![]() ![]() However, many photographers would like to use the "camera look" as a starting point for further adjustments, and RawTherapee makes this possible. Due to this fundamental fact of the data being "raw", there is no one correct way for a raw photo to look - the way your camera makes it look is not "the right way", nor is it the only way. Your camera cooks the raw data into a pretty image, which it stores as a JPEG file inside the raw file (yes, even when you're shooting in only "RAW" mode as opposed to "RAW+JPEG" mode). It must be "cooked" to look like the image you saw through the viewfinder. This sensor data does not look like a pretty image, in fact it does not look like anything - it is "raw" data, ergo the name. A raw photo contains a dump of sensor data, which makes up the bulk of the raw file. Then double-click on a raw photo to start editing it.įirst, a little background. Use the folder tree browser on the left of the File Browser tab to navigate to your raw photo repository and double-click on the folder to open it. You need to point RawTherapee to where your raw photos are stored. When you start RawTherapee you will land in the File Browser tab, and it might be empty. 8- Right-click context menu (you will typically use this to apply some processing profile to all selected files). 7- Sub-tabs of the File Browser: Filter (currently opened), Inspect (to see a full-sized embedded JPEG preview), Batch Edit (to apply some setting to all selected images) and Fast Export (low quality and bypasses some tools but fast saving - don't use this for typical saving!). 4- Filters to limit the thumbnails shown to only those which match some metadata or state. 3- Thumbnails of the currently opened folder. ![]() 2- Panels used for navigating to files and folders. RawTherapee in Single Editor Tab Mode - Vertical Tabs, showing: 1- Main sections: File Browser (currently opened), Queue, Editor and Preferences. Sorry, didn't work out how to downscale the file-size to post a meaningful 100% crop here, so hope it's OK to just link to a file on my photobucket account? 100% view of a larger file in PS side by side. The LR print didn't offer any more real sharpening even at print stage, just nothing more there to work from. This produced a file which might look a little crisp on screen, but was print ready (and indeed produced a lovely, natural looking A2 print). Settings were - V3 Detail+ X-Trans, Method-Iridient Reveal, Radius 0.75, Edge Detail Landscape/Strong 150, Texture/Micro detail 15, Edge Masking 0. Iridient wasn't maxed out by any means at all. I tried to get the best sharpening I possibly could in LR (100% detail method, Radius 1.0, Amount 40, no masking, no luminance or colour NR) any more than this didn't help actual acuity, just looked more exaggerated and painterly in the fine detailed foliage mid-scene. LR CC (latest update) vs Iridient (latest version). ![]() OK, here is a little comparison, as promised. Or is it a case that the users wanting such a change are not enough to support such work. Is Fuji X-Trans support being worked on?I appreciate that the support is better now than it was, but the reality is that Lightroom is still a long way behind other RAW developers, all of which are less well funded and with smaller teams working on the software.Lightroom has been the leader in RAW processing an image cataloging as far back as I can recall but with the Fuji X-Trans files many people I know are leaving Adobe Lightroom for one of the many other developers, all of which are producing far better results than Adobe Lightroom.Ones I have personally tested are as follows: Iridient DeveloperPhoto NinjaLightZoneCapture OneApertureSilkyPixRaw TherapeeIridient is very good, and this is a piece of software made by a single man.My question is, if he can get it right, why can't Adobe? They have been leaders in innovation for many years but it seems in some areas now they are falling behind - I have never seen so many people leave a major developer for smaller independent ones, but to Fuji users (both enthusiasts and professionals) it's a pretty simple decision when you compare results.So all I'd like to know is if my patience sticking with Lightroom is justified, and whether a solution is being worked on - or will always be worked on. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |