Which RAW processor?

umcelinho

umcelinho

Marcelo
Local time
7:35 AM
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
1,331
I am using Lightroom 4 and am getting very vectorised like images when looking at pixel size even at iso 200... So I am wondering which RAW converter is everyone out there using with good results.

Thanks in advance!

- Marcelo
 
Isn't one from Fuji the best? If not then Fuji is selling a car with a dummy engine which you have to replace on your own right after towing car home from dealership.
 
I've just tested opening on Capture One a file which was not pleasing me on how LR4 was rendering, ah wow, it's a HUGE improvement. I'm very used to the Lightroom interface, but it's just not in the same rendering level. For most shots, LR4 is fine, but when you get fine detail C1 seems to deliver better.
 
So, this is 100% view of a recent shot processed on Lightroom 4...


X-E1 file processed on Lightroom 4 by Marcelo Colmenero, on Flickr

...and this is what I got processing it through Capture One Pro 7:


X-E1 file processed on Capture One Pro 7 by Marcelo Colmenero, on Flickr

much more detail. this absolutely sucks, I am quite used to Lightroom, maybe I am doing something wrong here, I'm not sure, but if I could get the same image detail on Lightroom that I managed to get with Capture One it would be great.

I'm still raw at Capture One.. :)
 
I use aperture 3. Adobe support compared to the other vendors is not as good. However, it appears that Rico can get a bit more out of the raw files then most. Check this shoot out article out.

http://www.fujirumors.com/ultimate-raw-converter-shootout/

He has also post a link to a download area where u can pick up the files to check out yourself. I think he said something about the edited adobe files have the info in what he did (but could be going on bad memory).

Gary
 
That just looks like the C1 defaults have more sharpening and contrast than LR4 does, unless you customized the settings.

Of course, LR5.2 is the current version. I believe there are some improvements to the Fuji processing in LR5.
 
Capture one pro 7 is head and shoulders better for X-trans files. The default settings are better than anything you can get from Lightroom, no matter how much you tweak. The de-mosaicing algorithms are superior, I think.
 
Bob Wilson said:
Capture one pro 7 is head and shoulders better for X-trans files. The default settings are better than anything you can get from Lightroom, no matter how much you tweak. The de-mosaicing algorithms are superior, I think.
Click to expand...

This is one of the reasons I've avoided the X-trans cameras. Changing my image processing tools is a MUCH bigger, more time consuming, effort than whatever small benefit the Fuji sensor might offer.

G
 
Updated here to LR5.2, improvement is clear, the "vectorised" effect is much less pronounced, but still there. Reds are visibly worse in details than C1P7 as well...

I'm also getting more pleasant tones on Capture One than Lightroom, but that might be due to my limited editing skills. It feels like a photo editor that is more "complete", I will give it a shot, and also see how it handles my R-D1s files, who knows, might be a good surprise.
 
I use Capture One to convert the Fuji RAW files and then use LR 5.2 to adjust/edit.

Best of both worlds that way IMHO. ;)
 
Depends to a great extent on what platform you're using. I'm on a Mac and can share my observations.

I was a long time Aperture user who switched to Lightroom (4.4) for 2 years before Apple supported XTrans then switched back. In a nutshell, during my LR phase, more than half my keepers were jpeg's. After switching back to Aperture, in almost no time flat, all I was using were the raw files. You can get there with LR (perhaps) but I don't enjoy sitting in front of a computer. I went through a phase of comparing LR jpeg's to LR renders and striving to get the raw close to the jpeg. I did the same with Aperture and in most every case the initial render was materially better than the OOC jpeg.

Is Aperture the best? There's plenty of excellent converters out there. C1 and Aperture are very close. Irrident is excellent. When I can't get there with Aperture, I use a freebie, Rawker. It does DCRAW and its own proprietary render which I believe is a modified Aperture conversion. Superb detail. But given my familiarity with Aperture and its superb DAM, that's my choice.
 
There's also Photo Ninja, which I get great results with, though I don't use RAW much, except for portraits or difficult light. There's a trial version avaiable if you want to try it out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom