Just Tried Rpp For Mac

12.09.2019

Regarding resolution in converters. I have small example on my page Also one of my friends did some independent testing on a Kodak SLR/c raw file ( Kodak SLRs like SLR/c, SLR/n and 14NX are sharpest DSLRs and overall are best imagers available for 35mm format). These are links to pictures ACR LightZone RPP Settings adjustments didn't resolve any more details in all of them. For those who can read Russian this is the full post If you want to do your own test - fabric is a very good target, but classical wooden or brick wall will do fine also. I have downloaded RPP and had a brief play with it.

Whether you're an expert or just getting started, we'll help you get the most out of your Mac.

  • Read the latest review of the Top Mac FTP Clients 2017-2018. Evaluate and choose the best FTP client for your own needs. We gathered a short overview of the top FTP client solutions for macOS and hope it will help you to find the best FTP manager for you.
  • Welcome to /r/Mac! We are reddit's community of Mac users, enthusiasts, and experts. Please submit or enjoy content, comments, or questions related to the Mac platform, be it related to the hardware or software that makes it up.

Sharpness and colour separation look good, but for the moment this is subjective. Not being able to view changes in real time makes things a bit hit or miss. There must be some way to instantly apply adjustments to a screen scaled version and then applying it, when OK to the full scale version. In the sharpness comparson tests you have posted, what version of ACR was used?

The current version 4.x is better than 3.x. There seems to be no control on out of camera sharpening. Surely different sensors, filters etc will have differing sharpening requirements.

This is where iterations of deconvolution algorithms provide significant advantages over contrast enhancement. As far as I know no RAW processor has really addressed this.

RAW Developer is perhaps furthest along the line with some application of the Richardson -Lucy algorithm. PS seems to be edging into this with Smart Sharpen. How does your program address these issues?

The program is slow but I accept that, if intensive crunching produces a better result. Working colour spaces is an area that I can get out of my depth quite quickly, but a choice for a horses for courses approach seems a good thing. One problem with LR and ACR is restriction to sRGB, ARGB, ProPhotoRGB and ColorMatchRGB, all of which are not designed for current digital realities eg current sensors and inkjet ink gamuts. That is one reason I like RAWDeveloper, where I can use Joe Holmes spaces that give me better shadow separation and enable perceptual saturation control with Variants. Some other programs offer similar choice.Maybe that is something to think about. Bruce Lindbloom knows his stuff, but, as I understand it, like the original JH Ektaspace PS5, Beta RGB is a space designed for scanned trannies, not digital sensors.

Just

The argument for Gamma near 2.2 is persuasive, in any case. As a side issue, that someone smarter than me might like to comment on, that would seem to put ColorMatch RGB and thr ProPhotoRGB revivalists in a weaker position. I'm not sure about 'film look'. In a few years that wont make sense to too many people, but if you like the look, go for it. I must read the new ACRAW book. But I have that feeling there is a long way to go. In the interim the universal RAW protocols such a Adobe proposes, seem a good idea so one could slide from one RAW application to another to extract the best features.

I'll do some more playing when I wake up properly! Quote There seems to be no control on out of camera sharpening. Surely different sensors, filters etc will have differing sharpening requirements. This is where iterations of deconvolution algorithms provide significant advantages over contrast enhancement. As far as I know no RAW processor has really addressed this. RAW Developer is perhaps furthest along the line with some application of the Richardson -Lucy algorithm. PS seems to be edging into this with Smart Sharpen.

How does your program address these issues? Okay, had a small go at it. My initial reaction was that the software is slow. I'd like to see: Real time rendering An option for adobe98 colors pace as an option. More control over color temp. (Can't stress this enough) Default camera settings shortcut/button I really like the film curve and most importantly, the look of the image. Edit: I like the history feature and even the excessive EXIF data.

I'd like to be able to open up multiple files (and have them displayed in order) easily. The image is just a small processed example. The RPP file is noticeably sharper at a glance. I did some test.

Nice software a bit to primitive in terms off handling. But results are nice. It sure add a bit sharper photos. Does it has some sharpness built-in? I will still use Lightroom, as it is more my style off editing. Share a very unscientific test. I did a crop on a photo I shoot today with my 180mm AF nikkor.

Put it into photoshop, did the crop, convert the colorspaces. Both converters on default, thou Lightroom on no sharpening and noise reduction(didnt see those function in RPP). This is the results after blown up 200% with bicubic smoother. Thou I didnt fiddle to match colors in Lightroom. RPP seems to have a bit more contrast.

I like the results, thou the software is a bit to 'techy' for me. Both shoots was with 'as shot', whitebalance. I did some more testing, the rendering is fabulous. In my own humble opinion it brings more detail and microcontrast than Lightroom/Camera RAW. I took some landscape scenes and architecture I normally shoot. I am really surprised that a donationware can do this good. I tempted become more nerdy just to extract that little notch more detail Well if you are a tech-head and dont get confused by numbers and got patience this software is all right.

If you use it together with Photoshop it is really nice RAW converter. Thou it is a bit to tough for me. Reminds me off my days with early audio software. I tried out DXO5 that supposed have nicer demosacing engine. But wasnt that impressed at all. But this tool does bring out what would expect off DXO.

Quote I did some test. Nice software a bit to primitive in terms off handling. But results are nice.

It sure add a bit sharper photos. Does it has some sharpness built-in? I will still use Lightroom, as it is more my style off editing. Share a very unscientific test.

I did a crop on a photo I shoot today with my 180mm AF nikkor. Put it into photoshop, did the crop, convert the colorspaces. Both converters on default, thou Lightroom on no sharpening and noise reduction(didnt see those function in RPP). This is the results after blown up 200% with bicubic smoother. Some more observations, Andrey. 1) The histogram also gets locked up when you make a selection. It doesn't want to revert, even with a re-apply command.

2) I feel that the zoom feature and full screen feature need to be integrated into one central area and some keystrokes would be great. It would be nice to be able to zoom in at percentages so you could look at what the darker areas of an image are doing. There are two areas that you have to travel to in order to manage the preview size and full screen option. It would be nice if all of that was in one area. 3) I can't judge what the highlight recovery section is doing. I've tried several schemes with it and I just can't see what it's up to. 4) The numbers are nice to have if you want to zone in adjustments that are between the 'stops' on some of the sliders 5) I do like how, after Apply is hit, the slider you were working with stays selected so you can use the arrow key to fine tune after the previous 'apply' command.

6) As another poster mentioned in this thread, I'd like to see the white balance feature expanded on. It's nice to have a color temp slider as a general feature in a processor. Though, the CommandClick selection seems to work, it would be nice to be able see quick variations. 7) Some images open and they look great, RPP seems to get a good handle on things and display with remarkably neutral tones. My streets, sidewalks and grey clouds never looked so neutral in a raw processor. Other images, RPP seems to have hard time grabbing hold of and offering a 'close' preview.when this happens I get a little bit baffled as to where I should start working, a case of 'What 's first?'

.the reason for this is the speed of apply feature.it makes it difficult to try things to see what's happening in a quick way. It gets more confusing if you try to make several adjustments before hitting Apply. So, I'm wondering if you have an order or a workflow suggestion.such as: start with exposuremove to contrastset black point go back to exposurecheck brightness.do you understand what I mean? I'm looking for a reasonably good starting point and a logical progression after that, within the slider windows. This software is a different bear because of the speed and I feel like i start to go in circles because I can't see what I'm doing quickly enough, i need the immediacy.(I know you get sick of hearing about the speed thing). On the upside.when I finally arrive at what I'm after, things looks great. The rendering is fantastic.

Just Tried Rpp For Macbook Pro

Are you planning on addressing the speed issue as you move along? Is that something that happens at the end of the road in the process? I hope all that makes sense. Quote Other images, RPP seems to have hard time grabbing hold of and offering a 'close' preview.when this happens I get a little bit baffled as to where I should start working, a case of 'What 's first?' .the reason for this is the speed of apply feature.it makes it difficult to try things to see what's happening in a quick way.

It gets more confusing if you try to make several adjustments before hitting Apply. So, I'm wondering if you have an order or a workflow suggestion.such as: start with exposuremove to contrastset black point go back to exposurecheck brightness.do you understand what I mean? I'm looking for a reasonably good starting point and a logical progression after that, within the slider windows. Always start with WB and exposure - it makes picture look right and after that it's very easy to make it better. Never do any adjustments on images with wrong white balance (in any converter) - this is waste of time, WB affects our perception of contrast, brightness, details and sharpness.

Mac

It affects everything White balance may be tricky if there is nothing to pick from, but if you look closer there is usually something neutral or close to neutral. Auto usually works, but may fail miserably if some colors are over-present. In this case selection over some areas of pictures while holding Cmd may give decent start. Cold-worm touching may be needed after all those auto guesstimates. It may take some time to get used (couple of days?), but after that you'll find that it takes a lot less time for you to process pictures compared to other converters because numbers never lie and you'll just get that feeling. You'll be surprised how easy it is.

Comments are closed.