On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> I feel the same way. I never really liked Lightroom's RAW conversion
>> engine for Olympus. I disliked the colors and the WB temperature
>> numbers seem meaningless though the options available in RAW development
>> and the speed in which they work are noteworthy.
>>
>
>
> The only 3rd-Party RAW processor that comes close to Olympus' conversion
> engine is Capture One. This is particulary true when it comes to skintones.
>
> ACR's conversions just leave me wanting. First of all, I see a tremendous
> flattening of Zones II-IV with little tonal separation. And then when I
> crank the saturation up to give the images some snap, they turn into
> Disneychromes with no continuity.
>
> I was reminded this weekend that when I take the time to really focus on
> doing things right, the E-1 rewards me with an exceptional picture that
> seems to rise above the pixel limitations.
>
> AG
I'm going to work with Studio 2 for a while. It has pretty much the
same old stodgy workflow of Viewer and Studio 1. Lightroom is better
in this respect and has some tools that Studio doesn't have (but
nothing I can't get when I bring the image into PS). To me it is
important to have some sort of anchor for the color, and that anchor
is the engine in the camera. That's how I liked to work with color
with the E-1, so I think that makes sense for me with the E-3.
Unfortunately, I've never been able to develop an affinity for Capture
One. I tried it again last week. It's like SilkyPix -- so many
possibilities, but which is "right"? And I don't mean "right" so much
as the end-point but as the starting-point.
Joel W.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|