Alternative to SilkyPix

[casualuser]

What ip software are you using for you xp-1? Software Recommendations needed for simple adjustments on JPEG and RAW files from the xp-1. I am not a pro but the user interface with silky pix is not good so I am looking for something easy to use, can handle xp-1 files, and is not too expensive.

 

[Keith]

Silkypix is useless ... when I had my X100 I converted the files to tifs from raw via Silkypix then adjusted them in ACDSee Pro.

For a fairly high end camera the post processing software provided with the new Fujis really is pretty crappy ... probably the worst provided by any manufacturer!

 

[jsrockit]

I could forgive Fuji regarding Silkypix if they would just have RAW support for Lightroom (or whatever you choose) ready quickly after launch of the camera.

 

[dcsang]

I'm with Keith (not literally mind you *smirk*) - Silkypix is useless - I've used it before with Panasonic's LX-3 and it sucked then and STILL sucks now.

I am just biding my time until Adobe and Fuji have a pow-wow, sing "We Are The World" and/or "One Love" and come to agreement... until then, the jpegs (thank GOD) are pretty damn good.

Cheers,
Dave

 

[celluloidprop]

Embarrassing to admit, but I haven't felt like shooting the XP1 for the last week given the lack of RAW support.

import to LR4 and then assess is just so ingrained in me (and my reliance on Silver Efex Pro) that I can't get a handle on paying attention to JPGs

 

[peterm1]

Sadly every digital camera I have owned has skimped on providing post processing software. This is a consistent failing with cameras, the manufacturers of which seem to think that we all should buy top end image editors. The inherent failing of course is that such top end software often does not support the specific RAW files from these newer cameras and we then have to buy NEW top end software that does.

Why oh why oh why (I am yet to hear a sensible or convincing answer) does the industry not do what it already has done with JPGs and a myriad of other standard file formats - move away from those bloody awful proprietary forms of RAW to a common industry standard. Maybe we alrady have the beginnings of this in DNG.

But in any event it really is time for this common sense approach to become the industry paradigm - the same as it has in every other area of technology where the ability to interoperate is important. but no, manufacturers think that by using THEIR format, they are going to get a market advantage - which is usually illusory.

 

[Keith]

I've never had a problem working with tifs and the extra step of converting the Fuji's raw output (with silkypix) to tif never really bothered me that much. Certainly not enough to shell out the money for software like Lightroom 4 that read the RAF files of the X100.

 

[charjohncarter]

RawTherapee, Xnviewed, even Picasa 3.9, I think even MS has one that are all free (not free trials). It isn't a big deal so get one you like. I didn't like Silky either but there are many more than I have listed, that have free trials.

 

[gavinlg]

I am just biding my time until Adobe and Fuji have a pow-wow, sing "We Are The World" and/or "One Love" and come to agreement... until then, the jpegs (thank GOD) are pretty damn good.

Cheers,
Dave

Adobe said in their last newsletter that they're currently working on x-pro1 support in ACR and LR. Will be in the next update.

 

[splitimageview]

For historical reference purposes:

The x100 shipped in late February 2011 (Asia first.) The X-Pro1 shipped in late February, 2012 (also Asia was first.)

RAW support for the x100 was released May 17, 2011.

 

[willie_901]

I have no problem with Adobe. They said informally on forums and formally in the newsletter the XP1 will be supported. I just shot in JPEG + raw and will reprocess my keepers later.

But... why, why, why doesn't Fuji just switch to DNG for their raw file rmat and quit throwing away thir money on SilkyPix?

 

[rasterdogs]

LightRoom 4 - Xpro-1 OOC jpegs - Ok for now

LightRoom 4 - Xpro-1 OOC jpegs - Ok for now

What ip software are you using for you xp-1? Software Recommendations needed for simple adjustments on JPEG and RAW files from the xp-1. I am not a pro but the user interface with silky pix is not good so I am looking for something easy to use, can handle xp-1 files, and is not too expensive.

I'm using LightRoom 4 on the Xpro-1 OOC jpegs and find that there is a reasonable range of adjustability. I've not done much with jpeg files in the past, prefer to work with RAW files. Am enjoying the Xpro-1 jpegs.

I'm not even slightly inclined to learn SilkyPix - Life's to short to use such bad software.
-Rasterdogs

 

[gavinlg]

But... why, why, why doesn't Fuji just switch to DNG for their raw file rmat and quit throwing away thir money on SilkyPix?

I'm not sure if this is relevant, but back in 2008 I went to Tokyo with my 5d, and brought back about 800 images. I was in a organizational mood and had kicked off my newfound organization with converting all my proprietary raw formats to adobes DNG with their DNG converter - thinking it was a great idea.

Well, it wasn't a great idea. With the subsequent updates in lightroom and the raw converter, my 5d's CR2 raw files got better and better in terms of detail and noise performance and color, but the converted DNGs from my japan trip didn't. I don't know what it is specifically, but it seems that once you convert to DNG with their converter, you end up with a 'baked' file that no longer needs interpretation, and is 'finished', unlike the true raw files like those CR2s, of which are utilizing the latest adobe technology and getting better and better. Not only that, but those DNG files DON'T work in some of the other raw converters like aperture - apparently there's a few different types of DNG files that are based on different methods of compression, and they all work in different converters.

So now I'm completely untrusting of DNG format.

 

[Spyro]

DNG is just a container format, it would have taken Adobe as much time to interpret and support a DNG from this unusual sensor as any other type of raw file.

 

[casualuser]

Not being an LR 4 user, can someone comment on how user friendly it is. I don't enjoy spending time in front of a computer trying to learn unique and complex software only to spend more time actually using it. Intuitive interface, Easy import, export, cropping, contrast, saturation, edge enhancement are about it. If I need to do much more then I will spend my time on another photo.

 

[splitimageview]

I tried LR trial along with Aperture. I prefer Aperture's UI, so I bought it.

 

[dcsang]

Not being an LR 4 user, can someone comment on how user friendly it is. I don't enjoy spending time in front of a computer trying to learn unique and complex software only to spend more time actually using it. Intuitive interface, Easy import, export, cropping, contrast, saturation, edge enhancement are about it. If I need to do much more then I will spend my time on another photo.

As an LR user I would say that LR is a lot more intuitive than Silkypix ever will be. That said, you can get away with just using LR and nothing else, not photoshop or elements, to convert. But you can also say the opposite, that you can use just photoshop or elements and never have to use LR. The best thing I could suggest would be to download a trial version and see if you "like" it - that is, you can grasp the "stuff" reasonably quickly without having to search for help online.

Cheers,
Dave

 

[casualuser]

Sounds like good advice. Should I start w LR 4 or Elements or Aperature?

 

[celluloidprop]

Not being an LR 4 user, can someone comment on how user friendly it is. I don't enjoy spending time in front of a computer trying to learn unique and complex software only to spend more time actually using it. Intuitive interface, Easy import, export, cropping, contrast, saturation, edge enhancement are about it. If I need to do much more then I will spend my time on another photo.

I find LR very user-friendly. All the controls are on the right-hand side of the develop module and it's easy to understand what they do visually.

 

[rasterdogs]

Not being an LR 4 user, can someone comment on how user friendly it is. I don't enjoy spending time in front of a computer trying to learn unique and complex software only to spend more time actually using it. Intuitive interface, Easy import, export, cropping, contrast, saturation, edge enhancement are about it. If I need to do much more then I will spend my time on another photo.

I'd looked a various digital asset management tools to use in keeping track of my photos and LR does that acceptably for me.
I find it to be very user friendly, particularly so in comparison to Photoshop.

I have friends using Aperture to find it to be excellent.

Either tool will involve some learning curve but it should be pretty straightforward.

-Rasterdogs