which would be the best raw processor for the XE-1?

[nixda]

vkphoto wrote:

Ariston wrote:

David Hardaway wrote:

I have spent a great deal of time trying different optiions. C1 does a good job and has good micro co trast, but as another memeber has mentioned, LR does a better job with highlights.

Depending on the subject, LR does a decent job with sharpening 150 radius .6 detail 0 masking 0. That seems to work just fine untkl they get the bugs worked out arou d foliage.

However, the best results i have been able to achieve came from exporting RAF files from the bundled Silkypix to 16bit TIF without any adjustments except 100% unsharp mask in development parameters. It works fast. Then import your TIF files into lightroom where you will have exposure latitude similar to what you get with RAF and further sharpening can be done in LR if needed without causing watercolor effect.

It is a work around but it does work and works well.

--

Regards,
David
www.photographybydmichael.com

thanks. this was exactly my concern. I do have the previous version of C1 and I'm not sure if V7 is any different from an updated Version 6 C1. also a previous version of SilkyPix and a bundled one. wonder if version 5 is any better. I practically use LR and PS due to the set parameters for my workflow and plugins that I have on. I see that LR DNG conversion might still have some issues with regards to bringing out the best details out of the RAW image.

Hi,

if you are on OSX and already have LR and PS then I would suggest to try free RPP with excellent automation provided by Mark-vdi (search forum for RPP and Mark_vdi). Superb details.

RPP, being based on DCRAW, has the dreaded zipper effect. I couldn't get around that with the JPEG overlay method that's been proposed by abelits a while back and worked out by Mark_vdi just recently, because lens corrections can't be accommodated. It seems to work well though with optically corrected lenses that show no significant distortion.

 

[vkphoto]

it works well with Fujinon 35 mm and legacy lenses. Don't know how well it supports other fuji lenses.

 

[Uwe Steinmueller]

Thanks, makes sense.

 

[umanemo]

That Pre-Set is now in my LR, best I have ever produced and I am just climbing the learning curve! Thanks for the tip.

Here is a sample of the results of your recommendation. Pay attention to the cracking stucco detail and particularly the fiber board at the top of the doorway supported by the jack. The leaf detail on the sidewalk is excellent. I could not have guessed to have set unsharp to 150!

20130112 France L'Estaque Abandoned Passage

 

[Zardoz]

Hope, but no evidence of movement.

 

[Charuteiro]

Ariston wrote:

I meant the best on getting the best result out of the image among the photo editors right now?

Take a look at the DPR article (2013-01-23):

==> Raw Converter Showdown: Capture One Pro 7, DxO Optics Pro 8 and Lightroom 4

 

[David Hardaway]

You are welcome. However, in certain images you will still see a watercolor effect. In that case use Silkypix to export tiff or y444 jpg with demosaic at max and export option unsharp mask at 100%. I was able to match if not beat the c1 image from dpreview samples of the trolley. I will post the results from that if asked. I agree with another member that mentioned dpreview did not also co.pare Silkypix output i the comparisons. Easy to export tk tif and do the editing in lightroom or photoshop with excellent results.

Typing from my phone is causing typos.

 

[Charuteiro]

David Hardaway wrote:

You are welcome. However, in certain images you will still see a watercolor effect. In that case use Silkypix to export tiff or y444 jpg with demosaic at max and export option unsharp mask at 100%. I was able to match if not beat the c1 image from dpreview samples of the trolley. I will post the results from that if asked. I agree with another member that mentioned dpreview did not also co.pare Silkypix output i the comparisons. Easy to export tk tif and do the editing in lightroom or photoshop with excellent results.

Typing from my phone is causing typos.

 

[Ariston]

David Hardaway wrote:

You are welcome. However, in certain images you will still see a watercolor effect. In that case use Silkypix to export tiff or y444 jpg with demosaic at max and export option unsharp mask at 100%. I was able to match if not beat the c1 image from dpreview samples of the trolley. I will post the results from that if asked. I agree with another member that mentioned dpreview did not also co.pare Silkypix output i the comparisons. Easy to export tk tif and do the editing in lightroom or photoshop with excellent results.

Typing from my phone is causing typos.

 

[David Hardaway]

I am using the bundled software Silkypix version 3xxx

I open the the image in Silkypix default settings nothing changed except under sharpening I select MAX Demosaic, then in development parameters I leave everything as default and then increase unsharp mask to 100% (max is 500%). then I export to TIF and import to Lightroom. Silkypix can do this as batch as well. Very fast and simple.

The comparison image as requested I did 100 % crop of 3 images.

left to right - Image 1 left is JPEG OOC, Image 2 center is RAF to TIF as described and adjusted exposure etc in LR (NO SHARPENING in LR), Image 3 right is the RAF file developed straight in Lightroom.

Now I will do a side by side comparison with the C1 conversion done by DPReview and my middle image from above which is the Silkypix to tif to Lightroom. In my opinion this easy process using the software that came with the camera beats Capture one. Capture one does look good. You be the judge.

Thoughts? Opinions?

--
Regards,
David
www.photographybydmichael.com

 

[Ariston]

is the one taken on the 2 comparisons, on the left is Silky-LR and one in the right C1 exclusive or C1 to LR?




it appears the one on the right looks like a C1 image.

 

[David Hardaway]

First comparisons with three images are left OOC Jpg, Center is SilkyPix, right is RAF in lightroom directly.

The second set of comparison toward the bottom is C1 on left and Silkypix on the right.

 

[David Hardaway]

to answer your question more directly, C1 is on the left. Silky is on the right in the two image comparison at the bottom.

I tried to edit my post to make that clear but time expired. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Ariston]

thanks for the clarification. I was confused with the results initially.

well, it's not surprising considering that you did unsharp masking on Silky Pix. I agree that it does sharpen the image alot although my concern was more on the fine details that I could get from the image. for a quick workflow, the Silkypix do come in handy but for more elaborate work, I think the C1 might be better. LR is a bit underwhelming. the issue would be some artifacts. I'm not yet sure if further processing on PS would be as good as the C1 result or a C1 to PS would be better than a DNG LR to PS post-process, with careful application of course.

 

[awgk]

As anyone used this http://www.oloneo.com/ it has support now for X-pro, on sale for $59.00.

 

[Charuteiro]

David Hardaway wrote:

I am using the bundled software Silkypix version 3xxx

I open the the image in Silkypix default settings nothing changed except under sharpening I select MAX Demosaic, then in development parameters I leave everything as default and then increase unsharp mask to 100% (max is 500%). then I export to TIF and import to Lightroom. Silkypix can do this as batch as well. Very fast and simple.

The comparison image as requested I did 100 % crop of 3 images.

left to right - Image 1 left is JPEG OOC, Image 2 center is RAF to TIF as described and adjusted exposure etc in LR (NO SHARPENING in LR), Image 3 right is the RAF file developed straight in Lightroom.

Now I will do a side by side comparison with the C1 conversion done by DPReview and my middle image from above which is the Silkypix to tif to Lightroom. In my opinion this easy process using the software that came with the camera beats Capture one. Capture one does look good. You be the judge.

Thoughts? Opinions?

--
Regards,
David
www.photographybydmichael.com

Nice! The silver headlamp ring is noticeably darker on RFC-EX/LR-4 than OOC or COP-7. But, that is subjective and can be tuned-to-taste...

My take-away from your illustration is a combination of RFC-EX and LR-4 provide an alternative to COP-7 and SP-DSP5; create a TIFF (RGB 16 bit / channel) in RFC-EX with Demosaic Sharp at Max (100) and Unsharp Mask settings of [100, 0.6, 1] and use LR-4 to edit and catalogue images.

Footnotes:

1. RFC-EX ==> free;

2. LR-4 ==> $150;

3. SP-DSP5 ==> $250 (w/serial number from X Trans camera);

4. COP-7 ==> $300.

 

[Charuteiro]

awgk wrote:

As anyone used this http://www.oloneo.com/ it has support now for X-pro, on sale for $59.00.

Oloneo PhotoEngine has a DCRAW algorithm. Here's my comparison of RFC-EX and OPE for the same image (DPR Streetcar scene):

==> RFC-EX vs. OPE

Clique the slide and view slideshow in full screen. Typical DCRAW X Trans artifacts appear as blue dots in the letter "W" in the last slide (12).

 

[David Hardaway]

I only used Silkypix to generate TIF to be edited in lightroom but let Silkypix do the demosaicing and unshard mask since it knows how to handle the 6x6. Not sure if you got that from my post based on the questions you asked.

 

[David Hardaway]

your take away was correct. The export to tif is fast and easy. Then lightroom for editing to your taste. and the results are as good as it gets.




Regards,

David hardaway

www.photographybydmichael.com

 

[awgk]

Charuteiro wrote:

awgk wrote:

As anyone used this http://www.oloneo.com/ it has support now for X-pro, on sale for $59.00.

Oloneo PhotoEngine has a DCRAW algorithm. Here's my comparison of RFC-EX and OPE for the same image (DPR Streetcar scene):

==> RFC-EX vs. OPE

Clique the slide and view slideshow in full screen. Typical DCRAW X Trans artifacts appear as blue dots in the letter "W" in the last slide (

Was this the latest version of Oloneo that supports x trans sensor? I did see the difference thank you.