Open Photography Forums  
HOME FORUMS NEWS FAQ SEARCH

Go Back   Open Photography Forums > Digital Darkroom > Image Processing and Workflow

Image Processing and Workflow RAW, DNG , TIFF and JPG. From Capture to Ready for Publish/Display. All software and techniques used within an image workflow, (except extensive retouching and repair or DAM).

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 9th, 2010, 06:01 AM
janet Smith janet Smith is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cem_Usakligil View Post
Hi Jan,

Your analysis of this photo is spot on, as I have wrestled with the questions you've posed. I have tried dimming down the bright light, cloned it out and also tried a crop as well. In the end, I have decided to leave it in as such. The reason being; it is a very unusual position for a strong light source like that to be visible in a picture. As such, it makes the looker to rethink their frame of mind and it also provides clues to the unusual situation going on in this scene. And it feels better to me personally, which is no unimportant reason ;-)

As you wrote, it is amazing to have these results using the modern cameras and the raw conversion software. DxO is a very powerful raw converter, which I use as my main converter along with the Capture One for images with potential (or with lens/noise problems, especially when using the 17mm end of the 17-40). For occasional conversions or for the web, I use LR/ACR most of the time. DxO is easy to use, much like LR, but one has to learn to work with it properly to get the best results out of it (like any other application). For example, my harbour photos of Antwerpen were almost HDR like (a huge dynamic range involved) thanks to a creative way of converting single frames using DxO. Also, DxO compensates for the lens softness (if your lenses are supported, but most EF lenses are for the 5DII) using a deconvolution algorithm, which is my main preference for capture sharpening. And denoising algorithms of DxO are very powerful, as can be seen in these images. I have tried converting them using Capture One as well, but the results were nowhere near. Mind you, C1 works miracles for most images and it may provide a somewhat cleaner image than DxO if a sharp lens is used and the exposure of the picture is correct. Please ask away any questions you might have :-)
First question:

How do DxO and C1 compare to DPP, do you think they're both better than DPP? The 24 - 105 lens that I have seems to suffer from CA which DPP is quite helpful in correcting.

I'd like to refine my workflow before my next trips to the Hebrides, so now could be a good time to try before I get really busy.....
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old March 9th, 2010, 06:22 AM
Cem_Usakligil Cem_Usakligil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,940
Default

Hi Jan,

I have split the technical discussions originated in this thread to this one in the appropriate forum.

Cheers,
__________________
Kind Regards, Cem

flickr
website
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old March 9th, 2010, 07:02 AM
Cem_Usakligil Cem_Usakligil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by janet Smith View Post
First question:

How do DxO and C1 compare to DPP, do you think they're both better than DPP? The 24 - 105 lens that I have seems to suffer from CA which DPP is quite helpful in correcting.

I'd like to refine my workflow before my next trips to the Hebrides, so now could be a good time to try before I get really busy.....
Hi Jan,

According to my hands on experience, both DxO and C1 are definitely better raw converters compared to DPP. This does not mean that DPP is not good enough, on the contrary! But it has limited possibilities for selective color adjustments, noise reduction and correcting the lighting problems such as recovering blown out highlights, etc. And the user interface is awkward. But it is still a very good choice if one does not want to invest money in other raw converters. One typical advantage of DPP is the automatic correction of vignetting per lens type, but this is also the case with DxO. And in C1 the same can be achieved albeit by entering a manual parameter.

Re. the CA corrections, both DxO and C1 are very good at it, they will definitely do the job as well as DPP does.

Workflow with raw files is something which continuously evolves as the applications are being updated and improved all the time. So do not worry about getting things in order before going to the Hebrides. Once you settle on a raw converter and the workflow around it, you can always revisit your past shots and redevelop them using the better software/workflow. I do this all the time, i.e. revisit old pictures from years back and see what I can achieve now compared to what I did back then. Most of the time, there is a definitive improvement. And to me, this is one of the most important reasons for shooting raw. Future software (such as better de-mosaicing algorithms of the Bayer-matrix) will improve things greatly, and I can take advantage of it since my pictures are shot in raw format.

Ask away anything you want to know, there will be others who will chime in with answers as well :-).

Cheers,
__________________
Kind Regards, Cem

flickr
website
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old March 9th, 2010, 07:50 AM
janet Smith janet Smith is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cem_Usakligil View Post
One typical advantage of DPP is the automatic correction of vignetting per lens type, but this is also the case with DxO. And in C1 the same can be achieved albeit by entering a manual parameter.......

Re. the CA corrections, both DxO and C1 are very good at it, they will definitely do the job as well as DPP does.
Hi Cem

Thank you - I just visited DxO website and found that v6 is not available yet for Mac, but they have an offer if you get v5 now you can upgrade to v6 FOC when it's available soon....

Here come the questions.....

Which version of DxO are you using?

Do you know if there's much difference between v5 & v6?

Are they very similar to use?

How do you think DxO would handle the harsh light in the photos I've just got of the Lakes, do you think I'd see significant improvements if processed with DxO? If so - what?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old March 9th, 2010, 08:22 AM
Cem_Usakligil Cem_Usakligil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by janet Smith View Post
Hi Cem

Thank you - I just visited DxO website and found that v6 is not available yet for Mac, but they have an offer if you get v5 now you can upgrade to v6 FOC when it's available soon....

Here come the questions.....

Which version of DxO are you using?

Do you know if there's much difference between v5 & v6?

Are they very similar to use?

How do you think DxO would handle the harsh light in the photos I've just got of the Lakes, do you think I'd see significant improvements if processed with DxO? If so - what?
Jan,

I use version 6 of DxO on the PC. I don't know what differences there are between the Mac and the PC versions. There is a an improvement in the IQ of the images using v6 compared to v5. Usability of both versions is the same.

Re. the Lakes pictures, you can find out easily by downloading a demo version and having a go at them. Or send the raw files to me and I'll convert them using v6. Mind you, while DxO is good in correcting lens aberrations, noise and dynamic range issues, it cannot work miracles to introduce a heavenly light when in reality it was very harsh, lol. Well, we can find out if we test your files anyway.


Cheers,
__________________
Kind Regards, Cem

flickr
website
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old March 9th, 2010, 09:19 AM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,325
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cem_Usakligil View Post
Jan,

I use version 6 of DxO on the PC. I don't know what differences there are between the Mac and the PC versions. There is a an improvement in the IQ of the images using v6 compared to v5. Usability of both versions is the same.

Re. the Lakes pictures, you can find out easily by downloading a demo version and having a go at them. Or send the raw files to me and I'll convert them using v6. Mind you, while DxO is good in correcting lens aberrations, noise and dynamic range issues, it cannot work miracles to introduce a heavenly light when in reality it was very harsh, lol. Well, we can find out if we test your files anyway.


Cheers,
It would be good to know how well DXO treats the files versus doing manual corrections. BTW. Cem, how good are you at reducing CA by putting in your own values.

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old March 9th, 2010, 09:27 AM
Mike Shimwell Mike Shimwell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,792
Default

Hi Janet

I like DXo, I find the colour rendering is also very good - rich is the word I'd use to describe it. I've not moved to v6 yet (should have done really) but v5 is already good.

One thing you should be aware of is that DXo has tended to relaease Windows versions first in a slightly buggy state and then mac quite a while later. However the upgrade is free if the new version has been announced.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old March 9th, 2010, 11:25 AM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,325
Default

[QUOTE=Mike Shimwell;93736]Hi Janet

I like DXo, I find the colour rendering is also very good - rich is the word I'd use to describe it. I've not moved to v6 yet (should have done really) but v5 is already good.[quote]


Mike and Cem,

What's the learning curve like with DXO? How does it handle large catalogs of images?

Capture One has a weird way of putting it's own folder in one's directory within the particular image folder one uses. (It's not intuitive how this works and if you try to import more to that existing catalog, it can get muddled. With the Macbook pro and just 2GB RAM Capture One kept on crashing on importing an 8GB card full of images. Now I first import the images to a folder and then load those into a session and everything works smoothly). Still, Capture one is superior to Adobe Camera RAW.

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old March 9th, 2010, 12:04 PM
janet Smith janet Smith is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cem_Usakligil View Post
Re. the Lakes pictures, you can find out easily by downloading a demo version and having a go at them. Or send the raw files to me and I'll convert them using v6. Mind you, while DxO is good in correcting lens aberrations, noise and dynamic range issues, it cannot work miracles to introduce a heavenly light when in reality it was very harsh, lol. Well, we can find out if we test your files anyway
Once again thank you for your time Cem, I can see I'm going to have to overcome my reservations and try DxO, I'm always wary when it comes to installing new software incase I have problems that I can't resolve. Also thank you for your offer, I'll send you one of my RAW files tomorrow (I'm just about to go out) see what DxO and you can do with my harsh light LOL!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old March 9th, 2010, 12:07 PM
janet Smith janet Smith is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,355
Default

Hi Mike & Asher

Thank you both too.

I'm convinced! I'll download the trail version and see how I get on with it. It'll be interesting to see.....
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old March 9th, 2010, 01:42 PM
Cem_Usakligil Cem_Usakligil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post
It would be good to know how well DXO treats the files versus doing manual corrections. BTW. Cem, how good are you at reducing CA by putting in your own values.

Asher
Hi Asher,

When I referred to putting in values manually, I was actually referring to the reducing of the vignetting. Re. the CA, DxO and C1 do it automatically and in LR one can do it by shifting two sliders and watching on the screen what the results are until they are satisfactory.

Cheers,
__________________
Kind Regards, Cem

flickr
website
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old March 9th, 2010, 01:46 PM
Cem_Usakligil Cem_Usakligil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Shimwell View Post
Hi Janet

I like DXo, I find the colour rendering is also very good - rich is the word I'd use to describe it. I've not moved to v6 yet (should have done really) but v5 is already good.

One thing you should be aware of is that DXo has tended to relaease Windows versions first in a slightly buggy state and then mac quite a while later. However the upgrade is free if the new version has been announced.

Mike
Hi Mike,

V6 is a huge IQ improvement above v5, which was already very good. The buggy releases and the horror stories of DxO taking over your computer (due to the license security s/w) are luckily a thing of the past. I have been doing all the minor and major upgrades from v5.3 upwards and I have never encountered any bugs or problems. I think that they have gotten their act together, which makes me a happy user.

Cheers,
__________________
Kind Regards, Cem

flickr
website
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old March 9th, 2010, 01:51 PM
Cem_Usakligil Cem_Usakligil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,940
Default

[QUOTE=Asher Kelman;93737][QUOTE=Mike Shimwell;93736]Hi Janet

I like DXo, I find the colour rendering is also very good - rich is the word I'd use to describe it. I've not moved to v6 yet (should have done really) but v5 is already good.
Quote:


Mike and Cem,

What's the learning curve like with DXO? How does it handle large catalogs of images?

Capture One has a weird way of putting it's own folder in one's directory within the particular image folder one uses. (It's not intuitive how this works and if you try to import more to that existing catalog, it can get muddled. With the Macbook pro and just 2GB RAM Capture One kept on crashing on importing an 8GB card full of images. Now I first import the images to a folder and then load those into a session and everything works smoothly). Still, Capture one is superior to Adobe Camera RAW.

Asher
Hi Asher,

I don't use DxO as a DAM software, which it is not obviously. So there is no relevance of a catalog size as such. One opens a folder and selects the individual files to assign them to the "project", which is a compilation of images to be handled during a session. It does batch convert them or individually. DxO doesn't create any subdirectories like C1 does. And I know about the weird behaviour you mention that C1 wants to create "proxies" of all the images in a folder once it is opened. If that folder contains many images, than it takes a long time before C1 is responsive again and it crashes occasionally. This is not an issue with DxO.

I should add that C1 version 5 crashes occasionally on my Windows 7 64 bit computer. V4 used to be more stable.

Cheers,
__________________
Kind Regards, Cem

flickr
website
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old March 9th, 2010, 01:54 PM
Cem_Usakligil Cem_Usakligil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by janet Smith View Post
Once again thank you for your time Cem, I can see I'm going to have to overcome my reservations and try DxO, I'm always wary when it comes to installing new software incase I have problems that I can't resolve. Also thank you for your offer, I'll send you one of my RAW files tomorrow (I'm just about to go out) see what DxO and you can do with my harsh light LOL!
Hi Jan,

If you don't succeed in mailing the huge raw file, try using yousendit.com.

Cheers,
__________________
Kind Regards, Cem

flickr
website
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old March 9th, 2010, 08:28 PM
Nill Toulme Nill Toulme is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 1,407
Default

C1 v5.1 has been very stable (knock wood) so far on my XP SP2 system. I really like it a lot — like it more each time I use it in fact. I keep discovering new goodies in it. Mind you, I never moved to v4.x from v3.7.x because I couldn't make the interface leap, but having been forced to v5.1 by the 1D Mark IV purchase, I could hardly be happier with it (after about ten days and a thousand frames' worth of use and learning curve).

I do not use it to import files however... still using my good old Breeze workflow tools for that and for html gallery generation.

Nill
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old March 10th, 2010, 01:03 AM
janet Smith janet Smith is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nill Toulme View Post
C1 v5.1 has been very stable (knock wood) so far on my XP SP2 system. I really like it a lot — like it more each time I use it in fact. I keep discovering new goodies in it. Mind you, I never moved to v4.x from v3.7.x because I couldn't make the interface leap, but having been forced to v5.1 by the 1D Mark IV purchase, I could hardly be happier with it (after about ten days and a thousand frames' worth of use and learning curve).

I do not use it to import files however... still using my good old Breeze workflow tools for that and for html gallery generation.
Hello Nill

Thank you for this, interesting to hear your experience too, I'm looking forward to trying it now....
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old March 10th, 2010, 05:12 AM
Leonardo Boher Leonardo Boher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Argentina
Posts: 223
Default

Don't kow if I already said it but this RAW Converter is the best I have ever used: http://www.raw-photo-processor.com/RPP/Overview.html it's a free donation based program. The quality you will get with this is better tha any other raw application. Even the D700 RAW Files looks much, much better in this app than in Capture NX itself.
__________________
My 'real' name is Martín Leonardo Prósperi.

My Port: www.quantum3studio.daportfolio.com
My Music: www.myspace.com/martinleonardoprosperi
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old March 10th, 2010, 02:30 PM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,325
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonardo Boher View Post
Don't kow if I already said it but this RAW Converter is the best I have ever used: http://www.raw-photo-processor.com/RPP/Overview.html it's a free donation based program. The quality you will get with this is better tha any other raw application. Even the D700 RAW Files looks much, much better in this app than in Capture NX itself.
Hi Leo,

I am interested to know more of your experience with RAW Photo Processor. This review of RPP is very positive, essentially claiming it's way ahead of other processors. A corollary is that the reviewer asserts that unless one has CA solved before the RAW processing, the full potential of one's digital camera is not possible. CA adjustment in software is claimed to be the most degrading process for sharpness and detail.

If someone has knowledge of the quality one can get compared to Capture One and other RAW convertors it would be very helpful. In particular, does anyone know whether Capture One uses 32 BIT LAB space for calculations too?

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old March 10th, 2010, 06:17 PM
Ruben Alfu Ruben Alfu is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Panama
Posts: 790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonardo Boher View Post
Don't kow if I already said it but this RAW Converter is the best I have ever used: http://www.raw-photo-processor.com/RPP/Overview.html it's a free donation based program. The quality you will get with this is better tha any other raw application. Even the D700 RAW Files looks much, much better in this app than in Capture NX itself.
Hola Leonardo, do you feel comfortable using this program? I have it installed in my computer and I play now and then with it. The files it output are distinctively different, and quiet pleasing IMO, sort of "analog". The reason I don´t use it that much is because I find the UI confusing, I´m not even sure what´s an appropriate workflow with this program, also there are a couple of obscure functions that I don´t find documented at all. With enough time I can fiddle with it and get a pretty decent conversion, but I´m sure the program offers much more under the hood.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old March 11th, 2010, 05:03 AM
Leonardo Boher Leonardo Boher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Argentina
Posts: 223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruben Alfu View Post
Hola Leonardo, do you feel comfortable using this program? I have it installed in my computer and I play now and then with it. The files it output are distinctively different, and quiet pleasing IMO, sort of "analog". The reason I don´t use it that much is because I find the UI confusing, I´m not even sure what´s an appropriate workflow with this program, also there are a couple of obscure functions that I don´t find documented at all. With enough time I can fiddle with it and get a pretty decent conversion, but I´m sure the program offers much more under the hood.
Well... the app is for developing the picture more for doing some artistic stuff like you can do in Lightroom. But the color accuraccy and the way the picture looks in density is incredible! For example, some pictures tend to look like an HDR without tonemapping! This means, very realistic and wider in dynamic range, without loosing contrast. I red yestarday that the app demosaices the picture each time you apply a change to the pic. About the colors, you need to check the color profile used by the app in order to get the same colors than in RPP when exporting to PS or to another app. Try not to drag the sliders, use the arrows of the keyboard to be more precise with the adjustments. I discovered yestarday that the Compressed Expossure has a little box at the left of the main box, where you can enter the value in E.V. to keep the adjustment of the main slider (Compressed Expossure) inside a range of X E.V., set in the little box.

Asher, as for the Capture One Raw Processor, I find this little app much better and accurated too. WIll post some pictures by using all the RAW Processors I have (Capture One, Capture NX, Aperture, Lightroom, Canon Digital).

Leo :)
__________________
My 'real' name is Martín Leonardo Prósperi.

My Port: www.quantum3studio.daportfolio.com
My Music: www.myspace.com/martinleonardoprosperi
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old March 11th, 2010, 05:24 AM
janet Smith janet Smith is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonardo Boher View Post
WIll post some pictures by using all the RAW Processors I have (Capture One, Capture NX, Aperture, Lightroom, Canon Digital)
Hi Leo

I'll be taking the decision about which Raw processor to buy in about 6 weeks time, and am considering C1 & DxO. I currently use DPP, Aperture and ACR, although I find that out of the software I currently have that DPP handles CA better, although I understand that DxO and C1 are as good if not better in this respect. So I'll be very interested to see your results, and hear more about the key difference you see between these applications.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
JPEG Workflow. Is it an oxymoron? Gary C-G Image Processing and Workflow 31 June 21st, 2006 06:31 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:35 AM.


Posting images or text grants license to OPF, yet © of such remain with its creator. Still, all assembled discussion © 2006-2017 Asher Kelman (all rights reserved) Posts with new theme or unusual image might be moved/copied to a new thread!