Best post processing for M43?

I like to keep things simple and will NEVER pay for a subscription to any processing software. So, while I previously used Affinity I recently switched to FastStone for basic editing and Topaz denoise for noise reduction and sharpening. I only shoot jpeg since shooting RAW requires too much editing for what I do with my photographs (no prints over 8x10).

Woody S said:

I like to keep things simple and will NEVER pay for a subscription to any processing software. So, while I previously used Affinity I recently switched to FastStone for basic editing and Topaz denoise for noise reduction and sharpening. I only shoot jpeg since shooting RAW requires too much editing for what I do with my photographs (no prints over 8x10).

Click to expand...

For what you are doing I think you are RIGHT ON! Keeping it simple can have it's own advantages, and the OM-1s Jpeg output is indeed one of the most exceptional there is that I've found. The ONLY one to date I consider easily in the league of Canon which is known for it.

Thanks to Trevor's recommend I too loaded and tried out FastStone. I was so blown away by it's feature set as well as shear performance, especially for quick changes and resizing and viewing, that for the first time in 15 years I got rid of my former favorite, Irfanview. It's the first program of it's type to blow them out of the water. For Jpeg only processing you have it rather nailed. Should be all you'll need to process your Jpegs and sharpen/Denoise them appropriately in Topaz which does a fine job.

I'm assuming by "best" you mean final best image output quality? Because "best" could mean very good IQ output at the cheapest price point. Or, very good IQ output with the least amount of work. Or, so on.

I use Lightroom Classic and have Adobe's $10 per month plan (comes with Photoshop which I use occasionally). I like it. I find it easy to use. Does nearly everything I need.

I also have Topaz's products as plugins. Once you purchase you don't have to upgrade if you don't want. On images that really need it--low light or images that I need enlarged because of aggressive cropping--I find they work well. Intuitive and usually doesn't require much fiddling.

I've not directly compared other products. For me, the time investment of learning a new program even with a free trial just isn't worth it since 1)I'm fine with $10 per month (I realize some aren't), and 2) Lightroom+ Topaz do what I need them to do.

I, personally, have never been convinced that changing programs will make a substantial or meaningful difference to my output (note that I did not say it would make no difference). I would rather spend my time doing other things than trying to learn new programs for what at best would be marginal improvement (if any at all).

That's in no way a knock against others. Just an observation about what's important to me personally.

Member said:

Sorry but if you've not gotten DXO's masking function down you never bothered to learn it, which is super easy.

Click to expand...

That's really strange, because in a previous post you said you didn't use masks...

Member said:

As for the anti Adobe rant count on it continuing. it sucks.

Click to expand...

The real professional photographers who use Adobe are all wrong then, as are the Adobe users replying to this thread, and you know better :-O

I think you just can't work out how to use Adobe products, maybe a bit to complicated for you :-D

Richandhiscat said:

Richandhiscat said:

Sorry but if you've not gotten DXO's masking function down you never bothered to learn it, which is super easy.

Click to expand...

That's really strange, because in a previous post you said you didn't use masks...

Richandhiscat said:

As for the anti Adobe rant count on it continuing. it sucks.

Click to expand...

The real professional photographers who use Adobe are all wrong then, as are the Adobe users replying to this thread, and you know better :-O

I think you just can't work out how to use Adobe products, maybe a bit to complicated for you :-D

Click to expand...

Not at all. Just ceased using Adobe after the first few Lightroom itineration's. They got passed by. The professionals you typically run into are either Youtubers or on this forum. Considering the many thousands of us out there don't count on it being all about Adobe that's for sure. The ones I associate with have all moved on years ago as well. If you're in love with it go right ahead and stand in the mud.

High ISO noise is the main weakness of M43, and DXO just effortlessly corrects it.

elmanhansen said:

There is a feature for converting LR catalogues to ON1 RAW.

I should try that feature soon to cut my bill with 50 %. . .

Click to expand...

I seriously looked into converting the LR catalogue to ON1 some time ago. ON1 make promises about conversions but they are somewhat half-hearted. I was not convinced. The risk of having years of painstaking cataloguing, some scientific, go up in smoke with the press of a button due to some obscure quirk that nobody had thought of, is far too great. When they can convince me, I'll gladly do it. In the mean time, Adobe have me in a strangle hold.

C Sean said:

As a hobbyist M43 user, what is the best program to use for processing M43 files?

I been using Lightroom 6 since it first come out in 2015 and I imagine since then post process programs greatly improved. So what program would you recommend?

Click to expand...

If you bought LR in 2015, it is now written off and free if you keep using it. So from a cost perspective, it already is the best you can have. And you know how to use it, there is no new learning curve.

I would focus on what exactly it falls short for your personal use. Can it be fixed with plug-ins? Can a free standalone program do what you miss in Lightroom? If it is the latest fashion ai sharpening you are after, does the latest free Olympus OM workspace support your cameras and run on your PC?

As a hobby user, only if you cannot find a free remedy would I consider throwing money at new software. OTOH If you make money with your pictures, then yes by all means get the newest and latest and best, and deduct it from your income taxes.

C Sean said:

As a hobbyist M43 user, what is the best program to use for processing M43 files?

I been using Lightroom 6 since it first come out in 2015 and I imagine since then post process programs greatly improved. So what program would you recommend?

Click to expand...

I think that you will get a number of different ideas but for me familiarity with a program is more important . I have spent a lot of years using adobe products and know them inside out . They do everything I want or need. If you like Lightroom just update it and maybe add the DXO pureraw software which works as a plug-in within lightroom.

From an end results perspective I don't think you can go wrong with any of the modern programs. Make a shortlist and have a go with a couple of trial versions. A lot swear here swear by DXO photolab whereas I actively dislike its interface and way of doing things. You cannot please everyone all the time at least there are plenty of options

Richandhiscat said:

Richandhiscat said:

But note that OM Workspace actually has a pretty decent denoise module you can download. I'd start with that, see where it doesn't meet your needs, then seek out a tool to fill in what you need.

Click to expand...

He uses Panasonic and Nikon, not Olympus.

Click to expand...

Ah, that wasn't in the OP. Thanks for clarifying.

Messier Object said:

I’m still using Lr6.14 and I see no real advantage in switching to anything else at the moment despite it not supporting the raw files from two of my cameras . . .

> I convert my later model camera (E-M1 III and R7) raw files to DNG

Click to expand...

I am using LR6.14 also. Have been reluctant to upgrade from my E-M1ii as a result. How does conversion to DNG avoid the problem of lack of support for new cameras and how much of a pain is it?

Messier Object said:

> I use Topaz Denoise AI with Lr plug-in

I restored the Lr MAP module which was deliberately crippled by Adobe to ‘punish’ those who didn’t take up a subscription - I installed my own Google Maps API key (Google subscription) which over the last 5 years has cost my exactly $0

I know that when it comes time to upgrade my PC I won’t be able to reinstall a working copy of Lightroom 6 - Adobe has cut off all avenues for that :-x - and I’ll either subscribe or switch to something else, possibly Darktable.

Click to expand...

Others seem to like DXO. But you wouldn't consider that? (BTW, didn't know you couldn't reinstall LR6--not even from the CD?)

Messier Object said:

Peter

Click to expand...

scphoto said:

Guy -

Thanks for listing so many apps/utils for various aspects of photo editing. I'll give some of them a try.

- Simon

Click to expand...

That list was probably more prompted by me thinking about what the heck to put on this new HP Win11 i5 notebook I just bought to replace a really aging and slow little notebook.

I seem to have oceans of software collected over the years but that list gets to the core of what I feel works for me now for photos.

I also need to add SyncbackSE for auto backup purposes usually now set to do an auto backup at detection of plugin of the USB drive. https://www.2brightsparks.com/ The free version also works well but does not have the auto USB detect feature https://www.2brightsparks.com/freeware/index.html

I still need to look at slide show making software, I still have ProShow Gold but that company folded so no more updates. Maybe PTE in future when ProShow fails to function for some reason.

Another package I sometimes use is the AVS4YOU bunch and its "licence for life" which is 50% discounted at times (from their already "discounted" price) refers to the life of the PC, when I get a new computer then I have to buy another licence for life.

I find their programs useful for some functions. https://www.avs4you.com/ now called "unlimited" but still a new licence for a new computer, you can't move licences across.

The price gets cheaper than the current $79 "discount" seen today, a few times a year it's half that at $39 or so. There's maybe 6 utility programs for video and audio etc in one download. They have worked OK for me in the past. It seems to have changed, some programs are now free, some have disappeared and the price seems to have risen on the remaining main ones. The freebies seem to be limited versions of some of the paid software, will work OK within their limitations, mainly used for file type conversions by me.

Of course the free version of CCleaner https://www.ccleaner.com/ccleaner/download to tidy up the registry and to clean away junk files - and also Speccy https://www.ccleaner.com/speccy/download to poke about in the computer.

You need to pick Elite so you get the AI noise reduction.

People seem to forget DXO is a full fledged RAW converter with water mark support, and localize editing using U-point style interface from the Nik plug-ins.

And if you have an Apple Silicon Mac, it' sone of the few programs that takes full advantage of the Apple neural network accelerator when using deepPRIME noise reduction to export.

--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

Mephistopheles* said:

Messier Object said:

I’m still using Lr6.14 and I see no real advantage in switching to anything else at the moment despite it not supporting the raw files from two of my cameras . . .

> I convert my later model camera (E-M1 III and R7) raw files to DNG

Click to expand...

I am using LR6.14 also. Have been reluctant to upgrade from my E-M1ii as a result. How does conversion to DNG avoid the problem of lack of support for new cameras and how much of a pain is it?

Click to expand...

I use the free Adobe DNG converter - very easy to use. I then import the converted DNGs to Lr

Mephistopheles* said:

Mephistopheles* said:

> I use Topaz Denoise AI with Lr plug-in

I restored the Lr MAP module which was deliberately crippled by Adobe to ‘punish’ those who didn’t take up a subscription - I installed my own Google Maps API key (Google subscription) which over the last 5 years has cost my exactly $0

I know that when it comes time to upgrade my PC I won’t be able to reinstall a working copy of Lightroom 6 - Adobe has cut off all avenues for that :-x - and I’ll either subscribe or switch to something else, possibly Darktable.

Click to expand...

Others seem to like DXO. But you wouldn't consider that? (BTW, didn't know you couldn't reinstall LR6--not even from the CD?)

Click to expand...

I tried the free DXO trial and didn’t like it.

I like Lr’s file management and especially the extensive sort/filter/tag and GPS mapping.

You can install Lr 6.0 but getting to 6.14 isn’t easy unless you have a copy of the update files, and even with 6.0 you get the message telling you that you have Lr installed on too many devices despite your Adobe account showing that you have none installed. They know that they can’t stop you installing it so they hobble your account to stop you.

Peter

Mephistopheles* said:

Mephistopheles* said:

Peter

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

ProDude said:

Quite honestly, I find it nothing short of shocking ANYONE would recommend Adobe.

Click to expand...

I am confused as to why you find it shocking. Because you don't care to use it doesn't mean millions of others shouldn't,

Messier Object said:

I tried the free DXO trial and didn’t like it.

Click to expand...

I didn't even get that far. I couldn't make head nor tail of their web site, but that's me ;-)

BobT3218 said:

Messier Object said:

I tried the free DXO trial and didn’t like it.

Click to expand...

I didn't even get that far. I couldn't make head nor tail of their web site, but that's me ;-)

Click to expand...

Then you would just love Silkypix, even stranger than usual due to the often Japanese schoolboy ability English translations..

Can't see your problem though with the DxO site.

MNE said:

ProDude said:

Quite honestly, I find it nothing short of shocking ANYONE would recommend Adobe.

Click to expand...

I am confused as to why you find it shocking. Because you don't care to use it doesn't mean millions of others shouldn't,

Click to expand...

The ONLY analogy I can come up with is if I meet you on the street and offer to trade you a $100 bill for your $1 dollar bill it would surprise me if you chose to NOT do it. Assuming of course you could verify easily enough it was for real. Let's assume THAT. and yet another reason why it surprises me when people KNOW there is better out there, they stay stuck in their old ways and software.

ProDude said:

MNE said:

ProDude said:

Quite honestly, I find it nothing short of shocking ANYONE would recommend Adobe.

Click to expand...

I am confused as to why you find it shocking. Because you don't care to use it doesn't mean millions of others shouldn't,

Click to expand...

The ONLY analogy I can come up with is if I meet you on the street and offer to trade you a $100 bill for your $1 dollar bill it would surprise me if you chose to NOT do it. Assuming of course you could verify easily enough it was for real. Let's assume THAT. and yet another reason why it surprises me when people KNOW there is better out there, they stay stuck in their old ways and software.

Click to expand...

Stop the bullying shouting.

Who do you think you are, that people should take any notice of what is only your opinion?

It's many peoples opinion that there isn't better out there for anything except noise reduction, yet you refuse to accept that, and just shout anyone down who doesn't agree with you. I doubt if you've used the latest version of Lightroom, and yet you insist that DXO has better masking - it simply hasn't, and I've used both.

The OP asked for advice, he should expect that to be unbiased based on user experience, and not have to be assailed by someone with an irrational grudge against a specific company.

Update - you've now admitted that you abandoned Lightroom "after the first few iterations"....

Unbelievable :-(

robgendreau said:

Richandhiscat said:

robgendreau said:

But note that OM Workspace actually has a pretty decent denoise module you can download. I'd start with that, see where it doesn't meet your needs, then seek out a tool to fill in what you need.

Click to expand...

He uses Panasonic and Nikon, not Olympus.

Click to expand...

Ah, that wasn't in the OP. Thanks for clarifying.

Click to expand...

No problem.