Jump to content

Recommended Posts

@gdugic:

Thanks for pointing out RAW Therapee.

Since my C1 Express 7. something keeps on craching under W10, I was looking at other RAW converters. Played around with Darktable under Ubuntu, but I couldn't find my way so easily.

I now had a first try with RAW Therapee and at first impression I like it.

René.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Downlod haldclut tables and import it in RT and you have a large base of different profiles. Fuji, Kodak, Agfa... B&W and color profiles. All kinds of film simulations.

 

RT also has its own automatic lens correction algorithm that works pretty well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Did a quick few tests today and the fine detail is still just not there in Lightroom, I'm probably going to transition to Sony for professional work as I love the workflow of LR and using thing like VSCO.

 

Damn shame that Adobe just can't figure it out.

 

Lightroom on the left, Iridient on the right.

 

GqyJUDP.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

I found Raw Therapee + HALD CLUT profiles + right camera ICC profiles the best combination so far, and is free software! Suits my taste and with a bit of practice it produces results almost identical with OOC JPGS in terms of color rendering with the advantage of Raw editing. The only downside is that above 2500 ISO the other coverters do a better job but I rarely go so high.

 

Inviato dal mio Nexus 5 utilizzando Tapatalk

 

old thread... I know, but hope you are still following:
where did you find the "right camera ICC" you mentioned?
I searched for a while but don't seems fujifilm provide it, it does? (I'm looking for x-t10 and x-t1 ICC)
regards
Sandro
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Just came back from shooting foliage in Western Massachusetts. Here is a snippet of one image processed with LR and one processed with Iridient and imported into LR as a TIFF.  The image was made during zero wind--just absolutely still. The screenshot is from the LR Compare window. Both were sharpened with Bridgwood's  35-1-100-10 setting. The magnification is 2:1. The screenshot is from a 4K iMac.

 

I can just start seeing a difference at 2:1 and a little more at 3:1. I can't see a difference at 1:1.  I wouldn't say the LR version has "watercolor" degradation but the Iridient is a little sharper. 

 

Iridient is painfully slow on my iMac to first render and to show slider changes.

 

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/444303/Screen%20Shot%202016-10-15%20at%2012.53.37%20PM.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another experiment, which comes from https://thelightweightphotographer.com/2016/10/03/fuji-xtrans-iii-raw-files/

 

I used his settings ( 36-0.6-57-10) and then used Nik Sharpener RAW at its default settings.  

 

Here is the comparison to Iridient. Pretty close at 2:1 magnification. My screen is a 5K, not 4K as mentioned above. Iridient still has a slight edge but I don't know if it's actually meaningful. In any event, this is a long way from "watercolor" effect.

 

Stan

 

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/444303/Screen%20Shot%202016-10-16%20at%2012.00.56%20PM.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

What in hell happened with LR CC? Updated to the 2015.7 version and suddenly importing pictures goes at least 4 times faster! Rendering goes much faster too. And, as bonus, the accuracy in fine detail is improved. Anyone with the same findings?

;-D Hans

Edited by Hans K Aspenberg
Link to post
Share on other sites

What in hell happened with LR CC? Updated to the 2015.7 version and suddenly importing pictures goes at least 4 times faster! Rendering goes much faster too. And, as bonus, the accuracy in fine detail is improved. Anyone with the same findings?

 

;-D Hans

Much faster, yes.

 

Fine detail was already fine enough for my non-pixelpeeping needs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi all just one question .. what do you think about this article that show lightroom can do the same thing that c1.

 

http://lightroomkillertips.com/brilliant-article-martin-evening-lightroom-vs-capture-one-pro/

 

 

Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

 

Well, the author has worked for Adobe, so I'd already start out by saying 'take it with a grain of salt'.

 

That said, I use Lightroom all the time, unless you are uber picky about pixel level detail on big screens you'll be fine. My reference is still the print, and I've not seen any difference in print quality whatsoever between the C1 and Lightroom in anything I've printed lately, up to 1,5m x 1m. And my web images get reduced anyway, so you can't even see the detail in those.

Edited by Tom H.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Thank you. I will research it.
    • Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...