Malcolm_Stewart
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 11/07/2005
Posts: 2578
Loc: Milton Keynes, UK
|
|
I normally shoot jpeg, upload the jpeg as a Read-only file, and do very little adjustment in PS6 as most of my shooting is for record rather than artistic purposes. Occasionally I will shoot Raw if I feel that I may need more adjustment in post-processing. The converter I use is Breezebrowser, and it works for me.
Yesterday I was surprised to see some very confidently put comment on the web that this Pro could see massive differences between one Raw converter and another, so I thought I'd do a little investigation with the converters available to me.
So I converted the same file to tiff using Breezebrowser, and Canon's Zoombrowser and DPP converters. I understand that Breezebrowser and Zoombrowser (but not DPP) use the same Canon libraries. The differences when viewed in Breezebrowser were minimal or near imaginary at best. However, when viewed in PS6 there was a significant difference in hue when viewing the DPP sourced tiff. By default, DPP had incorporated a Canon colour profile into the file, and PS6 had reacted to this change in profile. Redoing the conversion from DPP and not incorporating the Canon profile, and all files were as near identical when viewed in PS6.
Makes me wonder if something similar had caused the Pro to make his statement which started my quick investigation (during which I came across other examples on the web showing very similar effects).
(Before anyone suggests it, I'm not colour blind...)
--------------------
Malcolm Stewart
|
staccato123
enthusiast
Reged: 06/09/2006
Posts: 205
Loc: Leeds, West Yorkshire
|
|
You could try with UFRaw to add another data point, if you felt like it. I'd be interested in the results, if only because I run Linux so it's my only choice.
|
Malcolm_Stewart
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 11/07/2005
Posts: 2578
Loc: Milton Keynes, UK
|
|
Quote:
You could try with UFRaw to add another data point, if you felt like it. I'd be interested in the results, if only because I run Linux so it's my only choice.
Done.
Same file converted and somehow initially I guess the profile got added again (similar colour shift as from DPP first trial visible in UFRaw / Gimp), so I backed out and tried again this time without the change in hue, and saved as a tiff without any adjustments.
Opened in Breezebrowser and the UFRaw version now has the same hue as my other copies, but is "richer" i.e. somewhat darker than the other three. Opened in PS6 and this mirrors what I was seeing in Breezebrowser.
Looks pretty good for free.
--------------------
Malcolm Stewart
|
staccato123
enthusiast
Reged: 06/09/2006
Posts: 205
Loc: Leeds, West Yorkshire
|
|
Thanks for that!
I've been happy with it, so nice to see it stacks up okay. It does have quite a decent reputation - The highly-regarded Raw Therapee is based on the same library ('dcraw') as UFRaw.
Edited by staccato123 (30/09/2008 12:31)
|
Zed
newbie
Reged: 27/09/2008
Posts: 16
|
|
Quote:
You could try with UFRaw to add another data point, if you felt like it. I'd be interested in the results, if only because I run Linux so it's my only choice.
Hi staccato123. You can run RT on Linux now so I read the other day. I've been using it on Win for some time, really like it but I'm just in the twilight zone of a (slow) change over to Linux so I'll be looking at RT/UFRaw. Think Lightzone do a Linux file too?
All the best.
Scot.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
