yavaro
Member
HI to all,
I normally use Lightroom 2 for my editing raw of the ricoh grd2, Soo when my epson arrive I use it too, until the other day when I import some pictures and I saw that the program start to change the color after import them.
So I decide to try the epson photoraw software, slow but very good on the details and film looking of the images!!!
I try Aperture 2 also and a little bit better on the color contrast but bad also on the details.
So my question it's, if is out there another editting software like photoraw but more modern
And if lightroom and aperture do that with the epson raw what it will do with my ricoh grd2 raw !!!! maybe it kills details also!!!
thanks
here are some examples, sorry for the image but it is good screen shots example of the lost of details:
1) left photoraw right ligthroom
2) left photoraw right aperture
3) left photoraw right aperture with sharp tool
I normally use Lightroom 2 for my editing raw of the ricoh grd2, Soo when my epson arrive I use it too, until the other day when I import some pictures and I saw that the program start to change the color after import them.
So I decide to try the epson photoraw software, slow but very good on the details and film looking of the images!!!
I try Aperture 2 also and a little bit better on the color contrast but bad also on the details.
So my question it's, if is out there another editting software like photoraw but more modern
And if lightroom and aperture do that with the epson raw what it will do with my ricoh grd2 raw !!!!
maybe it kills details also!!!thanks
here are some examples, sorry for the image but it is good screen shots example of the lost of details:
1) left photoraw right ligthroom
2) left photoraw right aperture
3) left photoraw right aperture with sharp tool
Attachments
Last edited:
benjaminlr
Member
LightZone
LightZone
Hi, I have used LightZone in the past because It was free and available for Linux.
You can give it a try, I think it is quite good.
There is a raw module for the Gimp as well, dcraw, which I think Lightzone is based on as well.
Regards, Ben
LightZone
Hi, I have used LightZone in the past because It was free and available for Linux.
You can give it a try, I think it is quite good.
There is a raw module for the Gimp as well, dcraw, which I think Lightzone is based on as well.
Regards, Ben
yavaro
Member
I am only talking when I open the image on each program whit out doing any retouching.
when I open in Lightroom it change the color contrast to red and the image look more blur.
imagen1 photoraw and imagen2 Lightroom.
the image of photoraw looks more similar to the image on the LCD of the epson.
benjaminlr I will try LightZone, thanks
when I open in Lightroom it change the color contrast to red and the image look more blur.
imagen1 photoraw and imagen2 Lightroom.
the image of photoraw looks more similar to the image on the LCD of the epson.
benjaminlr I will try LightZone, thanks
Attachments
Last edited:
nksyoon
Well-known
What are your default sharpening settings on each software? Colour differences can be due to how each software reads the white balance information.
I didn't notice any loss of detail when switching between Epson Photoraw and Lightroom.
I didn't notice any loss of detail when switching between Epson Photoraw and Lightroom.
yavaro
Member
I use default settings on bought programs.
yavaro
Member
Ben on the website of LightZone they put that LightZone supports the following RAW formats: ARW, CR2, CRW, DCR, KDC, MOS, MRW, NEF, ORF, PEF, RAW, SR2 and TIF.
Could you use the ERF of the epson??
thanks
Could you use the ERF of the epson??
thanks
Ray Nalley
Well-known
All raw processing programs come with default settings. You need to change those defaults to whatever makes your photos look best. Working with the defaults with any of the programs won't give you the best possible images. Of course Epson's program would likely have the better defaults for their own camera. If you don't want to learn to use the software, then that's the one to stick with.
santi-u
Established
I agree with Vavaro that seems that each raw developer applies different settings on temperature and tint.
I was learned to DPP (Canon Raw developer) with my 5D till i purchased the RD1. I've found with Canon that colours were much real on what i saw in scene and also on the lcd screen.
Now i'm finding that Epson Photo Raw has a more film like look, i like it but looks more unreal, colours seem more greenish. When i see them on miniatures they look much real than when i open them. After that everything changes and get those filmly casts.
I'm talking about a raw file, with "as shot" color balance and without tweaking anything else.
Two examples from the same file, open in Epson Photo Raw the first one and in ACR the second one.
Converted to tiff and saved for web in jpg without any other adjustment.
I think that if we could see a file developed with Canon's DPP the colour balance would be more neutral, not so green than the Epson one or redish than the ACR.
My concerns are because i thought that the same Raw file shooted with the same camera with "as shot" setting would have the same color cast, without depending in which developer we precess it. Now i see this is not correct!
I was learned to DPP (Canon Raw developer) with my 5D till i purchased the RD1. I've found with Canon that colours were much real on what i saw in scene and also on the lcd screen.
Now i'm finding that Epson Photo Raw has a more film like look, i like it but looks more unreal, colours seem more greenish. When i see them on miniatures they look much real than when i open them. After that everything changes and get those filmly casts.
I'm talking about a raw file, with "as shot" color balance and without tweaking anything else.
Two examples from the same file, open in Epson Photo Raw the first one and in ACR the second one.
Converted to tiff and saved for web in jpg without any other adjustment.
I think that if we could see a file developed with Canon's DPP the colour balance would be more neutral, not so green than the Epson one or redish than the ACR.
My concerns are because i thought that the same Raw file shooted with the same camera with "as shot" setting would have the same color cast, without depending in which developer we precess it. Now i see this is not correct!
tomasis
Well-known
obviously Photoraw is much better than Lightroom. I use Lightroom as preview or for high iso 1600-25.000. They rather complement each other.
Photoraw impresses me with colors. It is big difference. I think i have some comparisons pics somewhere.
Photoraw impresses me with colors. It is big difference. I think i have some comparisons pics somewhere.
Ray Nalley
Well-known
The same file will have the same raw data. But the data straight off the sensor is just that, data. To enable you to see the image in the raw converter, each one has default values that it applies to the image. You have to tweak those defaults for your camera. Judging one against the other using the defaults doesn't show the capabilities of one over the other.
NickTrop
Veteran
To my color-blind eyes these two picture look different in their exposure more than anything, with the one on the left being two-three stops brighter than the one on the right...
|
nanthor
Well-known
I've been trying to tweak the settings but so far can't get my B&W's to look as good as when photoraw "starts" to process them, they look richer and have more depth at first, then after "processing" they look bland. Can anyone help with the settings that would make the pics look the same as they do on the left of the screen, before the "processing" begins? Thanks, Bob.
Ray Nalley
Well-known
Bob, are you using a calibrated monitor?
mani
Well-known
Regardless of the 'adeptness' of the user, Lightroom (and all RAW converters for that matter) applies some settings which are impossible to control.
For instance, even with noise reduction set to zero there is a significant loss of fine detail and texture in the files - this was covered in other discussions before - including in a long thread with RAW comparisons including this post.
I also found that Lightroom 'muddied' colors that were more 'true' in Epson's own converter - but color is very subjective and subject to perceptual differences, and obviously can be altered and fine-tuned.
But I believe there is no way to retrieve the lost fine-detail. I therefore no longer use LR.
For instance, even with noise reduction set to zero there is a significant loss of fine detail and texture in the files - this was covered in other discussions before - including in a long thread with RAW comparisons including this post.
I also found that Lightroom 'muddied' colors that were more 'true' in Epson's own converter - but color is very subjective and subject to perceptual differences, and obviously can be altered and fine-tuned.
But I believe there is no way to retrieve the lost fine-detail. I therefore no longer use LR.
tomasis
Well-known
I post two samples of the same subject. seems so the Acr pic got a bit red stick but I could not detect that in LR. I guess it is ICC issue.
the car Epson
the car ACR
my conclusion: Epson beats Acr out the socks I think that Epson program knows own files very well.
the car Epson
the car ACR
my conclusion: Epson beats Acr out the socks
I think that Epson program knows own files very well.tomasis
Well-known
I find that same when I open files at both programs at default. IT is puzzling
tomasis
Well-known
What do you mean? What do you think if I say the first pic is more filmlike, other is plastic (epson resp. acr)
sonwolf
Established
HI to all,
So my question it's, if is out there another editting software like photoraw but more modern
To my eyes, the contemporary raw converters which do the best default job on R-D1 files are Capture One 4 and Silky Pix. They both provide a more modern interface than Epson PhotoRAW and excellent color. I personally use C1 4 but you should download trials of each program and see which one suits your taste.
Arvay
Obscurant
Epson has its own converter and it's not bad I would say. Try to load it from their support site.
yavaro
Member
Yes Mani I saw that thread, and I agree with you that loss of fine detail.
And I was thinking to use epson photoraw with my raw files of the ricoh grd2, but it's not possible, it only opens erf files. There is out there a converter from dng to erf???