Sigma Foveon Raw Development

Started 5 months ago | Questions
robertophoto Regular Member • Posts: 158
Sigma Foveon Raw Development

I have some older Sigma Fovean cameras that I want to start using again, like a DP-1 and DP2. I know of two ways to develop their raw files: SPP and Iridient Developer. Which do you recommend I use?

I would appreciate comments by those who have tried both.

I may also acquire a more modern camera version, such as the Sigma SD Quattro and would like your opinions on processing its raw files.

ANSWER:
This question has not been answered yet.
Sigma DP1 Sigma DP2 Sigma sd Quattro
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
docmaas
docmaas Veteran Member • Posts: 6,843
Re: Sigma Foveon Raw Development

I'd stick with SPP.  The newer versions work fine on my mac.  I do like Iridient but it doesn't offer me anything additional on most of my Foveon cameras.

Mike

-- hide signature --

"Laoma shitu" "An old horse knows the road" Chinese Proverb                                        "Dao ke dao, fei chang dao. Ming ke ming, fei chang ming" Laozi
"At every crossroads on the path that leads to the future, tradition has placed 10,000 men to guard the past."
Maurice Maeterlinck

Shawn67 Senior Member • Posts: 2,283
Re: Sigma Foveon Raw Development
2

Iridient is much faster to process Merrill files. It can’t do Quattro though. On the Quattro shooting DNG is great as you can avoid SPP all together and save loads of time.

Shawn

Joris1632 Senior Member • Posts: 2,789
Re: Sigma Foveon Raw Development
2

robertophoto wrote:

I have some older Sigma Fovean cameras that I want to start using again, like a DP-1 and DP2. I know of two ways to develop their raw files: SPP and Iridient Developer. Which do you recommend I use?

I would appreciate comments by those who have tried both.

I may also acquire a more modern camera version, such as the Sigma SD Quattro and would like your opinions on processing its raw files

I simply stick with the newest version of SPP for all.  There have been many upgrades and improvements  over the years. Get used to the basics - easy to save as tiff and edit later in your editor of choice.

-- hide signature --

Joris1632

DMillier Forum Pro • Posts: 21,638
Re: Sigma Foveon Raw Development

The older SD9 and SD10 and SD14 and the original DP1 are compatible with Lightroom. The DP2 might be as well. I think it was the later DP models and the SD15 that weren't compatible.

-- hide signature --
Strelov Forum Member • Posts: 78
Re: Sigma Foveon Raw Development

robertophoto wrote:

I have some older Sigma Fovean cameras that I want to start using again, like a DP-1 and DP2. I know of two ways to develop their raw files: SPP and Iridient Developer. Which do you recommend I use?

I would appreciate comments by those who have tried both.

I may also acquire a more modern camera version, such as the Sigma SD Quattro and would like your opinions on processing its raw files.

SPP gives best results. Normally you find how you like your settings. I mean contrast, fill light etc. you can save it as a preset and batch convert files if you want.

digi2ap Contributing Member • Posts: 811
Re: Sigma Foveon Raw Development

DMillier wrote:

The older SD9 and SD10 and SD14 and the original DP1 are compatible with Lightroom. The DP2 might be as well. I think it was the later DP models and the SD15 that weren't compatible.

Off topic - the SD15 is compatible with Lightroom,

On topic -the newest version of SPP is the best (more features for reviewing images and marking them) so my suggestion is download that and then develop your X3F's as a TIF for further editing outside SPP.

 digi2ap's gear list:digi2ap's gear list
Sigma dp2 Quattro Sigma dp1 Quattro Sigma dp0 Quattro Sigma SD15 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 +2 more
DMillier Forum Pro • Posts: 21,638
Re: Sigma Foveon Raw Development

Are you sure?

This old thread https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3068623 suggests significant problems.

My hazy recollection was that later versions of the Dp1 (s, x, ??) also had issues but I don't remember the details and I never had any of those cameras.  The first version of the DP1 definitely works, I had that one. Any other Lightroom users out there like to chip in...

-- hide signature --
digi2ap Contributing Member • Posts: 811
Re: Sigma Foveon Raw Development
1

DMillier wrote:

Are you sure?

This old thread https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3068623 suggests significant problems.

My hazy recollection was that later versions of the Dp1 (s, x, ??) also had issues but I don't remember the details and I never had any of those cameras. The first version of the DP1 definitely works, I had that one. Any other Lightroom users out there like to chip in...

Yes, as I have the SD15 and I have tried it. So no problems but I still prefer SPP as it gets the best out of the files. A two stage process to develop in SPP and then post-produce in LR also suits my way of working with images.

 digi2ap's gear list:digi2ap's gear list
Sigma dp2 Quattro Sigma dp1 Quattro Sigma dp0 Quattro Sigma SD15 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 +2 more
brazile Contributing Member • Posts: 597
Re: Sigma Foveon Raw Development

digi2ap wrote:

DMillier wrote:

Are you sure?

This old thread https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3068623 suggests significant problems.

My hazy recollection was that later versions of the Dp1 (s, x, ??) also had issues but I don't remember the details and I never had any of those cameras. The first version of the DP1 definitely works, I had that one. Any other Lightroom users out there like to chip in...

Yes, as I have the SD15 and I have tried it. So no problems but I still prefer SPP as it gets the best out of the files. A two stage process to develop in SPP and then post-produce in LR also suits my way of working with images.

To clarify: Lightroom attempts to function with the SD15. It sometimes works, especially with outside shots. It struggles with shots in unbalanced light, the white balance is wrong and the colors sometimes way off; there were some changes between the SD14 and SD15 that Adobe didn't bother to track. They gave up after that.

In other words, you might get lucky with LR and the SD15, but you will run into issues eventually.

As to the original question: Iridient is much faster, and offers very nice control over every detail of the conversion, especially sharpening. SPP is much simpler and more straightforward to use, and has Fill Light, which is occasionally useful, although it is slower (not as bad as when these cameras were new) and somewhat clunky in operation.

In my own use with those old cameras (which I still use occasionally, as they're so light and small), I use SPP for most stuff, and Iridient for the occasional file I'm willing to put extra effort into. What a lot of folks do is use SPP in batch mode on groups of files to do the initial conversion (to TIFF) and then do finer work in Photoshop or the equivalent.

Robert

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads