PDA

View Full Version : LR 4.4RC



anthonysemone
25th February 2013, 18:31
allegedly with Xtrans support

Download Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 Beta - Adobe Labs (http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/lightroom4-4.html)

scifitographer
26th February 2013, 00:56
moderately better. less smudgies and i have yet to find any color bleeding.

i've had to hit the reset button on a few of my already processed photos and then use the history to go back to the settings before the reset to remove the watercolor effect.

the 100% crop view still isn't as detailed as what i've gotten out of oloneo, but oloneo produces some odd jaggies, so i guess it's a trade off.

bmacw
1st March 2013, 06:45
Still quick underwhelming. In fact if you use the studio test tool in the newly published DPreview X-E1 review, you will see the LR4.4/ACR7.4 processed Fuji files still require a good amount of sharpening to look even remotely close to the competitors. Very frustrating....

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocomparefullscreen.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_dat a&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=true&headerTitle=Fujifilm%20X-E1&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20compari son&masterCamera=fujifilm_xe1&masterSample=dscf4209.acr&masterDisableCameraSelection=true&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=fujifilm_xe1&slot0Sample=dscf4209.acr&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=sony_nex7&slot1Sample=dsc03021.acr&slot2Camera=oly_em5&slot2Sample=p1010003.acr&slot3Camera=pentax_k01&slot3Sample=imgp1365.acr&x=-0.5408391900354882&y=-0.620842021646311)

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocomparefullscreen.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_dat a&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=true&headerTitle=Fujifilm%20X-E1&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20compari son&masterCamera=fujifilm_xe1&masterSample=dscf4209.acr&masterDisableCameraSelection=true&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=fujifilm_xe1&slot0Sample=dscf4209.acr&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=sony_nex6&slot1Sample=dsc00017.acr&slot2Camera=oly_em5&slot2Sample=p1010003.acr&slot3Camera=pentax_k5iis&slot3Sample=imgp0101.acr&x=-0.8730081413958668&y=-0.8571641604010933)

Pelao
1st March 2013, 14:32
Still quick underwhelming. In fact if you use the studio test tool in the newly published DPreview X-E1 review, you will see the LR4.4/ACR7.4 processed Fuji files still require a good amount of sharpening to look even remotely close to the competitors. Very frustrating....

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocomparefullscreen.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_dat a&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=true&headerTitle=Fujifilm%20X-E1&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20compari son&masterCamera=fujifilm_xe1&masterSample=dscf4209.acr&masterDisableCameraSelection=true&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=fujifilm_xe1&slot0Sample=dscf4209.acr&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=sony_nex7&slot1Sample=dsc03021.acr&slot2Camera=oly_em5&slot2Sample=p1010003.acr&slot3Camera=pentax_k01&slot3Sample=imgp1365.acr&x=-0.5408391900354882&y=-0.620842021646311)

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocomparefullscreen.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_dat a&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=true&headerTitle=Fujifilm%20X-E1&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20compari son&masterCamera=fujifilm_xe1&masterSample=dscf4209.acr&masterDisableCameraSelection=true&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=fujifilm_xe1&slot0Sample=dscf4209.acr&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=sony_nex6&slot1Sample=dsc00017.acr&slot2Camera=oly_em5&slot2Sample=p1010003.acr&slot3Camera=pentax_k5iis&slot3Sample=imgp0101.acr&x=-0.8730081413958668&y=-0.8571641604010933)

Doesn't that simply mean that the other apps have more default sharpening?

From my perspective I prefer a neutral RAW conversion, and then sweeten to taste. Given that a key point of RAW is to offer more leeway to alter as you see fit, what does it matter if it requires more sharpening?

The question for me was - would LR 4.4 offer a conversion that would match the competition in terms of what can be pulled from the file to give a pleasing final result? In my view, it does.

Uwe's summary is interesting:

outbackphoto - News - Happy End for Lightroom 4.4RC and Fuji X-Trans Raw*Images (http://www.outbackphoto.net/news/2013/2/25/happy-end-for-lightroom-44rc-and-fuji-x-trans-raw-images.html)

scifitographer
1st March 2013, 16:14
sorry, i don't go by dpreview's tests, i use my own experience with the program on my own photos. i had a few shots where the raws were previously unusable, and after they lr update they are now usable. yes, i have to apply more sharpening, but the color bleeding and watercolor effects were much more damaging than the extra sharpening is. in the end product, the extra sharpening in the raw file isn't noticeable. it's not perfect, but it's definitely a big step forward.

ustein
1st March 2013, 20:09
>yes, i have to apply more sharpening, but the color bleeding and watercolor effects were much more damaging than the extra sharpening is. in the end product, the extra sharpening in the raw file isn't noticeable. it's not perfect, but it's definitely a big step forward.

I agree. Also the Fuji JPEG engine use a lot of sharpening. I still think the X-trans pattern is hard to de-mosaic. Overall with my own sharpening I think the X-Pro1 is now quite nice.

bmacw
2nd March 2013, 17:22
sorry, i don't go by dpreview's tests, i use my own experience with the program on my own photos. i had a few shots where the raws were previously unusable, and after they lr update they are now usable. yes, i have to apply more sharpening, but the color bleeding and watercolor effects were much more damaging than the extra sharpening is. in the end product, the extra sharpening in the raw file isn't noticeable. it's not perfect, but it's definitely a big step forward.

My comment is from my own experience. I have used the GXR M module, my MFDB and my Leica M9, all of them have no AA filter, all of them look leagues better than than X files in LR with nothing but default raw processing profile. My files(from fuji) just don't look 'right' yet!

Fuji went through all the trouble to eliminate the AA filter, and they make a big fuss about it in marketing. So maybe my expectation was set a bit too high from my own experience with normal bayer sensor with no AA filter...

Patrick Kolb
2nd March 2013, 19:39
I have only had a chance to work with a few files using ACR and they initailly looked good, but I kept increasing the sharpening trying get something acceptable and didnít quite get there--but close. Then I increase the view to 200% to see what was happening with noise, and thatís when the image just fell apart.

Using Silkypix as my base I then checked the same images at 200% and what a difference. The images from Silkypix processor, that came with the camera, displayed none of the smearing that showed in the ACR and there was no stair-stepping that was present in the ACR.

ACR is certainly better than before, but it still has some room to improve.

scifitographer
2nd March 2013, 22:32
My comment is from my own experience. I have used the GXR M module, my MFDB and my Leica M9, all of them have no AA filter, all of them look leagues better than than X files in LR with nothing but default raw processing profile. My files(from fuji) just don't look 'right' yet!

Fuji went through all the trouble to eliminate the AA filter, and they make a big fuss about it in marketing. So maybe my expectation was set a bit too high from my own experience with normal bayer sensor with no AA filter...

sorry, but you didn't mention any of your own experience in your first comment, just the dpreview test.

if lr isn't working for you then try another program. i've gotten decent results exporting a .tif from oloneo and importing a .tif into lr. i'm not convinced that the sharpness issues are due to something lacking in the camera, more likely it's something in lr's processing. it's a release candidate, it could still be tweaked before the actual release, or lr may improve it further in a future release. as i said before, it's not perfect, but markedly better.

i'm adding more sharpening to my fuji shots and have been happy with how they're coming out, both on the computer and as prints. i'm waiting on some larger prints to come in, that will be the true test on how the lr update is performing.

Pelao
3rd March 2013, 04:22
i'm adding more sharpening to my fuji shots and have been happy with how they're coming out, both on the computer and as prints. i'm waiting on some larger prints to come in, that will be the true test on how the lr update is performing.

I agree - the final product is the true test. It would be great if you would post your opinion of the large prints when they come in.

scifitographer
3rd March 2013, 08:39
I agree - the final product is the true test. It would be great if you would post your opinion of the large prints when they come in.

i'll let you know on wednesday.

GrahamWelland
3rd March 2013, 08:39
I still find that LR is over saturating the reds compared with the original jpgs and Capture One. In just about every other aspect though it is a lot better than Adobe's previous offerings.

I still prefer C1's rendering though.

I'll give it a B+ for now and wait for the next update.

raist3d
16th March 2013, 09:51
So that's my big question now: LightRoom or Capture One? Which?

- Raist

scho
17th March 2013, 05:46
Improved, but I still prefer the rendering from AccuRaw. I usually just batch process through AccuRaw and then tweak tiffs in LR.

Ario Arioldi
17th March 2013, 10:33
Both Capture One and AccuRaw provide a better rendering of the Xtrans files, IMHO.