Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Fast Raw Viewer  (Read 134626 times)

alain

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 442
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #60 on: February 08, 2015, 12:12:53 pm »

Better to simply open another instance of FRV and then you'll have the image (to be compared) on permanent display ..

But then I still have to go to it first.  The decision to view a picture 20 places back occur when I see the current one.
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 769
version 1.0.5
« Reply #61 on: February 16, 2015, 03:14:53 pm »

In 1.0.5 we are trying to address the request to delete files. Among some other things, we added "Clean _Rejected" to delete the unwanted files.
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 769
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #62 on: April 21, 2015, 12:31:30 pm »

After quite some time of beta testing we are releasing FastRawViewer Release Candidate. Trial period is reset. Downloads are at http://updates.fastrawviewer.com/data/110rc1/

Please excuse "What's new" not being yet translated.
As you can see, we added filmstrip, folder tree; and many other features.
Logged

Redcrown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 376
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #63 on: April 21, 2015, 01:59:34 pm »

Thanks, Iliah, but can you please tell us which of those exe to use?

For me, which one for Windows 7 64bit?
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 769
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #64 on: April 21, 2015, 02:05:19 pm »

You can start with FastRawViewer-1.1.0.622-RC1-x64-DX9-Setup.exe - it is what we generally recommend.

If your videocard is relatively modern, like Nvidia GTX4xx and newer, AMD/ATI HD5xxx and newer, or Intel HD5xxx - you can try OpenGL version:
FastRawViewer-1.1.0.622-RC1-x64-OpenGL-Setup.exe - it is slightly faster. If it won't work for you, just reinstall DX9 version.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2015, 08:14:20 am by Iliah »
Logged

FranciscoDisilvestro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1470
    • Frank Disilvestro
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #65 on: April 21, 2015, 02:14:22 pm »

Awesome!

kirkt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 571
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #66 on: April 21, 2015, 08:03:36 pm »

Really nice work.  Thanks Iliah.

kirk
Logged

Redcrown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 376
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #67 on: April 22, 2015, 03:06:24 am »

After a 2 hour review... Outstanding program. I had passed on the initial version due to lack of features like navigation and thumbs. This release is great. Very fast, easy to use, and everything you need to analyze raw quality.

For the future, I suggest one more feature. Add a filter to display by rating stars or lables. And then add the ability to select multiple files (even select all of one rating) for moves to reject or other folders. Just like Adobe Bridge.

When culling, I like to tag images as "best", "seconds", and "junk-delete". But I like to keep them all visible until I'm done reviewing everything and then move or delete images.

With this version of FRV I can do the tagging using lables or star ratings, but then I can't say "show me just the best" and I can't say "move all the seconds to a separate folder".
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 769
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #68 on: April 22, 2015, 08:22:03 am »

We have those features in our ToDo list ;)
Logged

alain

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 442
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #69 on: April 22, 2015, 05:26:28 pm »

After quite some time of beta testing we are releasing FastRawViewer Release Candidate. Trial period is reset. Downloads are at http://updates.fastrawviewer.com/data/110rc1/

Please excuse "What's new" not being yet translated.
As you can see, we added filmstrip, folder tree; and many other features.

First test of the RC went very smooth.  I've noticed that the film strip can be placed on a second monitor and can be made into a light box (several rows).
Logged

Lundberg02

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 379
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #70 on: April 23, 2015, 12:16:03 am »

Why no Mac version?
Logged

AlterEgo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1995
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #71 on: April 23, 2015, 12:31:51 am »

Why no Mac version?
I can see FastRawViewer-1.1.0.622-RC1.dmg  available for download
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 769
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #72 on: April 23, 2015, 08:30:55 am »

Why no Mac version?

Just in case, all RC1 files are here:
http://updates.fastrawviewer.com/data/110rc1/

OS X version is available among those, but here is a direct link to it, too
http://updates.fastrawviewer.com/data/110rc1/FastRawViewer-1.1.0.622-RC1.dmg
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 769
1.1 RC2 is available
« Reply #73 on: April 24, 2015, 09:39:47 am »

http://www.fastrawviewer.com/forum/fast-raw-viewer-110-RC2
You can find "What's New" and a link to User Manual there, too.

Thank you very much for testing and feedback.
Logged

jrp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 293
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #74 on: April 25, 2015, 07:26:45 am »

What is the USP of this viewer over FastOne, Fast Picture Viewer, etc, etc? If it is just that it produces a more accurate histogram I wonder whether it is solving a real problem, other than for those interested in technical raw data processing?
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 769
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #75 on: April 25, 2015, 08:24:32 am »

>  it produces a more accurate histogram
Not "more accurate", but simply accurate.

The problem however is much more general. There is significant difference between the data in JPEG and data in raw. It is not just histogram. If one shoots raw, he needs to see raw, and not some unknown uncontrolled interpretation.

FastRawViewer supports more cameras than any other viewer.

FastRawViewer allows to set conversion parameters instantly.

FastRawViewer saves a lot of time, offloading the need to build full size previews when importing the whole shot into, say, Lr - as it allows to cull with confidence.

Logged

AlterEgo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1995
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #76 on: April 25, 2015, 11:00:15 am »

>  it produces a more accurate histogram
Not "more accurate", but simply accurate.
exactly as accurate as rawdigger ?
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 769
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #77 on: April 25, 2015, 11:53:25 am »

exactly as accurate as rawdigger ?


The difference is that RawDigger has tools to manipulate the histogram view (change the number of bins and scale), while FastRawViewer does not. The accuracy of the histogram calculation is the same for both programs.
Logged

jrp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 293
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #78 on: April 25, 2015, 06:16:24 pm »

OK, so what practical problem does having an accurate histogram solve?  Does it tell you whether there are highlights or shadows that can be recovered with Adobe Camera Raw, for example?  If so, how often is that a key factor in the workflow of taking a bunch of images from a shoot, culling and processing them?  Why would looking at the out of camera JPEG not be a better starting point for triage?
Logged

Iliah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 769
Re: Fast Raw Viewer
« Reply #79 on: April 25, 2015, 06:52:03 pm »

> Does it tell you whether there are highlights or shadows that can be recovered with Adobe Camera Raw, for example?

Yes, among other things.

> how often is that a key factor in the workflow of taking a bunch of images from a shoot, culling and processing them?

When bracketing a high dynamic range scene, it is often a key factor. Correct exposure is considered in photography to be one of key factors, no?

> Why would looking at the out of camera JPEG not be a better starting point for triage?

Because JPEG has nearly nothing to do with the raw data. It will show you wrong brightness, and can easily show red or blue channels being blown out when in fact they are underexposed.

> OK, so what practical problem does having an accurate histogram solve?

May I ask why are you willing to concentrate on just one thing, histogram?
« Last Edit: April 25, 2015, 06:53:48 pm by Iliah »
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8   Go Up