Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: hardloaf on November 27, 2007, 06:11:43 pm
-
This topic started here
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....ndpost&p=156308 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=21155&view=findpost&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/ (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!
-
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!
-
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.
-
Regarding resolution in converters.
I have small example on my page
http://raw-photo-processor.com/RPP/Examples.html (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 (http://blog.lexa.ru/files/sharpness-acr.png)
LightZone http://blog.lexa.ru/files/sharpness-lzn.png (http://blog.lexa.ru/files/sharpness-lzn.png)
RPP http://blog.lexa.ru/files/sharpness-rpp.png (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 (http://blog.lexa.ru/2007/11/11/ne_vse_rawkonvertori_odinakovo_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.
-
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
-
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 RGBÂ 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.
-
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,
-
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.
-
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.
(http://sunesha.se/images/demodumppreview/testraw.jpg)
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.
-
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,
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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).
-
Exactly...
-
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
-
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.
-
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).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156887\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not at all - it will be much easier to control if you get more or less right WB first, set all adjustments and than go artistic with tonalities. By picking good WB you are simply setting a baseline at which your perception will be at peace with your picture, but that doesn't mean you should keep your neutrals dead on for sunset shots in the final result.
-
how do you determine the camera matrix to go from device RGB to CIEXYZ
I don't use matrixes for most of cameras - RPP uses built-in custom made LUT profiles made by Iliah Borg.
what method do you use for white point estimation
Same classical auto wb as Dave uses in dcraw for -a option, but with my own twist
are you using the DCRAW engine.
I don't use dcraw engine for anything but Raw formats decoding. Some other parts also have dcraw roots, but over time they changed a lot and don't have much in common any more.
-
Andrey,
One quick question...is it possible to rotate images within the program? I supect the answer is no because I've been looking all over for a secret portal. My verticals are horizontal.
-
Andrey,
One quick question...is it possible to rotate images within the program? I supect the answer is no because I've been looking all over for a secret portal. My verticals are horizontal.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157043\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, i.e. no.
This feature is on my list though and I'll add it for sure.
Surprisingly this is a very rare request. Seems like there is not that many cameras without orientation sensor.
-
Andrey,
I'm noticing severe halos when using the local contrast feature, even in smaller amounts below 20, on objects with even moderately contrasting backgrounds, very significant. One needs to be able to be fine tune it in order for it to be useful
Also, the brightness slider seems to get hung up every so often. When it happens I can move it but it has no effect on the image. Is it a mode that turns it off? Can't figure that out, seems like a bug. Closing and re-opening seems to make it stop.
Also, I find that RPP works better with some images and not as well with others. I spose every processor has this issue, they are all different. I've had several images where i couldn't get any joy from ACR, and where, when opened in RPP, the joy was happening. Maybe it's me though...the "me" factor is firmly implanted in myself and to know this, you have to be me. That's a mess.
I have a few images that were shot on a grey day with backlighting that RPP seems to have problems with, also, a few shot on sunny days with large areas of heavy shadow contrast against yellow..has rendering yellow been an issue for you? It seems to give me problems.
The extreme ends of the histogram are hard to pick up when one should see a "tail" that represents very small % areas like specular highlights or small %'s of very dark areas. It would be nice to be able read this type of detail at the ends of the histogram. I would prefer a more contrasty representation.
UI wise, it would great if the app was dual monitor friendly so we could drag and resize to make the tool bar reside on the right hand monitor. It would also be cool if one could work on images against a black background, while being isolated from the tool panel. My crunchy eyes have a very hard time working with white light flashing in my eyes.
"Save As" would be good too.
After spending more time with RPP, I just can't get over the speed issues. I need the immediacy or real time editing. I think the market, at this point, demands it...WYDIWYS,I (what you do is what you see, immediately). I don't mean to be overly redundant on that point but it's a huge thing. I know that you already know this.
I'm still messing with things here because I really like certain things about the overall rendering..I'm a bit bummed about the local contrast issue, it really limits when you can apply that feature.
Hope all that helps.
-
I'm noticing severe halos when using the local contrast feature, even in smaller amounts below 20, on objects with even moderately contrasting backgrounds, very significant. One needs to be able to be fine tune it in order for it to be useful
I think I know what you talking about. Halo itself is part of the method, but it may became very visible when background is very dark and even slight increase in contrast push values to total 0 and we have flat black halos all around. In this case try to lift black point a little - some negative value. Try -1,-2,-3 and as soon as halo disappeared work your way back in smaller steps till it starts appearing again. F.e. you found that with BP -1 there is a halo and it's gone at -2 try -1.5 to see if it still helps. Basically you need to find the smallest value eliminating the halo. This applies only to black flat halos you see even at values below default 18.
Also, the brightness slider seems to get hung up every so often. When it happens I can move it but it has no effect on the image. Is it a mode that turns it off? Can't figure that out, seems like a bug. Closing and re-opening seems to make it stop.
Never seen anything like that. What position the slider has and what number it shows when this happens?
Also, I find that RPP works better with some images and not as well with others. I spose every processor has this issue, they are all different.
This actually shouldn't happen.
I have a few images that were shot on a grey day with backlighting that RPP seems to have problems with, also, a few shot on sunny days with large areas of heavy shadow contrast against yellow..has rendering yellow been an issue for you? It seems to give me problems.
I need Raw examples - this is the kind of problem I can't say anything about without seeing it.
The extreme ends of the histogram are hard to pick up when one should see a "tail" that represents very small % areas like specular highlights or small %'s of very dark areas. It would be nice to be able read this type of detail at the ends of the histogram. I would prefer a more contrasty representation.
Point taken. I also noticed this - need to 'amplify' those tiny fractions close to ground.
UI wise, it would great if the app was dual monitor friendly so we could drag and resize to make the tool bar reside on the right hand monitor. It would also be cool if one could work on images against a black background, while being isolated from the tool panel. My crunchy eyes have a very hard time working with white light flashing in my eyes.
Yes, some people already asked me about this and I have it on my to-do list.
"Save As" would be good too.
It's already there
After spending more time with RPP, I just can't get over the speed issues. I need the immediacy or real time editing. I think the market, at this point, demands it...WYDIWYS,I (what you do is what you see, immediately). I don't mean to be overly redundant on that point but it's a huge thing. I know that you already know this.
I tried pretty much every converter available on the market. Practically all of them handle real time editing on scale from 'ok' to 'good'. The problem is that all of them sacrifice quality over user experience and have to stick to deeply theoretically and practically flawed quick and dirty approach in image processing just to please customers and make interface attractive. This doesn't mean efficiency - only ease of uneducated use, plain attractiveness and false sense of control over the image. I don't mind - for 99% of all consumers this is enough, makes people happy and happy people are good people
You may have really quick and nasty 'polaroid' picture (in camera jpeg).
You may have affordable generic velvia developed and printed at Costco for few pennies (practically all Raw converters).
You may have your own lab, pick your film depending on scene and do development and printing all by yourself (nothing, you are on your own, big guys are so not interested).
Now guess where I place myself and RPP from those three
-
Hi Andrey,
I understand all that but there is something to be said for that immediacy. It's part of generating a creative flow when working. A lot of people feel this way.
However, I am ignorant enough, from a programming perspective, to not realize what it takes to accomplish all these things within a piece of software that strives to be excellent. Maybe it isn't possible and, perhaps, you are suggesting that it isn't possible...i can totally understand that : )
I'll try to send some examples to you..
Thanks
-
I understand all that but there is something to be said for that immediacy. It's part of generating a creative flow when working. A lot of people feel this way.
I'm actually trying to separate pure technical and creative stages. RPP is intentionally limited to only basic operations which cannot be done right with existing tools. The idea is to get good starting image and let your creativity unfold in some other tools, like Photoshop.
However, I am ignorant enough, from a programming perspective, to not realize what it takes to accomplish all these things within a piece of software that strives to be excellent. Maybe it isn't possible and, perhaps, you are suggesting that it isn't possible...i can totally understand that : )
This would be a big project, but it's possible for sure - modern computers are very powerful beings and f.e. Adobe or Apple could do this. In my opinion Adobe doesn't want to touch it's milking, but quickly aging cow and even thinks that some plastic surgery may help it. Apple is too superficial and disorganized to do this right - they need a mastermind for their photo related line of products who would understand photography and computers equally well.
I'll try to send some examples to you..
Thanks!
-
I'm actually trying to separate pure technical and creative stages. RPP is intentionally limited to only basic operations which cannot be done right with existing tools. The idea is to get good starting image and let your creativity unfold in some other tools, like Photoshop.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157520\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yep, you are totally correct. I confess, I want things to happen faster.
-
I'm having a hard time figuring out how to get a fullsized image to open up in CS2. What am I not doing?
-
Wilbur,
Go to the bottom of the tool bar and set the iinterpolation to AHD. There's a pull down menu below that, set it for RGB TIFF 16 bit or LAB TIFF 16 bit. Check the "open in PS box". Click Save and you should get full size tiff for your camera.
-
Andrey,
After spending more time with RPP, I just can't get over the speed issues. I need the immediacy or real time editing. I think the market, at this point, demands it...WYDIWYS,I (what you do is what you see, immediately). I don't mean to be overly redundant on that point but it's a huge thing. I know that you already know this.
Have you guys not tried Raw Developer?
http://www.iridientdigital.com (http://www.iridientdigital.com)
Doyle
-
Andrey,
After spending more time with RPP, I just can't get over the speed issues. I need the immediacy or real time editing. I think the market, at this point, demands it...WYDIWYS,I (what you do is what you see, immediately). I don't mean to be overly redundant on that point but it's a huge thing. I know that you already know this.
Have you guys not tried Raw Developer?
http://www.iridientdigital.com (http://www.iridientdigital.com)
Doyle
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157907\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks Pete. DYP, I agree but this is still in beta so all the input we give should go along way into improving this developer. Which seems to have a promising start IMO. We could be part of history
Maybe the fact that this point has been iterated a number of times will convince Loaf that this is a worthwhile improvement to make.
-
Have you guys not tried Raw Developer?
http://www.iridientdigital.com (http://www.iridientdigital.com)
Doyle
I tried - if it counts.
IMHO nice fast alternative to ACR with some useful advanced features and practical interface. Unfortunately it also carries all typical dcraw problems - soft, artificial noise, wrong saturated colors and so on.