Why don't YOU show us some tests?
I see you talking about it a lot, but if you were able to prove ACR's superiority over any other RAW converter, you'd have long done it.
There are many who prefer Nikon Capture and Canon DPP to ACR and they don't need to do any heavy testing to see the difference.
It's pointless to argue on this level, no matter where they cows are, if they stay home, go out, or come home.
I
do show tests. Haven't you noticed? Whenever I make a point and am able to demonstrate that point with tests, because I have the equipment, I usually do so. When I tried RSP a few years ago and found it produced sharper results than the then current version of ACR, I demonstrated the fact with test images on this forum.
Isn't this the whole point of the forum? Seeing is believing. As I mentioned before, there might be many reaosns why someone prefers a particular converter. It might simply be a quicker and easier way of getting the same results, or the controls might be more intuitive for one particular user, but not necessarily another.
Of course, I don't need to do this. I sometimes wonder why I bother. But the fact is, the very process of organising my own test results into a demonstration format, tests which are initially made for my own edification, clarifies the issues in my mind and helps me discover flaws in my methodology. I learn from the process. If I didn't, I would no longer bother.
There's no reason for me to prove ACR's superiority. I'm not making any claims for ACR other than it's probably, on balance, as good as any other converter on the market but has the advantage of being more of an industry standard than any other converter. If someone wishes to make the claim that another converter does a
better job than ACR, then let them demonstrate it so we can all benefit. You don't go through life believing everything that everyone says, do you?