Ok, am sitting here looking at the files after taking the TrailerBlad (500cm & P25v) out for a test drive, and have a few thoughts. First off is I can get used to this. As Victor has pointed out, there's a bit of detail in there, and while I'd love a P45, I think I'll be ok for the moment, even though I'm carrying what would've been my beloved Land Rover Defender around in a backpack. Second is that TrailerBlad is ghettOO. The cable for the back and lens gets in the way, and switching back and forth from vert to landscape and back again is for the birds. H series is much better in that regard even with all the bells and whistles. But TBlad scores some points because everyone thinks you're futzing with an ancient relic so they pay no attention unless you get caught chimping. Gonna head out tomorrow with tripod in tow and really work this thing...must wear trucker hat and wifebeater for added effect...Guy, I'll get some pix up soon.
I would love to see those Eric as many of the older Zeiss T* lenses don't look like they test out all that well. I would like to know what can be done with a TB
For Reichmann the latest is always the best. A syndrome shared by many pros - as usually, if you can do X well, doing X sharper and bigger is considered imprssive ...
I am retreating into a world of blur in my personal photography to escape this competition.
Actually the MF is right on for color. For one thing the different FOV of 35mm and MF make the MF look at sky and 35mm look at tree
second, I think collor for 35 needed to be cooler to get close to real color and so C1 may have added a bit of blue.
Biggest thing you are seeing is curves. The MF shot was at least 3-4 stop less light so I needed to boost shadow to just even see. Even with that (means theMF file had COMPRESSED detail, imagine what a full sun file would look like!)
I am giving up on this color bit.
Time to change subject matter. Maybe I take a dog picture - nope dont have dog. Oh well.....
.The MF gets the negra magnolia blooms right even in the shadows
while the bloom in DMR is wayoff. EVERYTHING else actually is ok in leica. It is, JUst as Guy has pointed out before in the REDS.
Note to all; I had same reds problem before with my Kodak back (the 16 bit 16 MP)
SO, still room for improvement
I am going to try different raw converters this may be an excellent file for DMR to check this problem.
Now back to my samples; the sole idea is to show the detail, I didnt take time with others (also frustrated I couldn't get blooms right )
@gogopix.
Your leica shots are still impressive. The lack of pixels is clearly visible in the L images but the dynamic range is very good. In your crop, I see the common C1 effect like with my canon files --->loss of material/color transition.
It could be great if you use SilkyPix - SP is not very good at sharpening but usually reveals more colors and material, better transition than C1 (or RSP).
At least for my eyes.
flexcolor (really s---ks, cant even open file sensibly. interface by de Sade I think
ACR ho hum, but like Flexclr want to default brighten (so maybe lose some detail?)
C1 default
Silkypix
No sharpening, please no comment on whether exactly best focus (I just pick a part of screen got too lazy to optimize)
purpose here is to se
1 any color difference
2. any detail difference
3. Overall handling of sceen
Irf this shows big differences then I may try different image
BTW ALL from the DNG RAW (as you would expect) all developed to TIFF 16 bit
then convertto 8 bit, sRGB and jpg
how you find interesting
DCan't wait to see what it looks like on the FM screen (always big surprise!)
Flx really notACR good detail, but little washed out
C1 maybe too dark but even so, look close at dark shadow, can STILL see some detail in dark)
Silkypix, good detail and slightly brighter than C1 but not quite as much detail
Of course, only one shot (also, ALL converter I just kept default settings, right from camera, but if ACR for example wants to change exposure etc I let it. All on same footing.
Note, many of us say we want BEST image but cannot spend all day.(
ok on eMORE
I finally got rawshooter, although their site is mostly down. Couldnt register, failed many times, then it finally let me convert. Is this really a favorite of some out their?
Let's see the image
(but Michael T really needs to help them with their site. His tutorial on raworkflow is pretty good
I must say, rawshooter does pick up detail. Look at the branch just right of center at bottom. Go up about 2 inches on stem. There is a lot of detail, and it matches detail of C1 and also ACR has some. the flxcolor is a washout here, BUT surprising - Silkypix also loses detail here!
So I think maybe C1 and Rawshooter are so far best, at least for this example. Who knows, different day, different phase of moon, maybe other converter is better
Best way to compare, just open second browser to the forum and compare side by side
Comments from the very sharp eyes out there? is this typical?
Hello to Victor and Guy,
I'm a new R9DMR user and this is my first post. At this point I'm mostly interested in raw processing my DNG files, so I much appreciate Victor's recent efforts (and of course Guy's boundless Canon/DMR thread!).
The latest word is that Raw Developer from Iridient is producing more/better detail on PhaseOne P25/45 files than even PhaseOne's own C1Pro. There may be other practical reasons for using C1Pro but apparently detail retention isn't one of them. Have any of you tried this comparison with DMR raw files? I'm using Raw Developer and really like it but I am looking for whatever raw processor works best with my DMR files. I need best-in-class detail retention and low/no noise for very large color enlargements. Color accuracy is secondary as I do not mind tweaking that in Photoshop.
Raw Developer is Mac OSX only and it processes just about everything including Leaf Valeo/Aptus, PhaseOne P-series, Leica DMR, Digilux2, even Epson R-D1 (in other words all the cool cameras, along with the popular ones). If C1Pro is really best I would go ahead and get it. Just curious if any of you have tried most of the raw processors for the DMR and what the general verdict is?
Thanks.
Thanks, Guy.
End of 2006 you'll be able to use any raw software you like with BootCamp on any IntelMac.
Thanks for the info. Again, that endless thread is incredible and this one I think also has much potential. I don't know anyone else discussing and comparing the DMR, other DSLRs and MF backs together. So far it's been an eye opener!
By the way, who is Chuck and where can I find his commentary regarding Raw Developer vs C1Pro?
Thanks again.
)
