What software do you use to edit your RAW photos

[newmikey]

I use Rudi Fuchs's UFRAW which is based on DCRAW by Dave Coffin. Great detail resolving and I have the feeling it leaves more detail for the final USM.

The downside is that it also leaves more noise, but that can be taken care of by NeatImage better than all of the all-in-one programs.

UFRAW just sort of gives an "honest" result for you to manipulate further. I tried about everything else including RSE, PSPX, Bibble etc. etc. and ended up with UFRAW.

[mogza]

Hi, if you are looking for a fast use to modify RAW format without losing the quality, my advice will be to use the Picassa (made by google).

Its a simple program with great result. I use this program first before going to photoshop elements 2. Just because it is a lot faster and does the job that I need for now.

Hope this helps.

[vanderstouw]

a lot of people like photoshop's CameraRAW, but it has the worst algorythm (which actually accounts for about 50% of the quality of the image)...

the best i have seen so far is Capture One Pro (expensive). i also use Nikon Capture (i think it is slow, but the algorythm is ok) , and DCS Photo Desk (made for the SLR/n and SLR/c)

also photoshop's CameraRAW has the worst controls for professionals. it was designed for consumers (hence the whole default auto check boxes thing).

i still use it, and it has it's place... the biggest problems with it are it's rendition of specular highlights (you will sometimes get weird geometric patterns in really bright areas like a flame or lamp) and shadows (i don't like the noise structure).

go to dpreview.com and you can look at comparisons of files processed under different raw editers. you will be amazed at the results.

[mr_skee]

It has to be C1 pro! ACR2 is catching but still not there yet! Most of my edited tifs come from RAW files processed in C1 pro. As I work in the Graphic design industry I use photoshop on a daily but have stopped using it for my RAW files. However all this may change, if like me, you use a mac that is, Apple's Aperture seems to be the way forward... I've looked at this program and realise it's pure genius! Industructive editing...wow! Adobe you could have done this ages ago. The bottom line is the more healthy the competition the better it is for us end users I only wish the price of such programs would drop as well!

[lance_h]

Why the emphasis on C1 Pro? What does it have, in terms of image quality that C1 LE does not have? I may be wrong, but I don't think there is any difference in image quality that would justify spending several hundred dollars more for the "pro" version of Capture One.

RawShooter Premium is another raw converter (created by some of the original developers of Capture One) that is worth serious consideration. Many folks who loved C1 now use it.

I prefer C1 LE myself,


Lance


http://www.pbase.com/lance_h

[vanderstouw]

i haven't used w/ C1 LE...

but according to phase one, these are things you can do w/ pro (and these are just the highlights - there are more differences). if it isn't important, then hell... sound like LE is a good option.

ability to shoot teathered (if you are into that)
auto renaming of files on import
moire suppression
ability to create photographic "styles" to apply
flexible sizing and scaling options
ability to embed watermarks
can apply iptc tags
ability to create iptc tag templates

[yuyud]

Adobe PS CS (1 or 2) is a good choice

[vanderstouw]

adobe cameraRAW actually has one of the worst algorythms.

if you process the same file with different processors cameraRAW and bibble pro will hands down be the worst two... both in shadow rendition and in highlight rendition...

i have personally seen the difference, but if you don't believe me, you can see reviews of this on dpreview.com

the algorythm is just as important as the camera actually.

i still use cameraRAW sometimes, but i find it the worst choice...

the main problems is the algorythm, in addition to their overly heavy-handed approach to auto controls.

i think it could be a really good program... but it isn't there yet.

[simplephotography]

I got my Rebel XT yesterday, and decided long before I bought it that I would shoot RAW exclusively. Before I start worrying about what editor I'm going to use, I have to teach my PC to see RAW files on my camera, because it doesn't! On my way home yesterday, I took about 20 photos in RAW format. Getting home, I installed the Canon software, rebooted the PC, connected the camera to the PC, and then I got a dialogue box asking me if I wanted to open Word, PS, Microsoft scanner/camera wizzard and something else. I decided not to open any of these, because I kind of expected one of the Canon programs to open. I then browsed through all my folders, and I did find the Rebel XT there, but... no files! I then opened the EOS viewer program, which I was sure had to be able to see th RAW images, but.... no Rebel XT in the list! I checked the camera, and yes, the 20 photos were still there. I then shot one JPEG, and that one was seen by every program, including windows explorer.
Anyone who is a computer wizzard too? I was looking forward to this so much, and I hate it that it doesn't work, despite all my efforts.

[vanderstouw]

your computer itself will NOT see your raw files...

raw files are basically binary... they aren't even images.... which is why your raw files are relatively small... a file that would be a 35mb tiff is only about 5mb raw... if you aren't starting to understand the implications for this then you need to stop and think about it...

the camera cmos chip really only records b/w... they make color images by making a mosaic of b/w "cells" that have different colored gel over them. each pixel in the mosaic is made up of 2 green gels, one red gel, and one blue gell...
(NOTE: each cell is NOT a pixel)

as so:

GRGB
BGRG
GRGB

if you look at this and read what i wrote, you are probably more flumoxed... but you look at that the grid, you are probably thinking "oh, if each pixel is made up of 4 cells, then this is a 4 pixel grid... actual it is 6 pixels... the pixels actually are made up of overlapping cells...

now, even though cells only see b/w, the gel causes only that color to go through the gel, causing that cell to only see that color...

why is a pixel made up of 2 green, one blue, and one red, when colors are made up of RGB? that is because the camera manufacturers (with the exception of sigma's fovion chip) have determined that green is the most neutral color, and they use that 4th green cell to act as the luminosity cell...

if this all sounds really confusing, it is because it is...

all this binary info means nothing without the file's sidecar file. (what is that, right?) the sidecar file is like a recipe... (with all of the binary data being the ingredients). all the exif data (shutter speed, f-stop etc.) gets put in the sidecar file as info... but even more importantly your white balance (actually a misnomer) your sharpening, your contrast curve, etc., lives in the sidecar file.

when your camera takes the picture in raw, it records binary data, and the directions for how to put it together (which you can completely ignore if you want later)... the image doesn't exist yet!!! this is why your computer doesn't recognize it. none of those things (sharpening, white balance) have actually happened yet... until the file gets processed by a raw processor...

something needs to put it together and make a readable file - and that is your raw processor. (like canon capture, adobe cameraRAW (bundled with photoshop now){ok}, C1 pro {great}, C1 lite {great}, bibble pro {sucks}, etc.

i don't know if your rebel comes with canon capture (or if you have to buy it)... but you might want to try there.

your raw processor runs what is called an algorythm... -a mathmatical equation that goes through the data (and the sidecar file) and builds your tiff or jpeg (and we at pbase already have battled over the whole why jpegs suck thing)... the better the processor, the better the results from the algorythm... the algorythm is actually about 50% of the quality of your image. use a sucky one, and get sucky results... personally, i like C1 pro and C1 lite (from PhaseOne) - it is really well reviewed, and gives great results.


simple:

what i would do, (rather than plug in your camera, which does work, but confuses the computer a bit as you discovered) is get a card reader... plug in the card to the reader, and just copy the files into a folder... then open your raw processor and open the folder or images that way...


(and BTW, i would work in 16-bit... the main advantage for raw anyway)

[simplephotography]

Okay, that makes sense. Now: I don't have a card reader, and I won't buy one now, because I have just spent over $2.000, and my wife would kill me if I bought more. I do have PS CS2, so I should be able to use that. I also have Canon Capture. Now, how do I get my RAW stuff on my PC from the camera, but without a card reader? Can I do that with Canon Capture, or even with CS2, or can I forget that?

[vanderstouw]

firstly, the card reader is like $15... but

you should still be able to move the stuff directly off the camera into a folder... - just treat it as a drive...

(you may have to go to adobe's website and download the latest version of the cameraRAW plugin to get photoshop to recognize your raw files)..

the other solution would be to get a divorce - ha ha!

canon capture and cs2 will open your files, but they won't act as a file manager... you will still need to drag them into a folder...

[aisassipbase]

Hey simplephotography!

Congratulations on your new camera!

I would strongly encourage you to spend en extra $15 on a CF card reader.
Plugging your camera to the USB port to regularly transfer your images to your PC....is not a good idea...battery drain, power surges, etc.

Tell your wife: "My buddies on PBase told me I need it"

[simplephotography]

First: I don't live in the States. These things cost more here.
So I just want to get the damn RAWs off my camera, ON my PC. My PC can't see them. Even if I got a card reader, my PC still wouldn't see the RAWs. How can I make it see the damn things?

[aisassipbase]

When it comes to handling image/photo files, there are 2 basic needs:

1)
Browse/preview the images (so you do not have to open the each image in the image editing software -just- to see if it is the image that you want.

2)
Edit/post-process the image

If your PC does not have software installed to handle RAW files....it won't be able to do either 1 or 2.
Did your Canon XT include software with it?
My 20D came with some basic software that lets me do these 2 tasks.