preserve the Foveon look, without making it look harsh.

The manual just says it is for removing spurious/irrelevant colours added from noise (that's my interpretation, not a quote), so I didn't spend much time with that control. It's obvious to me now that this is the 'primary' noise control we should be working with, and that we can control not just coarse noise removal, but that it gives us very subtle control over mediating detail versus harming the Foveon look.

I saw two other things that might be able to be improved in the image (I realize you were only covering the False Colour Control):

Exactly halfway down the image, along the leftmost edge of the rose where it borders darker green, it almost looks like a halo-effect from over sharpening/USM, and yet against the lighter green-to-red transitions, it looks silky smooth. Have you tried dialling the sharpening down close to (but not all the way) to zero?

Also, in the bluish part so of the rose, it seems like some posterization is going on: it seems too prevalent and consistently coloured to be a different form of noise, but that's just my guess. That could also possibly be a side-effect of Silkypix sharpening, which is much less required for the AA-less Foveons, and so a bad Silkypix default for us.

I love the splash of colour from the warm sunlight glints in the water drops versus the cool-blue glints refracting only the sky. Check out the detail (normally blown away in SPP) in the farthest-right rose petal, and the nice red colour reproduction. To pull all this out from a formerly unusable image is pretty amazing.

Thanks so much for the post!
 
Just a reminder that if you run a VMware session of a Windows environment on your Mac that the Silkypix Foveon beta runs beautifully. I would assume that Parallels would work too.

A side benefit: I can vouch from personal experience that Vista works faster under VMware Fusion on a Mac than on PC hardware!!!! Go figure.

It would be interesting to hear from anyone that has run prior Silkypix releases on both Windows and Mac to see how equal (or unequal) they are for each release.
 
Thank you John for sharing your experience.

It looks like a single slider will be enough for most of the noise suppression. That's what I also observed, playing around with the sliders. And, as you said in your first reply, if that is the truth, then the other 4 sliders seem to be quite too much. And because english is not my native language I don't have a association with e.g. the word NEAT, what confuses me even more.

Sometimes I have noise that doesn't occur at pixel level, but appear as large violet blobs, especially at high ISO. Might one of the other sliders correct for that kind of noise, or should I just don't bother and throw those pictures right away like I do now...

For me SPP is really good most of the time, also because of the simple controls. Only for noise reduction and BW conversion I use The Gimp. And because I shoot a lot indoors to portrait my kids (..), I regularly run into noise and low light conditions. So trying Silky Pix is mainly for its noise reduction features.

PS: your example is really a nice piece of work, the droplets are really sparkling in the final result. If that was only a left over shot, Compliments!... My example was my left over shot, yes it was definitely noisy, but what a huge difference.

--
regards,
Daniel

http://www.flickr.com/photos/portier/
 
I've just been looking at exposure - comparing SP with SPP3.5.2 -

At the default settings SPP protects hilites pretty well. With silkyPix you have to be pretty alert about what you might miss in the hilites and be pretty strong with the exposure settings to keep them.

It also seems like the SPix hilite recovery gets you a grey scale recovery of hilites at the extreme but SPP will put a little color in there.

SPP is really not so bad . . . but SilkPix seems to offer a lot of control, maybe punchier images. Wish you could just 'draw' the curves like in Photoshop or ACR, though.

If anyone is interested in raws to play with let me know.
 
It looks like a single slider will be enough for most of the noise suppression. That's what I also observed, playing around with the sliders. And, as you said in your first reply, if that is the truth, then the other 4 sliders seem to be quite too much. And because english is not my native language I don't have a association with e.g. the word NEAT, what confuses me even more.
I saw very little effect on the image with the other sliders, once I had this one set where I liked it. I think I was perhaps lucky in deciding to set all noise/sharpness to min to start testing, and moving only one at a time, since this showed me the value of the 'false color ctrl' - which meant nothing to me by it's label.
Sometimes I have noise that doesn't occur at pixel level, but appear as large violet blobs, especially at high ISO. Might one of the other sliders correct for that kind of noise, or should I just don't bother and throw those pictures right away like I do now...
I saw your examples of violet blobs. I have never seen them in my photos.
For me SPP is really good most of the time, also because of the simple controls. Only for noise reduction and BW conversion I use The Gimp. And because I shoot a lot indoors to portrait my kids (..), I regularly run into noise and low light conditions. So trying Silky Pix is mainly for its noise reduction features.
I agree - SPP 3.5 seems like a very good software for sigma images. I've tried others mentioned over the year that I have been stalking in this forum, and none really made a huge difference, except Klauss's example of using photoshop to re-saturate an image with reds - that worked really well with some shots - and got me close with this image. But I think SPix is better.
PS: your example is really a nice piece of work, the droplets are really sparkling in the final result. If that was only a left over shot, Compliments!... My example was my left over shot, yes it was definitely noisy, but what a huge difference.
Thanks Daniel. It wasn't really a left over shot - I thought it was really nice, but could never get the end result from the X3F file. I took it about a week after getting my SD14, and then discovered the 'problems' with brilliant red over saturation problems with the SD14. I think it still needs a little work in colors, since it's a little over-saturated, but this is the best this flower has looked since I took the photo :)

-John
--
http://www.johnlindroth.com/gallery/
[email protected]

My future starts when I wake up every morning ...
Every day I find something creative to do with my life.
--Miles Davis
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top