Post Processing - What does everyone use?

[cheddargav]

--
Anything the kids can do, I can . . . . copy
http://www.twitter.com/gavphotography

 

[PhilippeG]

Lightroom.

I used to use Photoshop because I already had it (I'm a designer) and have been using it since Photoshop 2. But Lightroom makes so much more sense! Even though it's the same "engine" (Camera Raw), the interface and workflow are miles ahead for photography.

Now I very seldom open a picture I've taken in Photoshop, I do 99.9 % of my PP strictly in Lightroom.

 

[Janko]

Raw conversion: Silkypix 3.xxx, hopefully soon Silkypix Pro
Subsequent editing: PaintShop Pro X2
Viewing: Xnview, Irfanview
--
Regards

Janko

http://www.pbase.com/janko/

 

[K McCall]

I find it interesting that many of the photos I like - like the ones you post, cheddargav, are processed with Lightroom. Perhaps I have an innate bias?
--
Keitha McCall

Pentaxian and Snapshot Shooter since April 2007
http://flickr.com/photos/aravis121/
http://www.ascenicworld.com

 

[Lucky Sky]

Huh.. i don't see that option- are you refering to- Profile: camera standard?

I only have the option to choose- Profile: camera standard or adobe standard (and color adjustments,etc) under camera calibration.
I'm using LR v2.4

What camera are you using? I mentioned that it is available for the K20D and the K-7. I know it is not an available profile for the K2000, but have no information about other Pentax models.

--
Lucky Sky
I'd rather be lucky than good

 

[Lucky Sky]

that's why you need to switch to the DNG format. PEFs don't work that way (which is what I assume you shoot with).
--
Marcin
http://flickr.com/photos/sankos/

Exactly.

--
Lucky Sky
I'd rather be lucky than good

 

[Lucky Sky]

This is reply number 2: I forgot the important part of using the embedded profile. One must shoot in DNG to use that "embedded" profile for the K20D and the K-7. Converting from PEF to DNG does not work.

It's well worth it despite the larger file size of the DNG that is copied to the SD card.
--
Lucky Sky
I'd rather be lucky than good

 

[jsk78]

UFRaw - RAW conversion, B&W conversion via colour mixer, lens distortion correction and basic cropping

GraphicsMagick/ImageMagick - the former is a "fork" of the latter and about 2x faster, but lacks a few things requiring both to kick around. Used for resizing, sharpening, auto-orientation and "stamping" images with text such as my name, camera used, date taken, lens used, ISO and other camera settings.

ExifTool - used for adding copyright info in the Comment field. Also used for reading/extracting camera, lens and setting info for "stamping".

F-Spot - used for organizing photos. It may be a bit crude, but it's served me well and gets the job done. I am looking for something different/better either on the KDE side of the fence or waiting for a new project "Solang" to evolve more... however, it still gets the job done.

Gimp - I rarely have any need to do any PP. Mainly used for fixing crooked shots and noise reduction.

I rely a lot on custom written scripts for batch resizing/sharpening/stamping under Gentoo Linux.

I could be wrong, but I think the lens distortion correction and B&W conversion is not included with most precompiled versions of UFRaw. Gentoo requires you to build everything, so those options are enabled like flipping a switch.

 

[cumulusnimbus]

with NoiseNinja
Imho already much better than B4

digiKam, gimp

 

[Marc Korens]

Simple..

 

[ccallana]

I use Lightroom 2.4 for almost everything - export to CS3 for panoramic stitching.

--
---
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chriscallanan/

 

[DrewE]

I primarily use PPL to convert RAW files, and GraphicConverter (for the Mac, of course) for further processing. They seem to work adequately for my needs. I don't typically develop every RAW image I take, but only those that are "worthy" enough. For the rest of the shots, I just extract the jpg embedded in the RAW file and store that away for safekeeping and review in iPhoto. (The RAW files themselves do, of course, get saved--at least, those that do not get to the circular file immediately.)

I do sometimes use dcraw for RAW conversion, but it's a lot harder to use than PPL, being a command line driven program. However, under some circumstances, I think it does a bit better job of RAW conversion than PPL. (Slightly better detail retention, and a fair bit better handling/reconstruction of overexposed highlights.)

For what it's worth, ufraw (as I understand it) uses dcraw as its underlying engine, so it should achieve very similar results.
--
--DrewE

 

[ccallana]

This is reply number 2: I forgot the important part of using the embedded profile. One must shoot in DNG to use that "embedded" profile for the K20D and the K-7. Converting from PEF to DNG does not work.

It's well worth it despite the larger file size of the DNG that is copied to the SD card.
--
Lucky Sky
I'd rather be lucky than good

When you import into Lightroom, does it compress the DNGs, or are they left alone? The whole reason I shoot PEF then let Lightroom convert to DNG is to save space.

--
---
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chriscallanan/

 

[godfrog]

If you shoot DNG, you can choose when importing. Either you do a straight copy, leaving you with uncompressed DNGs with the K20D, the K-7 has compressed DNGs. You can also choose "convert to DNG" when importing to Lightroom, this will take your camera DNGs and compress them when copying.

I shoot uncompressed DNG on my GX-20 (K20D clone, but does not have PEF) and I let Lightroom compress them when importing, I still have the choice to use embedded profile.

This is reply number 2: I forgot the important part of using the embedded profile. One must shoot in DNG to use that "embedded" profile for the K20D and the K-7. Converting from PEF to DNG does not work.

It's well worth it despite the larger file size of the DNG that is copied to the SD card.
--
Lucky Sky
I'd rather be lucky than good

When you import into Lightroom, does it compress the DNGs, or are they left alone? The whole reason I shoot PEF then let Lightroom convert to DNG is to save space.

--
---
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chriscallanan/

--
My Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36164047@N06/

 

[John Shakespeare]

Bibble 5 pro (preview), which integrates with Noise Ninja pro. There's an unlimited license for using the preview, since I have a Bibble 4 pro license.
Both running natively on Ubuntu, of course.
--

Horses are good subjects for photography, but terrible platforms for a photographer.

 

[Silverflower]

• I have tested a bunch of converters previously; one has good colour only after many tweaks, other has detail to background noise ratio inferior or wrong curves and so on. With PPL usually I have no need to tweak colours except wrong WB and the caucasian skin tone and texture is very realistic.
• After conversion I rename files with Amok Exif Sorter (%filename% %fnumber% %exposuretime% %isospeedratings% %focallength%) and view with XNview which have lock zoom, meaning I can compare successive images 100% in the same area. I hope PPL version 4 will became available soon for all cameras, it have finally many improvements like different individual settings in the same batch.

 

[n057]

Anyway, I'd love to hear what everyone else uses, are there any good alternatives to Photoshop or do most people just convert their images within it?

Bibble 4 Professionnal + Full Noise Ninja and, when needed, The Gimp

Also, I am not a Pentax shooter, but have processed PEF files from a friend who shoots Pentax.

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

 

[BOONER]

Noise Ninja & Light Room.

Very intuitive way of doing edits. If I had the money I would hook those programs in with Lightroom or perhaps just wait for Bibble 5 (which seems to be taking forever).
--
http://pentaxphotogallery.com/peterlabun
http://booner.smugmug.com/

 

[olivergbus]

I see no reason to photoshop unless you want to make up for your own mistakes.Personally I use Picasa for all my pictures both jpg and raw. It does a fine job and I use it for my viewer, storage, web site. What else do you need
--
Don't Forget to Remove the Lens Cap

 

[TimeTrial]

Lightroom is sufficient for most of the casual work that I do.