RAW/RAF Processing Tests

[jknights]

I have been following the questions in the forum and one of the things that seemed to be missing was an answer to the question - Which of the available softwares does the best job of processing my RAW/RAF files ?

I hope the following document helps others who are maybe asking this question.


Results are in a Word document that I have converted into a text file for attachment here.

I have the RAW data but unfortunately it is 3.2GB in size so I cant easily post.

Any questions or requests for the Word file then please mail back to me jonathan@jknights.freeserve.co.uk

[Bibble]

Great article! I think you covered the available options very well!

Just a quick note or two on your data relating to Bibble:

Bibble will process to any of the color spaces you choose from the advacned screen (10 in all). SRGB is the default. To change it, load settings from default.bis, change to the color space of your choice (Adobe RGB?), and then resave as default.bis to make this change to your defaults "Stick".

Exif data not being saved to .tiffs is a bug and will hopefully be fixed in the next release.

And AFAIK, Bibble is the only program of the bunch which is fully multithreaded, what that means is if you have a Dual CPU computer images will process in just about 1/2 the time!

Fuji S2 support will also be included in the Next MacBibble which will be released within a few weeks.

A free trial version is always available at www.bibblelabs.com

Eric

[jknights]

Have just reworked my Bibble

Eric, you are right.

**** Correction to my posting Bibble will process to Adobe 1998.

I have revised my report text above.

[Blade]

Dear Eric,

If you have time could you let me know...
s.bradley-meech@blueyonder.co.uk

Or post here when the next release is available (S"2 Support), and will definately buy it.

Kind regards

Stuart.

[bjnicholls]

I've found that Bibble does some image processing that can't be turned off in the current version. I've reported it on the Bibble forum. The effect under magnification looks like a plastic wrap filter in Photoshop, it apparently is Bibbles anti-noise filter (turned off for this conversion test).

The image below shows Bibble's swirly artifact vs. Fuji's EX converter on the right.

http://users.sisna.com/bjnicholls/bibbleartifact.jpg

I took a short look at Qimage and find the interface to be confounding. I'm not sure how much of my time I'm willing to invest learning a program that doesn't have conversions as a primary function.

Here's hoping Adobe's raw converter plugins arrives soon...

[stevebri]

Jonathan,

Great, thanks for taking the time to do all this, reading this after having played with bibble and qimage briefly has saved me about a week of tests.

Cheers.

Steve

[jknights]

FYI.
I have the Adobe RAW plugin for PS7.01
(No I will not post it as it is serialised to me)

Early assessment are that it works well enough for RAFs but it is not as good as Bibble or Fuji RAW Converter EX in my opinion.

It is a really handy tool as it allows me to see all the EXIF data in the File Browser in PS7.

There are definitely colour artifacts but I wont go into detail (see postings in this and other forums). I am sure that Adobe will sort out and release a second version soon. Fuji need to collaborate with Adobe rather than be unresponsive but I cant see if they will as it may not be in their interest, as it would effect sales of Fuji RAW Converter EX.

My advice would be to use the $99 to buy a copy of Bibble at this time.
Sorry Adobe but it's not that great for me. :-( I hope the next version proves me wrong.

[bjnicholls]

The last I tried Bibble, the noise reduction couldn't be turned off for the S2 and it produced swirly. plastic wrap looking artifacts that ruined fine details. I check the site every so often, but the only update is the Mac port and I'm still waiting for the S2 to be fully supported (with the noise reduction bug fixed) before I decide if it's worth the price or not. Right now, it's not useful at all for me.

[jknights]

Bjn,

I get the plastic wrap on very few images but I do get it. That is when it is processed by Bibble. However Bibble is still best for me as it suits my workflow. I wish I understood how/why this occurred. It looks like an edge or sharpening effect that is especially noticable in high contrast areas.

Do you have any thoughts/ideas ??.


I have found that the EXIF info in the NEFs and RAFs can be read directly using the Adobe RAW plugin when you are in the PS7 file browser. I find this useful sometimes.

[steve bingham]

Adobe Camera Raw - very fast at 3 plus seconds.

At last! Ignoring ALL, I mean ALL, default settings and setting temp at 5500, tint 0, exposure 0, shadows 0, brightness 0, contrast 0, saturation 0, sharpness 0, smoothness 0, 16 bit, 4277 x 2851, the images come out as sharp as EX - and no loss of detail or jaggies. Tested many times including Macbeth Color Checker and finally detailed scenics with grass, cactus, twigs, rocks, etc. Now I wonder why this could not have been set as the default instead of the CRAZY settings we had to start out with. I am sooooo happy but a little miffed at Adobe for starting S2 owners in the wrong direction.

Again, NO loss of detail or highlights, - and no jaggies

[steve bingham]

Oops . . .

Yeah, ACR got better but when I go 200%, 300% I still see better sharpness
with EX. Sigh. All this improved it but . . .

Use layers for instant A/B comparisons. Interesting that EX and ACR produce different amounts of actual image!!! ACR has more of the actual image on the left side and more image on
the right side! And then they add a thin white line on the right side. All
seen easily at 300%. And both files are 4256 pixels wide. How can this be???
Additional image AND a white line all with the same number of pixels.
Obviously ACR must use a different sampling algorithm or perhaps uses some
sort of resampling. Probably has to do with Fuji CCD uniqueness. Adobe has
some work to do.

In any case, my ACR files work great for 8 x 10s. Unfortunately I rarely print that
small.

[jknights]

Steve,

Very interesting afternoon spent experimenting with Adobe CR..

I have found that if I use the following settings:
Size 4277x2851, 16bit, Temp 5500K, Brightness 25, Contrast +50 and ALL others at 0 then I get a better result but I can't get it to be quite the same as the Fuji EX.


Also Colour is clightly more red/magenta than that of Fuji EX. I can't neutralise this to equal the Fuji EX results via the CT & Tint sliders.


I still find there are brown area of noise in the transition between higlights and shows. This is reduced if you reduce the sharpness setting. Hence my 0 setting. If you sharpen later in PS7 it doesnt seems to come back.

[bjnicholls]

I find that ACR defaults to fairly strong red, but like you I also find that even when I get the color as close as possible using the color temp and tint controls the images are still too red. If you go into curves in Photoshop and adjust the red channed white point back, you can (finally) get a reasonable color balance.

Adobe acknowledges the white stripe bug and they at least hint that the jaggies that show strongly in some images may be fixable. No fixes will be delivered before Photoshop 8, however. Consider the $100 cost of ACR a fee for the honor of beta-testing it.

Unless Fuji cooperates, I don't expect there to be much improvement of raf file handling with ACR when it's included as part of Photoshop 8.

[jknights]

BJN,
Thanks for the advice. "Consider the $100 cost of ACR a fee for the honor of beta-testing it."

I thik that if that is the case then I might invoice Adobe directly for my time spent assessing the problem.
In fact I may take it as a credit versus PS8, PS9 upgrades !!!

I hope that Fuji cooperate as they must understand most professionals wil use PS while the amateur market is more leikely to use Elements + Fuji EX.

Some of us are luck to be able to afford to have both PS and Fuji EX. (not to mention Bibble, QImage Pro).


BTW. Love the landscape shots on your site.
Jerusalem Cricket looks a real scary beast !!