A Silkypix development..

Small version of Silkypix developed photo
Original, full quality.

Above shot is taken in a studio yesterday (the place I worked with jpegs only – this shot I took as RAW though).  The shot came out underexposed and has been adjusted solely inside Silkypix (except for the white border). Even the copyright text is inserted inside Silkypix. (Really good control over watermarks btw).

So what do I think about Silkypix? I have found both greatness and the other way in the way Silkypix does its processing. The good thing about silkypix is that you can go back to the start, take away all noise reduction, all sharpening, all whatever they applied when you first open the shot – and slowly adjust to you liking. You have very nice control over colors and contrast – better than Lightroom (at least better for SD / DP shots) and also parts of it is better than SPP.

I’m now putting together a video showing the good and the bad. With some comparisons with SPP and RD. Perhaps LR and Darkroom too? If my RAM is big enough. hehe. Poor iMac.

FlyingRooster has posted his findings as a comment in this thread. Including comparison images. Well worth reading.

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 18-50, Flash, Full size, Review, Sigma SD14, Silkypix, Studio and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to A Silkypix development..

  1. Benji says:

    I am enjoying Silkypix a lot. I took some ISO 1600 pics the other night and developed with Silkypix. Here’s a few here:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaeming/sets/72157622527983820/
    It’s interesting because Silkypix did a much better job that SPP. The ugly color blotches and aberrations were gone and the noise was very uniform and film-like (not unsimilar to some 1600 speed film I’ve shot before).
    I was speculating in one of my comments with another flickr user how I think the Silkypix software is almost a little too good to be backwards engineered. I wonder if it isn’t possible that Sigma is contemplating getting out of the software side and striking a third-party arrangement with Silkypix, just providing them with the necessary specs and such. Silkypix has a pattern of courting camera manufacturers, wanting to become the bundle software their cameras. It’d be a good idea since Silkypix is dedicated to the software side, they’d have more time to develop for the Foveon RAW software.

  2. Hi Benji, to my understanding (talking with important people) Sigma has not been involved in the makings of Silkypix-X3F-conversion-version. And also, the way they process the files looks pretty different from Sigmas (spp) so I tend to think they did this alone. Also the way they do noise reduction differs some too.

    Will come back to this myself in a while.

  3. Benji says:

    Well that’s even more impressive if they did it without any collaboration with Sigma. I agree the results are quite different than SPP. Still I can’t help but think Silkypix will pitch themselves to Sigma in the future to be the default Foveon RAW developer, if they haven’t already. It’s still in early stages but Silkypix has a lot of promise. In any case I will be happy to purchase Silkypix should they release the Foveon supported version in the future.
    By the way, I really enjoy all the informative work you are doing on your blog. I think you have influenced myself and many others towards giving SD14/DP series a go! :)

  4. Teija says:

    Hi Carl,
    Thank you for the nice pictures. It was a very fun and relaxed photosession.

    Thank You,
    Teija

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)