Moosedip wrote:
> AG's comments about different processors got me to run it through Viewer3,
> too.
THANK YOU, for testing my thesis. I feel like the lone wormy wolf in
the wilderness.
> So, the worms I showed are artifacts of PS's input sharpening. You'd think
> that's a problem solved.
ACR 2012 addressed a lot of issues, but some of these artifacts (as
illustrated by my sample DMC-L1 image) reveal that Adobe raw
conversion is still a second-rate converter. It's pretty good for
Nikon and Canon's greatest hits, but...
> This is most disturbing. I wouldn't so much mind converting using V3, but I
> already know it's hopeless with recovering highlights. I really don't want
> to have a dual work flow, V3 for higher ISO, ACR for highlights, then merge!
> ICK!
That still won't solve problems, because ACR is screwing up the
highlights. So you might get some improvement, but not totally.
> This really brings home how different various sensor systems can be. The
> E-M5 and GX7 seem to have such similar systems, but the same settings in ACR
> result in worms from one and not from the other.
For the DMC-L1, Silkypix is unmatched by anything else out there for
maintaining pixel and tonal integrity. Absolutely nothing else is as
good. For the E-1, Capture One rocks. Lightroom 5.x does remarkably
well with E-1 files, but not without some goobering of the curves and
saturation sliders. I've attacked some Canon files with Lightroom and
found that it seems to be a harmonious marriage.
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|