At 11/24/2020 04:53 PM, Mike wrote:
>WS writes:
><<I was curious how many more pixels Helicon Focus raw converter used compared
>to
><<<what ACR does.
>
>My practice is to use raw converters I know well as don't trust stacking
>software converters. If don't stack in PS will use DXO or ACR converter wit
>all images to be stacked processed all the same or nearly so and stack saved
>tiff files then export a stacked TIFF back to PS.
>Modest variations in lighting can be handle by most stacking software but best
>to tweak by hand, IMO if that happens. The stacking software is very very
>good at what it does but demosaicing is not a strength.
>YMMV,
>
>My 2c, Mike
Helicon Focus converter does well for Sonie raw and handles some exposure
variation between shots. If I have 30 shots to stack, it is a lot easier to
adjust to my liking after it has stacked the image rather than process each
individual image, ugh.
I discovered my camera setting mistake causing missing pixels in ACR.
Perhaps the raw files from some cameras may need that level of control?
To quote HeliconSoft:
"Helicon Focus Pro now has got another truly valuable feature ? it can process
raw files in their native color space. It means that color balance and
highlights clipping ? which are the most destructive operations of all the
postprocessing/raw development ? can now be done after focus stacking is
completed."
WayneS
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|