FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Best derawtizer for alpha 900 ?

Page  12>
Author
acinonyx12345 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 08 October 2008
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Posts: 217
Post Options Post Options   Quote acinonyx12345 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Best derawtizer for alpha 900 ?
    Posted: 07 April 2009 at 21:38
Click on the following link to see the remarkable work of PATRICK MOLL, who made a comparative study of 9 different and most popular Raw developers (IDC 3.0, Lightroom 2.3, ACDSee pro 2.5, Bibble 5, DXO Optics pro 5.3.3, Capture one pro 4.7, Aperture 2, Raw therapee 2.4, Gimp 2.6) on Alpha 900. Tests were done at iso 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200 and 6400.
The study is in french but you don't need to translate since the pics speak by themselves. You just have to click on the orange button to see the result of the selected software. Results : DXO is the best one (cons : the slowest one and a bit of desaturation in very high isos). Bibble pro is very good and is able to keep a lot of details in high isos : excellent when associated with noiseninja, but slower. On the other hand, Lightroom is quite disappointing. Tests on Alpha 700 will be published soon, but it seems that DXO doesn't make the same excellent job with that body.
http://www.alpha-numerique.fr/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=264:alpha-900-comparatif-de-9-logiciels-de-developpement-de-fichiers-raw&catid=70:developpement-des-raws&Itemid=321
 



Back to Top
sdm9465 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 February 2008
Country: Canada
Location: Nova Scotia
Status: Offline
Posts: 1180
Post Options Post Options   Quote sdm9465 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 April 2009 at 21:47
Are these at default settings in the various raw converters or has the tester tried to optimize the settings in each? I use Lightroom so I mainly looked at the comparisons between that and DXO since it's supposed to be the best. Personally I find the DXO results, especially at low iso settings, have way too much contrast to the point where I don't like the look at all.
Back to Top
acinonyx12345 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 08 October 2008
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Posts: 217
Post Options Post Options   Quote acinonyx12345 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 April 2009 at 21:54
Hello sdm9465
The Author tried to optimize results with each software, but mainly noise treatment
Back to Top
sdm9465 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 February 2008
Country: Canada
Location: Nova Scotia
Status: Offline
Posts: 1180
Post Options Post Options   Quote sdm9465 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 April 2009 at 22:07
Thanks, perhaps that explains things. There is definitely much less visible noise in the DXO crops. I wonder if the files would still be that different in noise level if they were processed with less contrast in DXO.

In the end it doesn't really matter much to me. I realize that Lightroom isn't the best raw converter but I like the other aspects of it enough that I can accept its shortcomings.
Back to Top
Turerkan View Drop Down
Emeritus group
Emeritus group
Moderator emeritus

Joined: 11 February 2006
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Posts: 6251
Post Options Post Options   Quote Turerkan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 April 2009 at 23:08
i think best results are from captureone, then from rawtheraphee. dxo results are full of sharpening halos without much gain in sharpness.. i didn't compare the noise though.
Back to Top
Vivec View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Knowledge Base Contributor

Joined: 17 October 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 960
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vivec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 April 2009 at 01:16
Thanks for the link. Still, it is hard to say which one is better as there are also small differences in brightness etc.

For example, it seems to me that DxO looks better than Lightroom mostly because the blackpoint seems to be set higher (in DxO) which gives the impression of nice deep black without noise.

 



Back to Top
dekie View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 17 July 2006
Country: Belgium
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Posts: 390
Post Options Post Options   Quote dekie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 April 2009 at 02:12
It is possible to do better with C1. I downloaded the raw files and processed them in a different way.

All sharpening en noise reduction set to 0.
Used the moire sliders to reduce the chrominance noise.
Adjusted the tonality. The C1 raw result is to bright in the shadows and the midtones.
Used a low luminance noise only reduction with neato on some versions.
The very fine white speckles are not visible in a print. The fine noise reduction with neato could destroy some fine detail.

3200 ISO seems to me better than 3200 ISO on the 7D. The 6400 ISO version looks fine on my 1680px width screen.

iso 3200 C1 and neato, resampled to 1280 px


iso 3200 only c1 full crop


iso 3200 only c1 crop (resized at 6mp -3000x2000)


iso 3200 c1 and neato full crop


iso 3200 c1 and neato crop (resized at 6mp - 3000x2000)


iso 6400 c1 resized at 1280px


iso 6400 c1 full crop


iso 6400 c1 crop (resized at 6mp - 3000x2000)


iso 6400 c1 and neato full crop


iso 6400 c1 and neato crop (resized at 6mp - 3000x2000)


Gr.


Edited by dekie - 08 April 2009 at 02:13
Back to Top
douglasf13 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 September 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 1730
Post Options Post Options   Quote douglasf13 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 April 2009 at 02:29
Great comparison, dekie. I've been using C1 with a lot of success as well. According to Iliah Borg, the A900's sensor response is closer to a film curve, rather than linear, and I'm finding that using an initial linear curve in my RAW converters gives a nice, natural starting point. If I use the "film-like" curve, it seems too extreme and noisy, since it's sort of putting a curve on top of a curve.

----
douglasferling.com
NEX-5, Hasselblad V, Leicaflex SL, Hipstamatic (former A900, A700, A100 owner.)
Back to Top
Phototak View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 27 July 2006
Country: France
Location: Toulouse
Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Post Options Post Options   Quote Phototak Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 April 2009 at 05:13
Hello,

I'm the author of this comparison. I had the choice between letting the default values for brightness, contrast, etc. and modifying them to get really comparable crops. I've made this choice in order to show how the default parameters of the softwares can yield to different "default" results.
It's true that, because of this, it is not so simple to make a comparison, and one can have better results for some softwares (like C1Pro as shown bu Dekie).
Anyway I really don't think that the differences between LR and DxO are due to a different black point : LR is really worse even in bright areas.

In the test with A700, I have tuned a bit the brightness of some softwares to have more comparable results. I've added Silkypix and Lightzone, so there will be 11 crops to be compared. The test will be published by the end of this week.

Now I go to bed because it's already 5 a:m in France

Cheers

Patrick
Back to Top
Phototak View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 27 July 2006
Country: France
Location: Toulouse
Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Post Options Post Options   Quote Phototak Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 April 2009 at 18:55
Finally, after reading your posts, I have decided to developp again the raws for some softwares in order to decrease the contrast and brightness differences and make the comparison more confortable.
I will do the same for the A700.
Thanks.
Back to Top
douglasf13 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 September 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 1730
Post Options Post Options   Quote douglasf13 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 April 2009 at 19:22
It would be great if you could add a comparison of all the converters with all NR off, and all NR at standard settings at each ISO. Thanks!
----
douglasferling.com
NEX-5, Hasselblad V, Leicaflex SL, Hipstamatic (former A900, A700, A100 owner.)
Back to Top
Wayne09 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2009
Country: United States
Location: WA - USA
Status: Offline
Posts: 1333
Post Options Post Options   Quote Wayne09 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 April 2009 at 19:40
We really appreciate all the work you are doing, Phototak. It is a great help.
Thanks
Back to Top
Vivec View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Knowledge Base Contributor

Joined: 17 October 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 960
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vivec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 April 2009 at 21:39
Thanks for your reply, and for doing all the work to create this comparison!
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Offline
Posts: 16383
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 April 2009 at 08:27
Agree with all the others, thanks very much for all these tests Phototak.

Have you posted your A700 results on the same forum already or is this still under development. If yes, can you point us to the link (Even though my location is shown as Belgium I'm Dutch, and my French is good enough to follow your article, but when I try navigating the site I get lost)
My Gallery
Please help the Alpha Eyes, try to make as many comments as you post photos, you'll be surprised how much your own photos will improve
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Digital Darkroom Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

Find us on Google+

Feel free to contact us if needed.

Links monetized by viglink VigLink