Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

E-P1 RAW Processing

barjohn

barjohn

New member
A final note. These were output at 80% and 150dpi. None look as good as they do on my monitor in the application. I'm not sure what the best way to output for the forum. I always seem to get thumbnails rather than larger images. What is the secret?
 
Godfrey

Godfrey

Well-known member
I'm of the school that says "the tools you know best will return the best results". I standardized on Lightroom when it came out after evaluating all the available RAW processors. I like it most, and I get the results I want out of it. I never switch image processing tools unless there is a serious need.

Consistency and familiarity gives the greatest ability to exploit a given tool.
 
Terry

Terry

New member
Godfrey said:
I'm of the school that says "the tools you know best will return the best results". I standardized on Lightroom when it came out after evaluating all the available RAW processors. I like it most, and I get the results I want out of it. I never switch image processing tools unless there is a serious need.

Consistency and familiarity gives the greatest ability to exploit a given tool.
Click to expand...
Well said. :)

I've been using Lightroom since version 1 was released and I feel really comfortable with it. What I've started doing recently is going back over some online training and a couple of the Lightroom books to see if there are any tricks or small nuances that I missed in the initial learning phase. Version 2 with the local adjustments has so much more than the original and I can't wait to see what is next in version 3 (no idea when that will be).
 
nostatic

nostatic

New member
I went from iPhoto to Aperture a few years back, mostly because I was running into performance issues with a very large iPhoto library. v2 of Aperture was a big step up, and I've been mostly happy until recently. When I got the DLux4 I figured Aperture would get support for it reasonably fast. Wrong. And now the E-P1 isn't supported. And the K7 is supported, but not very well out of the box.

At some point one needs to reconsider their tools and determine if they need to make a change. I did it with iMovie, moving to FinalCutPro as I needed to do multiple streams. Right now I'm not shooting raw in 2 of my 3 cameras because Aperture can't deal with them. Well, I will occasionally shoot raw as I can use RD but it is a totally different workflow. Aperture is just so damn convenient and I don't have to think much. Thinking makes my head hurt...
 
D

Diane B

New member
I've been through a lot of RCs starting with the original Canon (awful) and then Chris Breeze created Breezebrowser. Then along came PS7 and the plug in you had to buy--and then lots more. I used C1 for a long time--it dealt better with reds and I was shooting a lot of textiles and furniture. I tried (and bought) RSP later along with C1 (and in the meantime was given Bibble and tried it but never became comfortable with it and haven't used the latest)--and the camera profiles for RSP were quite good. When RSP folks were given the LR beta free I tried it, liked it--and have been using it ever since in combo with PS (it also replaced Imatch for my database, my sometimes use of Qimage and RCs).

I agree with Terry---the local adjustments in the most recent LR made it much much better and I even started to print from LR. I have heard rumors that LR3 is slated for this year but who knows. Unless i have major issues, its unlikely I will keep trying other RCs anytime soon.

Diane

TEBnewyork said:
Well said. :)

I've been using Lightroom since version 1 was released and I feel really comfortable with it. What I've started doing recently is going back over some online training and a couple of the Lightroom books to see if there are any tricks or small nuances that I missed in the initial learning phase. Version 2 with the local adjustments has so much more than the original and I can't wait to see what is next in version 3 (no idea when that will be).
Click to expand...
 
Godfrey

Godfrey

Well-known member
Brian Mosley said:
That goes for cameras too
Unfortunately, consistency and familiarity won't help when your raw converter doesn't support your latest camera :cry:
Click to expand...
Very true.

Another reason I use Lightroom/Camera Raw is that they support every camera I own and have owned. And add the new ones I'm interested in in a very timely way. And Adobe offers DNG Converter and DNG Profile Editor to allow support for new cameras with older versions of the software, and custom camera calibration profiles tailored to my needs.
 
Brian Mosley

Brian Mosley

New member
Hi Godfrey,

have you seen the sharpness thread over in the bear pit?

oluv wrote:
i played again with ACR and it is not that bad. although for higher iso i wouldn't like to use it, because the noise is very irregular.

but i discovered another problem. i already saw it with capture one. as you say it doesn't officially support G1 raws, but inofficially it does. because the G1 seems to have exactly the same RAW-format as the LX3 (and D-Lux 4). so if you patch the header of your G1 raws and change them to D-Lux 4 files, capture one opens them if they were normal leica files.

unfortunately the way the lens-distortion correction is implemented is a bit "weak". i don't know if panasonic really thought about what they were doing. but i get much better results if i use an uncorrected raw and correct it with ptlens, than the automatically corrected ACR or C1 raws. today i discovered that ACR is doing exactly the same thing as C1. the distortion correction is not evenly performed over the whole image, but rather concentric areas of the image are stretched. this results in quite inconsistent sharpness, especially if you try to enhance pixel sharpness.
Click to expand...
Here's the post with image samples - it looks like Adobe still have some work to do... as have all the major raw converters to automatically compensate for m4/3rds lens distortion.

Kind Regards

Brian
 
C

compositor20

Guest
sorry fot hihgjacking the thread but does someone have a correct DNG profile for lightroom beta 3 i use yours i think(one that is in a site that has profiles for many olympus cameras ) and sometimes it produces different colours then olympus studio and all of my other profiles created with dng colour profile and dpreview and imaging resources test raw files
 
Godfrey

Godfrey

Well-known member
Frankly, Brian, I'm exhausted by all this hobbyist pixel peeping nonsense.

If the only comments a picture elicits are folderal about noise, resolution, raw conversion, ad nauseam, then the picture probably isn't worth looking at.
 
Brian Mosley

Brian Mosley

New member
I'm not surprised Godfrey, my last post on the subject was back in August last year! hope you had a nice Christmas :ROTFL:

Cheers

Brian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top