Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION  (Read 12066 times)

sjprg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 129
PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« on: December 27, 2015, 11:51:36 am »

I have spent a couple of days testing the "PICCURE" raw converter on both my Imac and my Asus PC and have the following short review.

This converter is SLOW, I mean SLOW, but the landscape results are superb. I tried it on images taken back to 2004 with a 10D all the way up to 2015 taken with a 5DS R and found impressive conversions to TIFF files. It could use more refinement as it does not yet do any light adjustments so you have to take it to another editor for light corrections and for JPG conversions but the focus and detail is well worth the extra time involved.
The link is on TLL or on Google or Bing search.
Try it, You might like it!
Logged
Paul

sjprg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 129
Logged
Paul

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20698
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #2 on: December 27, 2015, 12:20:54 pm »

Thanks for pointing the product out, looks interesting.
One item I'm not finding is if it supports DNG's.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

sjprg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 129
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #3 on: December 27, 2015, 02:53:39 pm »

It only outputs TIFFs from RAWs, Maybe they may expand it later. Who knows.
Logged
Paul

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20698
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #4 on: December 27, 2015, 03:10:05 pm »

It only outputs TIFFs from RAWs, Maybe they may expand it later. Who knows.
Can it read a DNG?
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

luxborealis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2798
    • luxBorealis.com - photography by Terry McDonald
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #5 on: December 27, 2015, 04:59:37 pm »

It only outputs TIFFs from RAWs, Maybe they may expand it later. Who knows.

TIFFs from raw certainly seems like a potentially unnecessary bloating of file size in these days of parametric editing. They would need to be significantly improved to make the use of Piccure truly value-added.
Logged
Terry McDonald - luxBorealis.com

Tim Lookingbill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #6 on: December 27, 2015, 05:23:12 pm »

From what I'm reading from online reviews (couldn't access Piccure website-WAY to slow) PiccurePlus as a LR plugin can only do its thing directly on the Raw image excluding any embedded xmp or parametric edits which means the image in its unedited state has to already look right both in color and dynamic range.

Or does this app apply its sharpening/clarity enhancements on top of the LR xmp edited preview before converting to tiff?
Logged

sjprg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 129
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #7 on: December 27, 2015, 05:52:12 pm »

I use it as a stand alone converter, than play with the TIFFs in either DXO or PS. Its an extra processing step but for me the results make it worth the effort.
Logged
Paul

jrp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 322
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #8 on: December 27, 2015, 07:57:16 pm »

You can use it as a plug-in or it can be used standalone (relying on DCRaw).

It seems to do superior optical aberration removal, if that's what you need.  Makes a Canon 50mm lens look better than a Zeiss Otus, if you believe the demos.
Logged

sjprg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 129
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #9 on: December 27, 2015, 08:03:58 pm »

That's what I observed. My 10D images looked like my 1DS3 images. I ran some of my 2002 Minolta 7I JPG images through it but the results weren't quite as good, but keeping the images to about 4X8 they were more than acceptable.
Logged
Paul

Tim Lookingbill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #10 on: December 28, 2015, 12:18:49 am »

You can use it as a plug-in or it can be used standalone (relying on DCRaw).

It seems to do superior optical aberration removal, if that's what you need.  Makes a Canon 50mm lens look better than a Zeiss Otus, if you believe the demos.

Not sure what demos you're referring to but I'ld like to see side by side 100% crops posted here in this thread to counter what I found in this review... http://www.thephotovideoguy.ca/blog/1865 ...the feather detail is not a desirable result.

And since you guys are actually using this app could you tell me if it allows tonal edits or is it just a straight Raw to tiff converter with the optical fixes applied?
Logged

kirkt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 604
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #11 on: December 30, 2015, 07:54:58 pm »

Here is an image shot with a Canon 5DII and a Zeiss 135mm f/2 Apo Sonnar T* ZE at f/4, 1/1600s at ISO 100.  The first image is a 2400px wide resized image for context.  The next two images are 100% crops with the "before" version representing the raw conversion in Raw Photo Processor (no sharpening) and the "after" with Piccure+, "Quality+", "micro" aberrations and no sharpening.

kirk

Logged

kirkt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 604
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #12 on: December 30, 2015, 07:58:14 pm »

Here is an image shot with a Canon 5DIII and a Zeiss Distagon T* 15mm f/2.8 ZE at f/5.6, 1/125s at ISO 100.  Same deal as previously, converted in RPP.

kirk

 
Logged

kirkt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 604
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #13 on: December 30, 2015, 08:02:23 pm »

Here is an image shot with a Canon 5DIII and a Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II at f/8, 1/500s at ISO 200.  It is an image composite made with LumaRiver HDR and converted in ACR from the LumaRiver DNG.  In this version I also applied some additional sharpening in Piccure+.

kirk

Logged

kirkt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 604
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #14 on: December 30, 2015, 08:04:39 pm »

If you convert your raws directly from within Piccure+, it does not permit any tonal edits.  All of my comparisons were on 16bit TIFF conversions, using Piccure+ as a plug-in from within Photoshop.

kirk
Logged

jrp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 322
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #15 on: December 30, 2015, 08:05:47 pm »

Well it does seem to produce better micro contrast -- a hyperrealistic rendering.

I can see that there would are types of picture where this sort of crispness contributes to the final impact of the image, but in a lot of circumstances, particularly if you are producing output on a screen, rather than print, the effect will be rather lost, it seems to me, although I am willing to be persuaded otherwise.
Logged

Tim Lookingbill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #16 on: December 31, 2015, 05:08:54 pm »

Thanks, kirk, for providing a meaningful and helpful comparison study and answering my question about having to convert to tiff to do further tonal adjustments.

That's also some very realistic and natural looking HDR rendering on both the LumaRiver shot and RPP. I take it RPP has a very good highlight recovering adjustment to retain the open barn door landscape detail.
Logged

kirkt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 604
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #17 on: December 31, 2015, 07:00:49 pm »

Thanks, kirk, for providing a meaningful and helpful comparison study and answering my question about having to convert to tiff to do further tonal adjustments.

That's also some very realistic and natural looking HDR rendering on both the LumaRiver shot and RPP. I take it RPP has a very good highlight recovering adjustment to retain the open barn door landscape detail.

You're welcome.  RPP has basic highlight reconstruction, but I did not use it.  It has very specific control over compression of the highlights when adjusting exposure, which is how I converted that image.  That is, the highlight detail was all there and I was able to compress it naturally when adjusting exposure for the midtowns and quarter tones.  RPP's highlight recovery is similar to dcraw's. 

Happy New Year!

kirk
Logged

biker

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 198
  • powered by a pair of quadriceps
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2016, 04:46:24 pm »

Thanks for the Piccure+ link! Tried it on RAWs from 2 different cameras (classic Bayer array sensor and Fuji X-Trans II) and I'm not convinced. :-\
With the 25% sharpness set the results were quite blurry and with the 50% one they were sharp but IMO pretty unnatural (see the attachments).

I played with it for just about 15 minutes so I might have missed something but couldn't get better results. There aren't many controls to play with.
I think that RAW Threrapee or Darktable are giving better results...??? Sorry.
Logged
Don't wait until the flock moves.
Be first to comment. (Unless you haven't got anything to say.)

kencameron

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 840
    • Recent Photographs
Re: PICCURE RAW CONVERSION
« Reply #19 on: January 21, 2016, 07:36:51 pm »

Thanks for the Piccure+ link! Tried it on RAWs from 2 different cameras (classic Bayer array sensor and Fuji X-Trans II) and I'm not convinced. :-\
With the 25% sharpness set the results were quite blurry and with the 50% one they were sharp but IMO pretty unnatural (see the attachments).

I played with it for just about 15 minutes so I might have missed something but couldn't get better results. There aren't many controls to play with.
I think that RAW Threrapee or Darktable are giving better results... ??? Sorry.
I use Piccure with sharpening set at zero, and do the edge sharpening afterwards in Lightroom. This is a common approach. Piccure is good for something that could be described as microcontrast, although I am not sure if it works in the same way as microcontrast in other apps. It is worth reading the blurb to gain an understanding of how it is supposed to work. The Facebook user group is also useful. I also use it most with shots taken with less than stellar lenses. I certainly don't use it as a general purpose raw converter and I think that to do so is to misunderstand its purpose.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2016, 06:26:44 pm by kencameron »
Logged
Ken Cameron
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up