Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Software > Editors (Photoshop, Vegas, Final Cut Pro, Kdenlive, etc.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 24, 2005, 3:23 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 53
Default

I have a Fuji S5000, can anyone recomend a good raw converter? At present I'm using S7Raw but I'm not very happy with the results from it.



Del
barbusdel is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 24, 2005, 3:36 PM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Check out some of the "Other RAW Converters" listed on David Coffin's web site:

http://www.cybercom.net/~dcoffin/dcraw/

A number of raw converters use some or all of David's dcraw.c source code, adding more features to it (GUI front end, etc.). Chances are, some ofthem will work with your camera.

You'll also see links to download dcraw.c already compiled for Windows if you want to try it via command line.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2005, 5:24 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 53
Default

Thanks for the info, I'v now installed UFRaw and it seems to do a nice job

unlike s7raw which seems to soften the image and wash out the colours.

Seasons greatings Del
barbusdel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 25, 2005, 8:00 AM   #4
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

barbusdel wrote:
Quote:
Thanks for the info, I'v now installed UFRaw and it seems to do a nice job

unlike s7raw which seems to soften the image and wash out the colours.

Seasons greatings Del

Udi Fuchs' latest UFRaw is using the raw conversion algorithms from one of David Coffin's newer dcraw.c versions (7.84).

Beginning with dcraw.c version 7.60, David started using AHD (Adaptive Homogeniety Directed) for the interpolation algorithms.

A lot of the credit also goes to Paul J. Lee, whocollaborated with Hirakawa Keigo (the original co-author of AHD algorithm as part of his Ph.D thesis).

Once Paul fully understood the algorithm,he modifieddcraw.c to use it and gave a prototypeto Dave. After some comparison studies like this one,Dave was convinced that AHDwas superior to VNG and other demosaicing algorithm.

http://www.ece.gatech.edu/research/labs/MCCL/pubs/dwnlds/bahadir05.pdf

Dave converted and optimized the prototype created by Paul J. Lee, integrating it into dcraw.c versions 7.60 and later (he's continuing to refine it).


So, products using some or all of David's code to perform the raw conversion also benefit from these improvements, while adding their own enhancements and features.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 4, 2006, 5:48 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 38
Default

Are you using the defaults in s7raw? you can adjust the paramaters to get just about any result you want from it but idealy you should set everything to 0, save in a lossless format and PP in a program like Photoshop. The RAW images aren't supposed to look good! They're unprocessed.

Tom
tbcass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 4, 2006, 10:45 AM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

tbcass wrote:
Quote:
The RAW images aren't supposed to look good! They're unprocessed.
I had to chuckle when I read that one (they aren't supposed to look good). :-)

To some extent that's true. Some converters use more conservative processing (no added sharpening, etc.).

But, the output of any raw converter is the result of some pretty interesting algorithms, and you'd be surprised how well some converters can work that have no added sharpening, contrast boosting, etc., at all

There is a difference in the demosaic algorithms and the quality of the output between converters.

The quality of the output from the camera also comes into play. I've gotten some pretty decent pics using sharper lenses, straight from "bare bones" raw converters like dcraw.c

I did a "user review" recently in one of the lens surveys for my Minolta 100mm f/2. This lens is almost too sharp (make sure your subjects are wearning makeup if they don't have good skin). LOL

I put this comment about it in the review (it's a discontinued lens):

Quote:
If they ever restart production of a lens using the same optics, they should put a sticker on the box:

"No Post Processing Required"

With a lens this sharp, who needs USM? ;-)
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2006, 12:16 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
The Winemaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 126
Default

Don't overlook a little program called Raw PhotoDesk at: http://www.rawphotodesk.com/

Such a nifty little program, that does batch, image manipulations, even unsharp mask. I really like the way it not only works on and converts RAW file images, but it can also work on other files, like jpeg, tif as well. Free to try, and only $29.00 to buy. I tried it out and bought it the second day. You should see some of the images on their site that have been done with RAW Photo Desk.! I'm pretty pleased with what I'm getting from the raw images as well.

Fuji S9000 is what I shoot.

Vern


The Winemaker is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:49 AM.