I think that probably a camera maker is able to get the best image
from their own file. After all it is not just another format to be
added to a multi file application like ACR. I know that at least one
maker adds a tag to their RAW image that is installed as firmware on
testing the color response of that camera during manufacture because
there is variability. Their own software picks up that tag and
incorporates it into the conversion. Any manufacturer that does their
own software probably does that. I also suspect that the manufacturer
goes to greater pains to extract a great image than the pair of Gretag-
MacBeth images Adobe uses to color balance ACR for each camera model.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On / February 22, 2008 CE, at 8:37 AM, C.H.Ling wrote:
>
> Depends on what you expected from Olympus Master, I'm very happy
> with it, I
> use it for RAW conversion and some basic adjustment like WB and
> exposure,
> all other jobs go to photo editing software if needed.
>
> I have not much experience on LightRoom, I have C1 V4, it has much
> better
> workflow and more powerful than Olympus Master, the price is cheaper
> than
> LightRoom. Someone on the market for RAW converter may have a look.
> Silkpix
> is also a good one, I have the free version for my Pana LX-1.
>
> BTW, there are always slight different in color with different RAW
> software,
> it may not be important to you but I prefer Olympus RAW.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|