Phil Askey\'s quote was based on a Nikon D300 file. Being a newish DSLR it could just be that Bibble did a better job in their initial support for that camera. RAW processor results are very camera dependant.
cogitech wrote: Pixel Perfect wrote: foto-z wrote:
Looks interesting, but at the end of the day I\'d have to test the basic image quality. Not all raw processors are equal when it comes to demosaicing, colour, etc.
I was always underwhelmed by Bibble\'s ability to extract detail and the colours weren\'t great. Hopefully v5 is much better.
You haven\'t tried it in a while then. Phil Askey of DPReview states: “The image with the most resolution and fewest artifacts appears to be that produced by Bibble Pro”.
Phil Askey\'s quote was based on a Nikon D300 file. Being a newish DSLR it could just be that Bibble did a better job in their initial support for that camera. RAW processor results are very camera dependant.
cogitech wrote: Pixel Perfect wrote: foto-z wrote:
Looks interesting, but at the end of the day I\'d have to test the basic image quality. Not all raw processors are equal when it comes to demosaicing, colour, etc.
I was always underwhelmed by Bibble\'s ability to extract detail and the colours weren\'t great. Hopefully v5 is much better.
You haven\'t tried it in a while then. Phil Askey of DPReview states: “The image with the most resolution and fewest artifacts appears to be that produced by Bibble Pro”.
Sep 17, 2008 at 05:44 PM
Previous versions of pdmphoto's message #6179608 « Bibble 5 »
