RPP - raw converter for mac.

[hardloaf]

This topic started here
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....ndpost&p=156308

Per Pete's request I'm separating it to this new thread.
It's about my raw converter for Mac

http://www.raw-photo-processor.com/RPP/

The results are also sharper than ACR..I think it's more a matter of apparent sharpness, due to the film curve and the local contrast feature

RPP produces more details and sharper by default compared to ACR even without contrast and local contrast adjustments. You can return sharpness with ACR built-in unsharp (at some extent), but this doesn't increase amount of details of course.

As I was scrolling through the Black and White conversions I noticed that when I went back to the "color" setting, I lost the histogram..it compressed and moved over to the right side of scale and appeared as a narrow spike. It wouldn't respond after that.

Yes, histogram is not working properly in monochrome mode. I'll fix it.

Second, the VNG conversion/interpolation scheme did not do very well with an image that had telephone and electrical wires and small tree branches..gave it a candy cane stripe at all viewing percentages on my monitor
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156494\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

VNG is kind of hit-or-miss thing - it produces color artifacts, but it also makes more smooth images and sometimes it's useful. I never use it though, but some people asked me to keep it when I wanted to remove it completely, so it stays.

Thank you for your report!

[papa v2.0]

Out of all the RAW convertors the basics are found in
DC RAW by Dave Coffin.
You probably cant get better that his. If you know how to utilise his command properly!

[hardloaf]

Out of all the RAW convertors the basics are found in
DC RAW by Dave Coffin.
You probably cant get better that his. If you know how to utilise his command properly!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156573\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think I know dcraw very well - almost all known to me converters use this code.  Practically all Raw formats decoding code in RPP also taken from dcraw and I deeply respect and appreciate Dave's work - without dcraw we would be bound to those horrid camera vendor's converters and world of digital photography would be full of excruciating pain

In processing part though it's very far from perfection. I'd say dcraw and ACR have a lot in common.

[hardloaf]

Regarding resolution in converters.
I have small example on my page
http://raw-photo-processor.com/RPP/Examples.html

Also one of my friends did some independent testing on a Kodak SLR/c raw file ( Kodak SLRs like SLR/c, SLR/n and 14NX are sharpest DSLRs and overall are best imagers available for 35mm format). These are links to pictures

ACR http://blog.lexa.ru/files/sharpness-acr.png
LightZone http://blog.lexa.ru/files/sharpness-lzn.png
RPP http://blog.lexa.ru/files/sharpness-rpp.png

Settings adjustments didn't resolve any more details in all of them.

For those who can read Russian this is the full post
http://blog.lexa.ru/2007/11/11/ne_vse_rawk...vo_polezni.html

If you want to do your own test - fabric is a very good target, but classical wooden or brick wall will do fine also.

[Brian Gilkes]

I have downloaded RPP and had a brief play with it. Sharpness and colour separation look good, but for the moment this is subjective. Not being able to view changes in real time makes things a bit hit or miss. There must be some way to instantly apply adjustments to a screen scaled version and then applying it , when OK to the full scale version.
In the sharpness comparson tests you have posted , what version of ACR was used? The current version 4.x is better than 3.x.
There seems to be no control on out of camera sharpening. Surely different sensors, filters etc will have differing sharpening requirements. This is where iterations of deconvolution algorithms provide significant advantages over contrast enhancement. As far as I know no RAW processor has really addressed this . RAW Developer is perhaps furthest along the line with some application of the Richardson -Lucy algorithm. PS seems to be edging into this with Smart Sharpen . How does your program address these issues?
The program is slow but I accept that, if intensive crunching produces a better result.
Working colour spaces is an area that I can get out of my depth quite quickly, but a choice for a horses for courses approach seems a good thing. One problem with LR and ACR is restriction to sRGB, ARGB, ProPhotoRGB and ColorMatchRGB, all of which are not designed  for current digital realities eg current sensors and inkjet ink gamuts. That is one reason I like RAWDeveloper, where I can use Joe Holmes spaces that give me better shadow separation and enable perceptual saturation control with Variants. Some other programs offer similar choice.Maybe that is something to think about.
Bruce Lindbloom knows his stuff, but, as I understand it, like the original JH Ektaspace PS5, Beta RGB  is a space designed for scanned trannies, not digital sensors. The argument for Gamma near 2.2 is persuasive, in any case . As a side issue , that someone smarter than me might like to comment on , that would seem to put ColorMatch RGB and thr ProPhotoRGB revivalists in a weaker position.
I'm not sure about "film look". In a few years that wont make sense to too many people, but if you like the look, go for it.
I must read the new ACRAW book. but I  have that feeling there is a long way to go .
In the interim the universal RAW protocols such a Adobe proposes, seem a good idea so one could slide from one RAW application to another to extract the best features.
I'll do some more playing when I wake up properly!
Brian

[hardloaf]

In the sharpness comparson tests you have posted , what version of ACR was used? The current version 4.x is better than 3.x.

My test is 4.3, the fabric test is 4.2. It's not that much about sharpness though and more about resolution. Unsharp was disabled everywhere in ACR and RPP simply doesn't do any sharpness adjustments in it's traditional meaning. In any case this is irrelevant here - ACR just doesn't resolve those missing details at all and there is nothing to enhance.

There seems to be no control on out of camera sharpening. Surely different sensors, filters etc will have differing sharpening requirements. This is where iterations of deconvolution algorithms provide significant advantages over contrast enhancement. As far as I know no RAW processor has really addressed this . RAW Developer is perhaps furthest along the line with some application of the Richardson -Lucy algorithm. PS seems to be edging into this with Smart Sharpen . How does your program address these issues?

It doesn't. RPP is a development machine and simply trying to resolve as much as it can. Sharpening is a very sensitive area and depends a lot on destination media type, size, resolution and many other things. I don't believe in sharpening "in advance" just to make picture look cute - it's very harmful for later post processing and for this reason it falls out of RPP scope.

Bruce Lindbloom knows his stuff, but, as I understand it, like the original JH Ektaspace PS5, Beta RGB  is a space designed for scanned trannies, not digital sensors. The argument for Gamma near 2.2 is persuasive, in any case . As a side issue , that someone smarter than me might like to comment on , that would seem to put ColorMatch RGB and thr ProPhotoRGB revivalists in a weaker position.

I prefer BetaRGB because it almost covers Lab and doesn't go farther. Very practical space in my opinion and it certainly covers gamuts of all known to me sensors

I'm not sure about "film look". In a few years that wont make sense to too many people, but if you like the look, go for it.

I'm not ready to give up on over 100 years of photography development and adjustments to human perception. I really like this look even though I'm not that much of a film guy.
Haven't seen a single person who disliked it though. Want to be first?  
There is gamma curve in RPP for those who want something else.

[Sunesha]

Cool, I will try this software out. Will share what I think.

A lightroom user myself. But like to test all sorts off software. Thanks also for sharing software.

Cheers,

[wilburdl]

Okay, had a small go at it. My initial reaction was that the software is slow.

I'd like to see:
Real time rendering
An option for adobe98 colors pace as an option.
More control over color temp. (Can't stress this enough)
Default camera settings shortcut/button

I really like the film curve and most importantly, the look of the image.

edit: I like the history feature and even the excessive EXIF data. I'd like to be able to open up multiple files (and have them displayed in order) easily.

The image is just a small processed example. The RPP file is noticeably sharper at a glance.

[Sunesha]

I did some test. Nice software a bit to primitive in terms off handling. But results are nice. It sure add a bit sharper photos. Does it has some sharpness built-in?

I will still use Lightroom, as it is more my style off editing.

Share a very unscientific test. I did a crop on a photo I shoot today with my 180mm AF nikkor. Put it into photoshop, did the crop, convert the colorspaces. Both converters on default, thou Lightroom on no sharpening and noise reduction(didnt see those function in RPP). This is the results after blown up 200 % with bicubic smoother.



Thou I didnt fiddle to match colors in Lightroom. RPP seems to have a bit more contrast.

I like the results, thou the software is a bit to "techy" for me. Both shoots was with "as shot", whitebalance.

[Sunesha]

I did some more testing, the rendering is fabulous. In my own humble opinion it brings more detail and microcontrast than Lightroom/Camera RAW. I took some landscape scenes and architecture I normally shoot. I am really surprised that a donationware can do this good.

I tempted become more nerdy just to extract that little notch more detail

Well if you are a tech-head and dont get confused by numbers and got patience this software is all right. If you use it together with Photoshop it is really nice RAW converter. Thou it is a bit to tough for me. Reminds me off my days with early audio software.

I tried out DXO5 that supposed have nicer demosacing engine. But wasnt that impressed at all. But this tool does bring out what would expect off DXO.

Cheers,

[wilburdl]

I did some more testing, the rendering is fabulous. In my own humble opinion it brings more detail and microcontrast than Lightroom/Camera RAW. I took some landscape scenes and architecture I normally shoot. I am really surprised that a donationware can do this good.

I tempted become more nerdy just to extract that little notch more detail

Well if you are a tech-head and dont get confused by numbers and got patience this software is all right. If you use it together with Photoshop it is really nice RAW converter. Thou it is a bit to tough for me. Reminds me off my days with early audio software.

I tried out DXO5 that supposed have nicer demosacing engine. But wasnt that impressed at all. But this tool does bring out what would expect off DXO.

Cheers,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156776\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I was a bit put off by all the numbers as well. There were some abbrieviated options I didn't know/understand function of.

[hardloaf]

I tempted become more nerdy just to extract that little notch more detail

All of those numbers are easy to understand - channels and exposure sliders f.e. are in eV numbers, so if you put 2 in exposure this means +2 stops.
You may ignore them after all, but in fact they are a lot more efficient and reliable way to get predictable results. Play a little more with those numbers and you'll get used very soon.
There is certainly nothing unusual in this for a typical photographer who deals with numbers all the time.

[hardloaf]

I did some test. Nice software a bit to primitive in terms off handling. But results are nice. It sure add a bit sharper photos. Does it has some sharpness built-in?

I will still use Lightroom, as it is more my style off editing.

Share a very unscientific test. I did a crop on a photo I shoot today with my 180mm AF nikkor. Put it into photoshop, did the crop, convert the colorspaces. Both converters on default, thou Lightroom on no sharpening and noise reduction(didnt see those function in RPP). This is the results after blown up 200 % with bicubic smoother.

[hardloaf]

Okay, had a small go at it. My initial reaction was that the software is slow.

Shouldn't be that slow
On PPC mac at may actually. Intels are a lot faster.

I'd like to see:
Real time rendering
An option for adobe98 colors pace as an option.
More control over color temp. (Can't stress this enough)

Cold-Warm slider is temperature. The idea is to set more or less decent white balance and fine tune with cold-warm. White balance can be set via auto or "as shot" or with picker from neutral or with averaging of selection from random parts of picture with many different colors.

The image is just a small processed example. The RPP file is noticeably sharper at a glance.

Also ACR sample has badly clipped shadows.

[Pete JF]

Some more observations, Andrey.

1) The histogram also gets locked up when you make a selection. It doesn't want to revert, even with a re-apply command.

2) I feel that the zoom feature and full screen feature need to be integrated into one central area and some keystrokes  would be great. It would be nice to be able to zoom in at percentages so you could look at what the darker areas of an image are doing. There are two areas that you have to travel to in order to manage the preview size and full screen option. It would be nice if all of that was in one area.

3) I can't judge what the highlight recovery section is doing. I've tried several schemes with it and I just can't see what it's up to.

4) The numbers are nice to have if you want to zone in adjustments that are between the "stops" on some of the sliders

5) I do like how, after Apply is hit, the slider you were working with stays selected so you can use the arrow key to fine tune after the previous "apply" command.

6) As another poster mentioned in this thread, I'd like to see the white balance feature expanded on. It's nice to have a color temp slider as a general feature in a processor. Though, the Command>Click selection seems to work, it would be nice to be able see quick variations.

7) Some images open and they look great, RPP seems to get a good handle on things and display with remarkably neutral tones. My streets, sidewalks and grey clouds never looked so neutral in a raw processor.

Other images, RPP seems to have hard time grabbing hold of and offering a "close" preview...when this happens I get a little bit baffled as to where I should start working, a case of "What 's first?"...the reason for this is the speed of apply feature...it makes it difficult to try things to see what's happening in a quick way. It gets more confusing if you try to make several adjustments before hitting Apply.

So, I'm wondering if you have an order or a workflow suggestion...such as: start with exposure>move to contrast>set black point> go back to exposure>check brightness...do you
understand what I mean? I'm looking for a reasonably good starting point and a logical progression after that,  within the slider windows.

This software is a different bear because of the speed and I feel like i start to go in circles because  I can't see what I'm doing quickly enough, i need the immediacy.(I know you get sick of hearing about the speed thing).

On the upside...when I finally arrive at what I'm after, things looks great. The rendering is fantastic.


Are you planning on addressing the speed issue as you move along? Is that something that happens at the end of the road in the process?

I hope all that makes sense.

[hardloaf]

Some more observations, Andrey.

1) The histogram also gets locked up when you make a selection. It doesn't want to revert, even with a re-apply command.

Try to click somewhere outside of selection to disable it and histogram should return to normal (calculated for the whole image).

2) I feel that the zoom feature and full screen feature need to be integrated into one central area and some keystrokes  would be great. It would be nice to be able to zoom in at percentages so you could look at what the darker areas of an image are doing. There are two areas that you have to travel to in order to manage the preview size and full screen option. It would be nice if all of that was in one area.

I'll think about this.

3) I can't judge what the highlight recovery section is doing. I've tried several schemes with it and I just can't see what it's up to.

It restores neutrality of originally neutral objects when one or two channels clipped, but third one is not. Pink clouds f.e. Turn the option on and  shift the little slider to the left - you should see dark blobs in clipped areas. Keep shifting it to the right till it blends with surroundings. You need to give a little space for clipped areas, so you should move exposure about -0.3..-0.7 stops before and white balance should be taken from unclipped surrounding to make them blend perfectly.

6) As another poster mentioned in this thread, I'd like to see the white balance feature expanded on. It's nice to have a color temp slider as a general feature in a processor. Though, the Command>Click selection seems to work, it would be nice to be able see quick variations.

You may just Cmd-click (area 3x3) or Cmd-drag over some area (same over bigger area).
For the rest - looks like it boils down to configurable WB presets for different lightning conditions. Right? Popular request and it's on my list.

Other images, RPP seems to have hard time grabbing hold of and offering a "close" preview...when this happens I get a little bit baffled as to where I should start working, a case of "What 's first?"...the reason for this is the speed of apply feature...it makes it difficult to try things to see what's happening in a quick way. It gets more confusing if you try to make several adjustments before hitting Apply.

So, I'm wondering if you have an order or a workflow suggestion...such as: start with exposure>move to contrast>set black point> go back to exposure>check brightness...do you
understand what I mean? I'm looking for a reasonably good starting point and a logical progression after that,  within the slider windows.

Do one thing at a time.
1. White balance
2. Exposure compensation
3. Brightness
4. Contrast
5. Saturation

This software is a different bear because of the speed and I feel like i start to go in circles because  I can't see what I'm doing quickly enough, i need the immediacy.(I know you get sick of hearing about the speed thing).

Always start with WB and exposure - it makes picture look right and after that it's very easy to make it better. Never do any adjustments on images with wrong white balance (in any converter) - this is waste of time, WB affects our perception of contrast, brightness, details and sharpness. It affects everything

White balance may be tricky if there is nothing to pick from, but if you look closer there is usually something neutral or close to neutral. Auto usually works, but may fail miserably if some colors are over-present. In this case selection over some areas of pictures while holding Cmd may give decent start. Cold-worm touching may be needed after all those auto guesstimates.

It may take some time to get used (couple of days?), but after that you'll find that it takes a lot less time for you to process pictures compared to other converters because numbers never lie and you'll just get that feeling. You'll be surprised how easy it is

[wilburdl]

Always start with WB and exposure - it makes picture look right and after that it's very easy to make it better. Never do any adjustments on images with wrong white balance (in any converter) - this is waste of time, WB affects our perception of contrast, brightness, details and sharpness. It affects everything
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156872\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think that you've got the neutral thing down to a science. My whole reason for bringing up the white balance thing is that 8 times out of 10 I'm purposely changing the color temp in order to enhance the mood of the image. Sometimes warmer, sometimes cooler--with a cyan tint (i.e. ACR).

[Pete JF]

Exactly...

[Brian Gilkes]

Out of whack colour balance does change perception of conrast etc as Andrey explained. I reckon the work flow is correct, get colour right, adjust other parameters , THEN adjust your colour for mood.
Cheers
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au

[papa v2.0]

Hi hardlaof

just downloaded your RPP app

ill give it a whirl tonite

just a few questions

how do you determine the camera matrix to go from device RGB to CIEXYZ and what method do you use for white point estimation

or are you using the DCRAW engine.