Sniff...sniff (nose in air)...I don't need no stinkin' expensive converter software; I already got 2 and one of those cost me $105! he said (sort of).
Last week I bought Adobe's Camera Raw (that was the $105), and I started noticing more color noise in the dark sections of my newly converted images. Then my friend Jim got me thinking, and then I read all the threads about this on Miranda and Galbraith, and then I downloaded Phase One's Capture One DSLR Monday nite, and...guess what...I DO need a stinkin' expensive converter program. DAMN!
In preliminary results, Capture One DSLR (C1) was the clear winner--LOTS less noise but detail retained--over Canon FVU and Adobe Camera Raw, with ACR's results the noisiest. My friend reminded me that others have said that one must use some smoothing in ACR (I had used zero each for sharpness and smoothness), so I then used ACR's defaults for sharpness and smoothness, 25 each. Most of the noise was gone, but so was lots of the detail (hmm...maybe Adobe's smoothness filter is just gaussian blur!). So I converted again using 25 sharpness and 15 smoothness, and then 25 sharpness and 10 smoothness. Some of the detail came back with each reduction of smoothing but so did some of the noise.
I then figured out...no easy task with the useless online Help (what a laugh!) and User's Guide...how to set C1's noise suppression (File/Preferences/Develop settings). Discovered that Medium was used for the prelims; set it to Low and converted again. I saw slightly more noise and maybe slightly more detail with it on Low rather than Medium. I'll have to live with this for a few days to see what real images (prints) look like, but C1's results still look better than the other 2's results.
Overall, there's still no contest for me--C1 is the best, even if it is clunky to use. Its 'unintuitiveness' reminds me of the difference between the D60's and 1Ds's menuing systems--the D60's is effective and easy to use while the 1Ds's is difficult to use and effective in spite of itself.
Please e-mail me if you'd like to see my 8 samples. 100% crops in 8-bit TIFs will occupy about 900K, or if you want smaller files, quality-12 JPGs will occupy about 300K. If you don't state which you want, you'll get the JPGs.
It would be great if PhaseOne would take a page from Microsoft's sales manual and price C1 at 99$ rather than 500$. They would probably sell 10 times as many copies and it would be a no-brainer to buy their software. Of course that would eliminate all the threads analyzing which RAW convertor is better.
Jeffrey,
Thanks for posting yoru observations. I'm eager to try C1 since a Mac version is now available - but I've been reading about serious problems with this version. Here is a thread from robgalbraith.com:
"I can convert in 16bit my 1D raw files, but I've tried to convert in 16bit a 1Ds file I've download from the net and C1 converts it always in 8bit (I can see it when I open the image in PS).
File size boxes are not active, even if you *could* achieve a given file size using the scaling box.
As mentioned, the "set as default for new captures" button is not active, ditto for the "Automatic adjust" button.
Mac version lacks also:
- Color editor
- Noise reduction setting
- De-Moirize filter as PS plug-in "
For me, the lack of 16-bit conversions and control over the noise reduction are show-stoppers. I hope Phase1 addresses these issues pronto!
Ya know, I hear all this about how great C1 is, but I have yet to see any substantive examples showing the difference. How about a sample comparison of C1 to ACR, without any sharpening or color adjustment -- just a straight conversion?
I find C1 anything BUT clunky. IMO it's interface is a model of logical, flexible, and efficient design. I've also updated my comparision to include Adobe CR. http://www.lashier.com/home.cfm?dir_cat=20503 Of particular note are the noise issues that you mentioned. Check the two "the gory details" pages for examples.
Bottom line for me, CR is a JOKE. It'll serve fine for consumers posting or emailing web pics or printing snapshots, but it's not even close to being a pro tool. IMO (re 1D images anyway) you're better off just shooting jpeg.
>. Check the two "the gory details" pages for examples.
Good examples DL, I have come to the same conclusion as you. Although the Adobe program is fast & easy to use, if image quality is important to you the Adobe RC is totally worthless(you are better off using the free software that comes with the camera).
I was really excited about the Adobe RC when it first came out & purchased it immediately figuring it could go hand in hand with CaptureOne, but unfortunately that did not turn out to be the case. Thankfully Adobe offers a 30 day refund policy so I can recoup the $99 I wasted on this useless program.
I really hope Adobe improves the converter so when PS version 8 comes out it works correctly.
It depends on what you mean by better I think. I find that with 1Ds files, I get more detail in the shadow area of an image converted with C1 than with Yarc. That doesn't always look better however. I think Yarc is a superb product that everyone should own(obviously not everybody is going to spend $500 on C1).
I called Adobe today & will be receiveing a refund on the CR program.
I repeat my offer to e-mail to anyone who asks my 8 100%-crop samples, either quality-12 JPGs or 8bit TIFs. The former total about 300KB, the latter 900KB.
just thought I would throw my link in here and what I found
I will make C1 my main tool now
I will still keep Addobe in my system for pulling in work etc.. not sure it will get used much ??
http://216.197.110.125/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB29&Number=113259
jwarthman wrote:
Von Thomas makes some observations:
"I can convert in 16bit my 1D raw files, but I've tried to convert in 16bit a 1Ds file I've download from the net and C1 converts it always in 8bit (I can see it when I open the image in PS).
File size boxes are not active, even if you *could* achieve a given file size using the scaling box.
As mentioned, the "set as default for new captures" button is not active, ditto for the "Automatic adjust" button.
Mac version lacks also:
- Color editor
- Noise reduction setting
- De-Moirize filter as PS plug-in "
Jack Flesher wrote:
Ya know, I hear all this about how great C1 is, but I have yet to see any substantive examples showing the difference. How about a sample comparison of C1 to ACR, without any sharpening or color adjustment -- just a straight conversion?
Ok, folks, ... got an email from Kenneth Laerke, Vice President of PhaseOne this morning (actually sent yesterday but I read it this morning, probably they're sending the same thing to registered or non-registered users as well, also PhaseOne used Chad's samples in their email), so now PhasOne is collecting the comparison samples, anyone who win the contest will have the chance to win a free product key, hey that's 500 dollars so maybe you guys want to give it a try?
Please provide the following information when you post your images to [email protected];
Name
Address
Zip / City
Country
E-mail
Phone
Phase One has the rights to use the images
Software conversion data (brand)
Camera data (brand)
Raw files
Please attach the Raw file
Jpeg file
Please attach the jpeg file
I was too busy these days yesterday went to demo something to a big guy now I have to come back in office and maybe it's another 30-40 hours straight ahead ... most of you guys are really so lucky to have some time to get your hands on your hobbies or run in-depth research like this ... keep up your good job and have fun
so maybe you guys want to give it a try?