FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

RAW Software + A900/A850 files

Page  12>
Author
arpphoto View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 01 March 2010
Country: United States
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Post Options Post Options   Quote arpphoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: RAW Software + A900/A850 files
    Posted: 16 June 2022 at 16:37
Hello.

I currently use Adobe Photoshop & Bridge CS6 with whatever ACR version (9?). It has been 10 years since CS6 was release and looks like a lot has changed in RAW development. I used PhaseOne + PS back in 2003 ~ 2006 but have pretty much stuck to ACR since then.

Can anyone who processes a900/a850 RAW files in the newer RAW software provide some feedback? Is it worth upgrading to say PhaseOne 22 for these older cameras? I also have A99 cameras but never use them...

Here is what I currently do:

I do not shoot JPEG.

In RAW development I use: shadow and highlight recovery, contrast, clarity, and a touch of basic sharpening (90% of the time it is set to default ACR setting). I do not use any of the lens corrections, color correction, B&W editing or whatever else there is.

In Photoshop I only use the most basic tools: sloppy hand drawn masking, dodge, burn, levels, curves, contrast, the erase tool for dust removal, some shadow/highlight recovery, etc. I do not use layers, I do not add, remove, or move content around.

End result is 100% B&W mostly for print.

Any input would be great :-)

Thanks

Adam

|a900|a850|CZ24~70|Min70~200SSM|CZ24|Son35|CZ50|CZ85|CZ135|Min17~35|Min20|Min28|Min35|Min50|Min85|Min100|Min200|Min300|Min300SSM|Son500|Min600|Sig800|Sig28|Sig20~40|Sig14|Sig50|Sig85|
 



Back to Top
XKAES View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 24 September 2021
Country: United States
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Posts: 162
Post Options Post Options   Quote XKAES Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 16:55
When it comes to software it seems like everybody uses something different -- usually more than one package. A real plate of spaghetti, complicated by software constantly being upgraded, and pricing changing.

It seems impossible to know what will work best for any particular person. Everyone says "This is what I use", which is no help at all. It's impossible to try all of the packages.

If you're satisfied with what you have, why "fix it"? If there is some feature you want to add, there will be several options to choose from -- unfortunately.
http://www.subclub.org
http://www.subclub.org/minman
http://www.subclub.org/minchin
Back to Top
skm.sa100 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 08 January 2009
Country: United States
Location: Charlotte, NC
Status: Offline
Posts: 4262
Post Options Post Options   Quote skm.sa100 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 17:05
Agree with xkaes.
Your needs are SO simple that pretty much any good quality RAW and JPG editor would be more than enough for your needs.
RawTherapee would probably work very well for you for RAW development. Gimp would work well for JPGs. I've been using these two for many years now and it really is more than what I need.
DarkTable is also quite good and is an open source alternative to LightRoom, just like Gimp is an OS alternative to Photoshop.
More Dyxumer, less photographer.
Back to Top
arpphoto View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 01 March 2010
Country: United States
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Post Options Post Options   Quote arpphoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 17:20
Just looking for feedback from folks who have processed these older files thru older software and newer software to see what sort of improvement can be seen in such areas as highlight/shadow recovery, sharpening, noise, general structure of the file, etc. Does not matter that everyone is different as long as they have actually compared it.

Originally posted by XKAES XKAES wrote:

When it comes to software it seems like everybody uses something different -- usually more than one package. A real plate of spaghetti, complicated by software constantly being upgraded, and pricing changing.

It seems impossible to know what will work best for any particular person. Everyone says "This is what I use", which is no help at all. It's impossible to try all of the packages.

If you're satisfied with what you have, why "fix it"? If there is some feature you want to add, there will be several options to choose from -- unfortunately.
|a900|a850|CZ24~70|Min70~200SSM|CZ24|Son35|CZ50|CZ85|CZ135|Min17~35|Min20|Min28|Min35|Min50|Min85|Min100|Min200|Min300|Min300SSM|Son500|Min600|Sig800|Sig28|Sig20~40|Sig14|Sig50|Sig85|
Back to Top
arpphoto View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 01 March 2010
Country: United States
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Post Options Post Options   Quote arpphoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 17:23
Ok, have you compared a900 files processed thru older software and the software you mention? If so I would love to hear if you see any difference in the processed file.

Originally posted by skm.sa100 skm.sa100 wrote:

Agree with xkaes.
Your needs are SO simple that pretty much any good quality RAW and JPG editor would be more than enough for your needs.
RawTherapee would probably work very well for you for RAW development. Gimp would work well for JPGs. I've been using these two for many years now and it really is more than what I need.
DarkTable is also quite good and is an open source alternative to LightRoom, just like Gimp is an OS alternative to Photoshop.
|a900|a850|CZ24~70|Min70~200SSM|CZ24|Son35|CZ50|CZ85|CZ135|Min17~35|Min20|Min28|Min35|Min50|Min85|Min100|Min200|Min300|Min300SSM|Son500|Min600|Sig800|Sig28|Sig20~40|Sig14|Sig50|Sig85|
Back to Top
lomitamike View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 23 September 2006
Country: United States
Location: CA.
Status: Offline
Posts: 756
Post Options Post Options   Quote lomitamike Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 17:42
I shoot mostly with both the A900 & A850 although I do use a A6000 for a small travel kit.
My current raw processor is ON1 Photo RAW 2022. I'm satisfied with it for the most part. I came from being a longtime and probably one of the last Aperture users.
I can say with certainty that the raw engine in ON1 is far better than Aperture was. I notice that after becoming familiar with what ON1 can do as compared to what Aperture could do that ON1 handles the raw files much cleaner, sharper, better color adjustments and all the basic adjustments with a more accurate easier to get to feel.
I'm sure most of the newer RAW processors can do the same.
A900, A850, A6000, Canon S95, SAL 70-400, 70-200, 35/1.4, 50/1.4. KM 85D, 28-75D, 17-35D,100macroD. Mino 28/2, 35-70. Rok14/2.8. Many flashes, Phottix Odin. E16-50, 18-200LE, 50/1.8, Rokfish 8mm
 



Back to Top
arpphoto View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 01 March 2010
Country: United States
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Post Options Post Options   Quote arpphoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 18:13
Very cool! Question: Do you ever process your high ISO files (1600+) with no noise reduction? If you do... have you seen any difference in the characteristics of the noise between the older Aperture and ON1?

Originally posted by lomitamike lomitamike wrote:

I shoot mostly with both the A900 & A850 although I do use a A6000 for a small travel kit.
My current raw processor is ON1 Photo RAW 2022. I'm satisfied with it for the most part. I came from being a longtime and probably one of the last Aperture users.
I can say with certainty that the raw engine in ON1 is far better than Aperture was. I notice that after becoming familiar with what ON1 can do as compared to what Aperture could do that ON1 handles the raw files much cleaner, sharper, better color adjustments and all the basic adjustments with a more accurate easier to get to feel.
I'm sure most of the newer RAW processors can do the same.
|a900|a850|CZ24~70|Min70~200SSM|CZ24|Son35|CZ50|CZ85|CZ135|Min17~35|Min20|Min28|Min35|Min50|Min85|Min100|Min200|Min300|Min300SSM|Son500|Min600|Sig800|Sig28|Sig20~40|Sig14|Sig50|Sig85|
Back to Top
lomitamike View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 23 September 2006
Country: United States
Location: CA.
Status: Offline
Posts: 756
Post Options Post Options   Quote lomitamike Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 19:47
Yes! NoNoise is a huge improvement with high ISO 1600 and above. I have had a problem with after converting the folder of RAW edits to JPEG. I like to send the processed raws to a converted jpeg folder. The converted jpeg being processed in the batch come out unacceptable.
Ive had a lengthy back and forth with ON1 but they couldn't figure it out. Bad communication, no fix, I don't know. But if you convert a single raw to jpeg no problem. The problem is only with batch conversions.
I have had some good results with some 6400ISO photos that Aperture couldn't handle.
A900, A850, A6000, Canon S95, SAL 70-400, 70-200, 35/1.4, 50/1.4. KM 85D, 28-75D, 17-35D,100macroD. Mino 28/2, 35-70. Rok14/2.8. Many flashes, Phottix Odin. E16-50, 18-200LE, 50/1.8, Rokfish 8mm
Back to Top
arpphoto View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 01 March 2010
Country: United States
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Post Options Post Options   Quote arpphoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 19:57
LOL, I didn't realize ON1 has a feature called "NoNoise"... what I meant was, have you ever processed high ISO images without applying noise reduction? I am curious if there is any difference in the structure of the digital noise between old and new software. I love the noise structure of the a900/a850 when printed.

Originally posted by lomitamike lomitamike wrote:

Yes! NoNoise is a huge improvement with high ISO 1600 and above. I have had a problem with after converting the folder of RAW edits to JPEG. I like to send the processed raws to a converted jpeg folder. The converted jpeg being processed in the batch come out unacceptable.
Ive had a lengthy back and forth with ON1 but they couldn't figure it out. Bad communication, no fix, I don't know. But if you convert a single raw to jpeg no problem. The problem is only with batch conversions.
I have had some good results with some 6400ISO photos that Aperture couldn't handle.
|a900|a850|CZ24~70|Min70~200SSM|CZ24|Son35|CZ50|CZ85|CZ135|Min17~35|Min20|Min28|Min35|Min50|Min85|Min100|Min200|Min300|Min300SSM|Son500|Min600|Sig800|Sig28|Sig20~40|Sig14|Sig50|Sig85|
Back to Top
Rssweetman View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 21 March 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Essex
Status: Offline
Posts: 86
Post Options Post Options   Quote Rssweetman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 20:11
I use DXO Photolab 4 (couldn't be bothered to upgrade to PL5) for all my initial raw processing ie a580,a700,a900,a77ii,a99,a7s) images and it works a treat, especially with the Deep Prime function which utilises the GPU to reduce noise.   Whilst not ALL old minolta lenses (eg 100mm soft, 500 mirror) are in PL, enough are and the automatic lens corrections and pre-sharpening work well enough for me.

If I need to then I will export a tiff into eg Luminar 4 and then - if needed - export THAT image in Affinity Photo but that's becoming rarer and rarer as time becomes more pressed.

DXO Photolab's Deep Prime (from PL4 onwards) is incredible for older cameras at higher ISOs (which are low iso's now but you know what I mean).

HTH
Sony: A58, A580, A700, A900, A99 , A7s
135mm STF, 50 f1.4, 35mm f1.4G, 16-50 f2.8,70-400 G2,
Minolta: 100 2.8 Soft Focus, 85 f1.4, Beercan 70-210 f4, 35-70 f4, 24 f2.8,
Zeiss: 135 f1.8, 85 f1.4
Back to Top
arpphoto View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 01 March 2010
Country: United States
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Post Options Post Options   Quote arpphoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 20:35
I just went on to their site... Bit confused, I guess you need PL to do full image editing while PR is just for noise/sharpening?

Originally posted by Rssweetman Rssweetman wrote:

I use DXO Photolab 4 (couldn't be bothered to upgrade to PL5) for all my initial raw processing ie a580,a700,a900,a77ii,a99,a7s) images and it works a treat, especially with the Deep Prime function which utilises the GPU to reduce noise.   Whilst not ALL old minolta lenses (eg 100mm soft, 500 mirror) are in PL, enough are and the automatic lens corrections and pre-sharpening work well enough for me.

If I need to then I will export a tiff into eg Luminar 4 and then - if needed - export THAT image in Affinity Photo but that's becoming rarer and rarer as time becomes more pressed.

DXO Photolab's Deep Prime (from PL4 onwards) is incredible for older cameras at higher ISOs (which are low iso's now but you know what I mean).

HTH
|a900|a850|CZ24~70|Min70~200SSM|CZ24|Son35|CZ50|CZ85|CZ135|Min17~35|Min20|Min28|Min35|Min50|Min85|Min100|Min200|Min300|Min300SSM|Son500|Min600|Sig800|Sig28|Sig20~40|Sig14|Sig50|Sig85|
Back to Top
Rssweetman View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 21 March 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Essex
Status: Offline
Posts: 86
Post Options Post Options   Quote Rssweetman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 20:48
Kinda: Pure Raw is purely a (Adobe Photoshop?) plug-in for noise removal and optical corrections.

Photolab 5 is a full raw editor and image processing software but is somewhere between Adobe Lightoom and Adobe Photoshop in terms of abilities/scope (ie more capable than LR, less powerful than PS but dare I say it likely 'good enough for most', certainly to begin with).

If you buy Photolab 5 then you can still use it with Photoshop and Lightroom (maybe not as a direct plug-in but as a "1st step" ie run the raw through Photolab and export it into Lightroom or Photoshop) but you can't go from Pure Raw to Photolab 5 if that makes sense....

Sony: A58, A580, A700, A900, A99 , A7s
135mm STF, 50 f1.4, 35mm f1.4G, 16-50 f2.8,70-400 G2,
Minolta: 100 2.8 Soft Focus, 85 f1.4, Beercan 70-210 f4, 35-70 f4, 24 f2.8,
Zeiss: 135 f1.8, 85 f1.4
Back to Top
arpphoto View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 01 March 2010
Country: United States
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Post Options Post Options   Quote arpphoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 20:54
Yep!

Originally posted by Rssweetman Rssweetman wrote:

Kinda: Pure Raw is purely a (Adobe Photoshop?) plug-in for noise removal and optical corrections.

Photolab 5 is a full raw editor and image processing software but is somewhere between Adobe Lightoom and Adobe Photoshop in terms of abilities/scope (ie more capable than LR, less powerful than PS but dare I say it likely 'good enough for most', certainly to begin with).

If you buy Photolab 5 then you can still use it with Photoshop and Lightroom (maybe not as a direct plug-in but as a "1st step" ie run the raw through Photolab and export it into Lightroom or Photoshop) but you can't go from Pure Raw to Photolab 5 if that makes sense....

|a900|a850|CZ24~70|Min70~200SSM|CZ24|Son35|CZ50|CZ85|CZ135|Min17~35|Min20|Min28|Min35|Min50|Min85|Min100|Min200|Min300|Min300SSM|Son500|Min600|Sig800|Sig28|Sig20~40|Sig14|Sig50|Sig85|
Back to Top
arpphoto View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 01 March 2010
Country: United States
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Post Options Post Options   Quote arpphoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 June 2022 at 21:14
So with your a900, prior to PL 5, what were you using to process the RAW files? and did you see an improvement when you went to PL5? Such things as less chunky/haziness in recovered shadows or smoother transition in recovered highlights, etc. Mostly I am interested in the general overall quality/integrity of the file. I know editing is very subjective, everyone has their own taste.

Originally posted by Rssweetman Rssweetman wrote:

Kinda: Pure Raw is purely a (Adobe Photoshop?) plug-in for noise removal and optical corrections.

Photolab 5 is a full raw editor and image processing software but is somewhere between Adobe Lightoom and Adobe Photoshop in terms of abilities/scope (ie more capable than LR, less powerful than PS but dare I say it likely 'good enough for most', certainly to begin with).

If you buy Photolab 5 then you can still use it with Photoshop and Lightroom (maybe not as a direct plug-in but as a "1st step" ie run the raw through Photolab and export it into Lightroom or Photoshop) but you can't go from Pure Raw to Photolab 5 if that makes sense....

|a900|a850|CZ24~70|Min70~200SSM|CZ24|Son35|CZ50|CZ85|CZ135|Min17~35|Min20|Min28|Min35|Min50|Min85|Min100|Min200|Min300|Min300SSM|Son500|Min600|Sig800|Sig28|Sig20~40|Sig14|Sig50|Sig85|
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 0.068 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.