Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Raw Conversion Article in Photo Techniques

  1. #1
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Raw Conversion Article in Photo Techniques

    Since this has been discussed at length.....thought some might be interested in seeing the current article.

    Raw Conversion and Editing software test..aperture , lightroom and capture one. (Mike Dubovoy) .

    Bottom line ..same as advised here..Capture One produces superior raw conversions and a "best of breed" solution would be C1 for basic raw conversion (WB, exposure and contrast etc); Lr for most everything else; PS for the special stuff and printing. Multiple physical files..managed within LR.

    Best part was the testing of the image conversions and comparisons .

  2. #2
    Subscriber Member Jonathon Delacour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    454
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Raw Conversion Article in Photo Techniques

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    Bottom line ..same as advised here..Capture One produces superior raw conversions and a "best of breed" solution would be C1 for basic raw conversion (WB, exposure and contrast etc); Lr for most everything else; PS for the special stuff and printing. Multiple physical files..managed within LR.
    Alternatively, you could say that a "best of breed" solution would be Raw Developer for basic raw conversion (WB, exposure and contrast etc); LR for most everything else; PS for the special stuff and printing. Multiple physical files..managed within LR.

    As Doug Peterson from Capture Integration wrote:
    ...Brian Griffith does Iridient Raw Developer essentially by himself and manages to get better results (in pure IQ terms) than LR and is on par with C1 (sometimes better). This is because of the same thing: he is very very very good in the realm of image processing and because his priority is always quality over speed/features/workflow.

  3. #3
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Raw Conversion Article in Photo Techniques

    Raw developer is very good and had a lot of success with it with the M8. Basic issue it is very slow to use and for some folks that makes it tough to work with. But certainly not surprised at these results and came to these same conclusions. Obviously for me shooting a Phase back C1 is the ticket because it has special features for my back but I go back to the Canon 1ds with C1. Also a big part of why we teach it in our workshops and bring the master Doug Peterson in to help with the advanced features of C1.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  4. #4
    Ranger 9
    Guest

    Re: Raw Conversion Article in Photo Techniques

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    Bottom line ..same as advised here..Capture One produces superior raw conversions...Best part was the testing of the image conversions and comparisons.
    'Photo Techniques' isn't easy to find in my area. Could you provide a bit of additional info so I'll know if this article would apply enough to my usage scenarios to be worth my while tracking down?

    -- What manufacturers' raw file formats did he evaluate?

    -- What types of final-output usage did he consider? (Large exhibition prints? Small album-size prints? Publication-quality TIFF files? JPEG files for onscreen viewing?)

    -- Briefly, how did he evaluate the conversions? (This kind of judgment normally implies comparison to a reference -- but there's no way of viewing raw files directly.)

    Thanks...

  5. #5
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Raw Conversion Article in Photo Techniques

    Quote Originally Posted by Ranger 9 View Post
    'Photo Techniques' isn't easy to find in my area. Could you provide a bit of additional info so I'll know if this article would apply enough to my usage scenarios to be worth my while tracking down?

    -- What manufacturers' raw file formats did he evaluate?

    -- What types of final-output usage did he consider? (Large exhibition prints? Small album-size prints? Publication-quality TIFF files? JPEG files for onscreen viewing?)

    -- Briefly, how did he evaluate the conversions? (This kind of judgment normally implies comparison to a reference -- but there's no way of viewing raw files directly.)

    Thanks...
    I read through it quickly on the news stand so I don t have it to refer to. A few things I remember.

    He did his tests with Canon s .CR2 files but stated that he had tested the Leica files and his associates have tested Nikon s .NEF files with similar results.


    I believe he created TIF s from each test and evaluated the files (I think in photoshop on a screen).

    He had good examples that showed more file detail ,better tone separation and color saturation with the C1 conversions.

    His evaluation seemed very fair and he pointed out that the complexity of using two(or three products) would not be justified for many users .

    He keeps 3 copies of every file he works on Raw,TIFF and a PSD if he uses PS on the file.

    Best I can remember . I though his examples were decent illustrations of how the conversions would differ.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •