[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] !Re: Re: RAW

Subject: [OM] !Re: Re: RAW
From: "C.H.Ling" <chling@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 23:59:14 +0800
I didn't found a RAW converter has better resolution, may be one or two has 
poorer resolution but not Olympus RAW, C1 or Photoshop CS I have tried, 
Vuescan has very poor color rendering (may be it need a profile to work) I'm 
really not interested in it. For exposure latitude, C1 can save 1 stop or 
more on the high end. Being a pro like you I think you need to try out the 
C1, it lets you work much much faster especially when you have to make 
adjustment on each image.

Talking about resolution, for Olympus RAW you better set the sharpness to -5 
and save to 8 or 16 bit tiff then sharpen it in PS later. For C1 the 
built-in sharpening tool is very good, the noise filtering tool is also 
fine. Of course it is not as good as the special noise filter program but it 
is fast and integrated in the RAW convertion. I use NeatImage if necessary, 
make a batch filtration for all 16 bit tiff I converted, exposure adjustment 
in PS and sharpen the last step.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "AG Schnozz" <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx>

> This is interesting. I'm rather liking the Olympus RAW converter
> for the overall quality of the images. My only beef remains with
> the WB bias in both the E-1 and the RAW converter. I've got to
> adjust the blue gamma on my pictures to get the fleshtones right
> where I want them.
> I've been experimenting around with the RAW conversion in
> VueScan. Common wisdom is that VueScan uses the DCRAW engine. I
> would believe it, since the same rasping artifacts in a DCRAW
> conversion are present in the VueScan conversion. Does
> VueScan/DCRAW create a "sharper" conversion than Olympus' RAW
> converter?  Yes. Is it noisier?  Yes, and the noise is a pattern
> noise which looks like the debayer algorithm is merging the data
> one pixel position off.  A quick pass through a noise removal
> program (I use Noiseware with very low settings) helps.
> How about latitude?  The VueScan conversion gives me about 1/2
> stop more usable latitude on the high end. The low end is
> cleaner with Olympus' converter.  I'm experimenting with a
> hybrid approach where I do a conversion with both the VueScan
> and Olympus converters and merge them together in layers. One
> trick is to take the VueScan conversion--kept in linear and
> merge it on top of the Olympus conversion in a "darken only"
> mode. This way, the VueScan layer only fills in the highlight
> areas and doesn't affect the mids and shadows.
> AG

List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz