Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?  (Read 14525 times)

Cem

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 124
    • Photographs
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #20 on: December 21, 2016, 05:16:37 am »

.... I am going to keep on using the ON1 Photo Raw 2017 for the effects (filters) part, since it is many times faster than the previous (non RAW) version. I'll continue doing the raw conversion itself in either Capture One or LR. Just the speed improvement and the ability to switch individual filter layers on/off is enough improvement for me to justify the upgrade.
Coming back to this, I have tried editing multiple photos in one go today. When I select multiple photos in LR and send them to ON1 Photo RAW for editing, only the first photo in the batch is updated by Photo RAW. The remaining photos in the selection are returned to LR without any updates. This process used to work with Photo 10.5, it doesn't work now. I have reported this to ON1 support, hopefully it will be fixed soon.
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8901
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #21 on: December 21, 2016, 06:12:38 am »

I see that Bart has also included an early version of Affinity Photo.  Now that AP 1.5 is out and Luminar is out, how do they fit into the raw conversion "race".  I would like to get away from both LR and C1 with software that is "good enough" for x-trans RAW and appears to have a long term improvement program.

Hi,

I have not specifically tested X-trans Raw conversion quality, but I've heard positive things about the Capture One conversions. How On1 Raw handles them is something that has to be verified but, given the issues with regular Bayer CFA demosaicing, it would surprise me a bit if it does better with X-trans files. Whether it's 'good enough', is up to the user.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Bob Rockefeller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 543
  • Mac, iOS, Olympus OM-D E-M1, Epson 3880
    • Bob Rockefeller
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #22 on: December 23, 2016, 08:34:03 am »

I've been attempting to compare the raw conversion of ON1 Photo RAW and Lightroom but am finding it maddening difficult to get both programs set to "default" for that comparison. Does anyone have any tips for getting both programs set to the "same" default adjustments?
 
Logged
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA   www.bobrockefeller.com

Jack Hogan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 797
    • Hikes -more than strolls- with my dog
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #23 on: December 23, 2016, 12:50:12 pm »

I've been attempting to compare the raw conversion of ON1 Photo RAW and Lightroom but am finding it maddening difficult to get both programs set to "default" for that comparison. Does anyone have any tips for getting both programs set to the "same" default adjustments?

There is no 'standard' output.  Every raw converter gives its own version of what it considers to be a 'pleasing' rendition upon opening a file.  It's very subjective.  As far as ACR/LR is concerned I personally do not like 'Adobe Standard' for my camera, preferring 'Camera Standard' instead (which is Adobe's attempt to copy Nikon's 'Standard' Picture Control).

Jack
Logged

Shiever

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #24 on: December 23, 2016, 05:31:37 pm »

On YouTube, the Modern Artist had a recent video where he is comparing various raw converters (LR,C1.ect) on low light, high iso images.  He noted that each converter had a different starting point and in his mind there is always some proprietary things happening with the algorithms. Further adjustments eventually gets you to a similar result.  I really do not know his level of knowledge/expertise, but his conclusions seem to match my experiences.  https://youtu.be/Y4WzaXrLwJI
Logged

Bob Rockefeller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 543
  • Mac, iOS, Olympus OM-D E-M1, Epson 3880
    • Bob Rockefeller
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #25 on: December 23, 2016, 06:18:24 pm »

The work he discussed on the video was focused almost exclusively on noise treatment for high ISO X-Trans files.

I have a hard time agreeing with him that they will all end up in a satisfactory place, given enough adjustments. The initial raw conversions counts - starting from a bad place is going to make it hard (if not impossible) to get to a good one. Hence my interest in which coverter provides a "better" starting point and if ON1 Photo RAW is already in the pack with the top converters, or if they have years of development to get where Adobe and Phase One are now.
Logged
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA   www.bobrockefeller.com

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4726
    • My photography site
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #26 on: December 24, 2016, 04:22:06 am »

What though is a "bad place"? Don't forget the human aspect here, because a flat or neutral default rendering (assuming default exists) can often give you a much better roadmap, revealing the image's final possibilities, than a more "pleasing" default may do.
Logged

Bob Rockefeller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 543
  • Mac, iOS, Olympus OM-D E-M1, Epson 3880
    • Bob Rockefeller
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #27 on: December 24, 2016, 09:42:56 am »

What though is a "bad place"?

I'm thinking in terms of image quality that can't be fixed later with a program's adjustment tools. All raw converters can't be equal, some must produce better demosaic results. I would think that the amount of detail extracted from the raw file would be a part of that. Perhaps there are others I'm overlooking?

The default starting point is less important to me because, as you point out, different starting points provide different base images to work from.
Logged
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA   www.bobrockefeller.com

Jack Hogan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 797
    • Hikes -more than strolls- with my dog
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #28 on: December 24, 2016, 12:33:28 pm »

I'm thinking in terms of image quality that can't be fixed later with a program's adjustment tools. All raw converters can't be equal, some must produce better demosaic results. I would think that the amount of detail extracted from the raw file would be a part of that. Perhaps there are others I'm overlooking?

Raw converters do a number of menial tasks and a couple of critical ones, the rest is just pre-editing (you can read about a simplified breakdown of the key steps involved in rendering a raw file here).   What's critical today?

My opinion is that in late 2016 demosaicing is no longer critical: algorithms are tried, tested and stable - and they have been so for at least the last 5+ years or so, each with their known strengths and weaknesses.  Improvements have slowed to the point of being almost unnoticeable from year to year.  Same with sharpening and noise reduction.

Where I think they differentiate today is 1) a pleasing starting point upon first opening of the raw file, and 2) ease of squeezing camera DR into output device DR naturally.   Both of these features are very subjective but, subjectively, some do better than others.  They have mainly to do with getting color and (global, local, micro) contrast rendition in the desired ballpark out of the box.  Pretty well everything else can be done better and more easily in a good editor like PS.

Jack
Logged

scyth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #29 on: December 24, 2016, 01:46:58 pm »

What's critical today?
you totally forgot about the speed to reflect changes in controls in real time for example and that includes the art of GPU coding for the said algorithms, which few converters mastered
Logged

scyth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #30 on: December 24, 2016, 01:49:09 pm »

Pretty well everything else can be done better and more easily in a good editor like PS.
except that hoi polloi do not want to go to PS, hence you either aim for a niche or if you want to fight for marketplace (or what remains of it) then you have to do it all inside.
Logged

Jack Hogan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 797
    • Hikes -more than strolls- with my dog
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #31 on: December 25, 2016, 05:16:09 am »

Sure and sure, scyth. Plus for some people the darn DAM is a big deal, etc., etc.  I guess it depends whether one has a high volume or low volume flow.  If the latter, as far as image 'quality' is concerned, those are the two that stand out to me.  I sometimes use horrible and slow Capture NX-D because it renders the file well upon first opening - and  exactly as I had it set up in-camera; then do the rest elsewhere.  I know that that may not be everybody's cup of tea.

Jack
Logged

Bob Rockefeller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 543
  • Mac, iOS, Olympus OM-D E-M1, Epson 3880
    • Bob Rockefeller
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #32 on: December 25, 2016, 10:20:03 am »

My opinion is that in late 2016 demosaicing is no longer critical: algorithms are tried, tested and stable - and they have been so for at least the last 5+ years or so, each with their known strengths and weaknesses.

Does this suggest that ON1 has used existing demosaic algorithms, rather than develop their own? In would have thought the critical components of a demosaicing engine would have been patented by the likes of Adobe and Phase One. No?
Logged
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA   www.bobrockefeller.com

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8901
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #33 on: December 25, 2016, 01:07:14 pm »

Does this suggest that ON1 has used existing demosaic algorithms, rather than develop their own?

Hi Bob,

My own analysis of the Raw conversions leads me to the conclusion that they used some sort of algorithm of their own that uses noise reduction and (too much) sharpening. Other converters do none of those, although they may apply a default to the subsequent controls that the user can then reduce to zero if they like.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Jack Hogan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 797
    • Hikes -more than strolls- with my dog
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #34 on: December 26, 2016, 05:07:54 am »

Does this suggest that ON1 has used existing demosaic algorithms, rather than develop their own? In would have thought the critical components of a demosaicing engine would have been patented by the likes of Adobe and Phase One. No?

What Bart said plus many demosaicing algorithms (including current champs) are in the public domain.  Folks like adobe simply customize them a bit for their workflow.  RawTherapee gives the option of trying a collection of several advanced ones, as used in well known raw converters.  Based admittedly solely on what I have seen in this thread, I think to understand ON1 raw conversion one can start by looking at their old filter suites.  While those may be fun in the creative department, they may appear a bit heavy handed when simply wishing to open a 'neutral' raw file.

Jack
Logged

Bob Rockefeller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 543
  • Mac, iOS, Olympus OM-D E-M1, Epson 3880
    • Bob Rockefeller
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #35 on: December 26, 2016, 07:41:57 am »

My own analysis of the Raw conversions leads me to the conclusion that they used some sort of algorithm of their own that uses noise reduction and (too much) sharpening. Other converters do none of those, although they may apply a default to the subsequent controls that the user can then reduce to zero if they like.

This is more in line with what I would have guessed: ON1 created their own algorithm, perhaps by combining and customizing publicly available ones.

What is interesting is that they have opted to "bake in" certain adjustments during the demosaicing that cannot be reversed using their adjustments UI. I would think that adjustment defaults would be added such that they could be adjusted by the user.

And it certainly makes comparing the base conversions between converters very difficult.

I suppose I'll come back and look at ON1 again, after they've added some of the more important (to me) features on their development roadmap. I give them kudos for having a more public development process.
Logged
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA   www.bobrockefeller.com

dseelig

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 595
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #36 on: January 21, 2017, 03:47:49 pm »

I tried today with the latest version but it crashes constantly so no go for me now
Logged

Alan Smallbone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 788
    • APS Photography
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #37 on: January 25, 2017, 09:17:07 am »

I tried today with the latest version but it crashes constantly so no go for me now

What kind of system? I have not had a crash yet with Win 10, 16gb ram and plenty of disk space.

Alan
Logged
Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA

mburke

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 70
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #38 on: January 26, 2017, 07:03:56 am »

I have been using Photo Raw since the first version. Very early on I had 2-3 crashes. Haven't had one in a month. I've been very pleased with everything about PRaw. It should be even better as they add features. For the landscapes I do and the amount of photos I do it works really well. I use Win10, I-7, 16 g ram. They have some wonderful tutorials. It can be very powerful when using the protection and apply to functions on all of the effects.
Logged

Bob Rockefeller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 543
  • Mac, iOS, Olympus OM-D E-M1, Epson 3880
    • Bob Rockefeller
Re: Early ON1 Photo RAW testing?
« Reply #39 on: January 26, 2017, 07:44:48 am »

I have been using Photo Raw since the first version. Very early on I had 2-3 crashes. Haven't had one in a month. I've been very pleased with everything about PRaw. It should be even better as they add features. For the landscapes I do and the amount of photos I do it works really well. I use Win10, I-7, 16 g ram. They have some wonderful tutorials. It can be very powerful when using the protection and apply to functions on all of the effects.

Have you been satisfied with the RAW conversion quality compared to ACR (or Capture One)?
Logged
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA   www.bobrockefeller.com
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up