Raw Developer mini-review flv..

[EDIT] Open recommendation: Please convert to DNG in order to make Raw Developer 1.7.0 stable and retrieve maximum information from your X3F’s. [/EDIT] Alright, it’s time again for yet another movie. Should play in correct size too! I’m trying to find WHAT it is that makes Raw Developer a nice complement to Lightroom and SPP. (I know I need to keep them all). The built in advanced sharpening does help together with true color rendition (I do not know this for sure, but my eyes tells me ;)
[flv:http://www.tnirp.com/sd14/raw_develop3.flv 500 326]

About Carl Rytterfalk

Welcome to my blog! I'm Carl Rytterfalk, a swedish photographer who loves everything that is interesting in the world of photography. In 2002 I fell in love with the three layered Foveon sensor and has since then been an addicted user of Sigma cameras. Though I use Canon and Nikon as well. :)
This entry was posted in All, Flash, Movie, Review, Sigma SD14. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Raw Developer mini-review flv..

  1. Tobbe says:

    What program did you use to convert the movies to flv? is it a os-x program or do you flash things up on a win computer?

    Really nice program btw, really does amazing stuff to the pictures.

  2. First I use iShowU to capture, and I dump a huge movie in raw resolution (no compression) to the hard drive. This dump is later converted to FLV thru CS3 Flash converter. I tried many ways of free software but with 44Hz sound the Flash converter does the best job. If you use any other Hz (like 22Hz) then the file will have no sound after 50% of play.

    I even tried Sorensons Squeeze but it didn’t work as I hoped.

    :) Yes, It’s an amazing software.

  3. oh and yes, everything os x

  4. The ending crash was very funny;-)

    Now make a new movie with that same bee-picture converted to DNG beforehand. Then the magenta/green splotches will be gone.

  5. I just tried converting and result is that it’s pretty much treated my images the way LR does. if I used ISO100 I think I will continue use X3F’s but if I used higher ISO I will convert to DNG – All noise gone. :) But also more soft appearance. In some images it doesn’t matter – in others it matters much.

    will do some more tests.

  6. Carl, have you tried some poorly lit shots as X3F in RAW Developer? Poorly lit as in “tungsten” lighting, or slightly underexposed shots. Even shot at 100 or 200 ISO. They look totally off, whitebalance wise. Grey shirts are almost impossible to make grey, even with manual whitebalance fiddling. Whereas, same images, just converted to DNG, can be treated well in RAW Developer with good results.

    I guess I’m picky since I’m a longtime RAW Developer use, and know what it can do consistently with non-foveon images.

    Anyway, matter of taste.

    If you take SDIM2954.x3f from your latest RAW pack, the sky is very overexposed. and the whitebalance totally off. A green cast by default. But, converting the X3F to DNG, gives an image that has a no apparent colorcast by default, and, the overexposed sky can be resqued by simply dragging the exposure slider down (which has built-in highlight recovery)… Whereas, dragging down the exposure slider on the .x3f file, would give huge burnt-out solid gray areas. There’s no question, RAW Developer is no-no with x3f, while cool with the dng’s;-)

  7. With high iso, overexposed and underexposed images you’re right BUT with a correct exposed image at lower ISO (<200) I do think X3F-format wins big time! Colors are just so much better – especially blues and reds. I will post side by side examples.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Optionally add an image (JPEG only)