Here are my attempts. I wasn't there to see what Victor shot so files are my interpretation of the scene. I don't believe auto setting tell you anything, so admittedly these crops are limited by my skill.
Yeah, we did go off topic. Raw Developer may hold more detail, but what I see is cleaner tonal gradation. The converter in Lightroom is the same as ACR, but you have a lot more control over what is happening. It would be interesting to run a calibration on the DMR and then reprocess in Lightroom with the profile.
After a few minutes of hindsight I would say that the ACR raw converter just is not as good as RD and others. I think RD offers a more neutral and accurate image, but sometimes the ability to tweak your image by huge amounts in the raw stage is more important than anything else and Lightroom wins big there.
I've been using RAW Developer since December 2004 with my Canon files. I started using it also a few months back when they added support for my Leaf files. Then with the last update, I added processing my Leica DMR files with it as well.
I've found that RAW Developer gives better detail, smoother tonal range, and for some reason, more accurate color than my other options. Strange to say, given it is only a $99 package. I just processed out almost 100 DMR selects from this weeks shooting using RAW Developer for all of them. Just for a gut check, I did process a couple of the same images in ACR & Lightroom. Not even close. If you are on a Mac, check it out, you won't be sorry.
Good information on RD. I guess we are stuck with our $499 C1 solution until there is a PC Raw Developer.
Is that in the works?
Actually, although the interface is really awful ( and I do ot mean full of awe!) the Raw SHOOTER is pretty good too.
BTW I agree that some more standard target may be better, but I have found that natureprovides a very good challenge in both range of detail that you can SEE and also color differences thancfan be perceived (as in the grades in the blooms. Also, trees/ banches have traditionally provided a good way to see focus range/bokeh and also edge detai (lots of edges
Dear Bill
Glad you were able to test the other two. Rd looks good.
BTW the crops dont look 100% at least they seem smaller than what happened when I cropped from 'actual pixels' in PS.
Also, is it possible to re-run the lightroom and RD with their defaults? For workflow considerations a lot of us I think would like to reduce raw manipulation and basically get a ggod broad gamut image into Tiff for PS fixing.
Curious since I just used default settings for the others.
I usually then review and pick winners for PS and plug fixes.
I've had a play with RAW Developer and I can't say I'm impressed. I did try with some DMR files and preferred C1 for colour and detail. As this is a thread about MF, here is a comparison between C1 and RD with a P25 file.
The C1 is is straight out of the box, just auto levels and the sharpening is default, amount 25, threshold 3. Importing into DR took a LOT more work to get anywhere near the colour. I used the P25 product flash as the import profile (same a s C1). The sharepenig on RD is the Hybrid smooth amount 10, sharpen 6 (the default I believe). Grey balanced to the same spot. Not a scientific test, no Macbeth card, but the colours on the C1 are just so much nicer (and, if memory of the subject serves, more accurate)... with no effort.
As far as detail goes, I can't see any real difference. I think the default sharpening on the RD is stronger but I usually apply more sharpening to C1 files for repro and can certainly make them pop more. Just as a note, noise reduction and banding suppression is on by default when you install C1, I wonder if this has affected other reviews. Maybe I'm missing something but, at the moment, I think I'll put the $99 towards another bit of Leica glass .
I know several people here have followed the medium forum thread on Rob Galbraith's site for a while now. As of today RobGalbraith.com just closed their forum to posts pending finding a buyer. They posted a FAQ about it here: http://forums.robgalbraith.com/showrules.php?Cat=
I hope it is appropriate to post this information on this thread as we've all be interested in this topic.
Wow, you guy's really got into this. On other groups I'm lucky to get one vague response.
Paul, based on the JPEGs you provided it looks very clear to me that the RD image is much more neutral and detailed than the C1, but I do not know what the actual subject matter looks like. From my brief experience with RD and with the Leica DNG files, the hybrid sharpening is one of the aspects of the software I like the most. It makes for a nice capture sharpening for archiving that can be later augmented for specific output sharpening in Photoshop. I really do not care for the sharpening routines in ACR.
Victor, I agree that nature makes for good test images. I do not think that keeping default settings are that useful, except to maintain a false sense of consistency. It makes for more straightforward testing and comparing, but we ought to really try on flex these program's muscles as much as we can to see how good a quality we can achieve for each raw processor. Then compare the best efforts. Just my opinion.
You know, if this is to continue perhaps we should start a new thread so as to continue looking into the best raw processing for Leica DNG files. I really believe that, other than lens quality, what we do to the raw files will make or break the image quality.
I was following the Medium Format Digital Forum on Galbraith's site and this news is shocking. That forum had lots of problems lately with some very heavy handed moderator editing or censorship or whatever you want to call it. The MF digital forum was one of the best, but Galbraith's site is WEIRD.
gogopix wrote:
BTW the crops dont look 100% at least they seem smaller than what happened when I cropped from 'actual pixels' in PS.
Also, is it possible to re-run the lightroom and RD with their defaults? For workflow considerations a lot of us I think would like to reduce raw manipulation and basically get a ggod broad gamut image into Tiff for PS fixing.
Curious since I just used default settings for the others.
Per Victors request, larger and defaults. Lightroom doesn't really have a default, rather four canned settings with increasing contrast using the preset curves from ACR, but here is the setting titled "Lightroom Default"
With Galbraith closing we may see more MF people here. Let's spread the word. I do not think there is another forum that touches MF with exception of LL.
I think MF and Leica discussion provide an interesting counterpoint, and Leica users seem every bit as aware and willing to explore.
.