So much so that I have actually paid up because I want to use it as my sole editor when travelling, and noise reduction isn't available in the free version, which is a major downside. In fact, I like that a lot, and even the free version does a nice job for files at or near base ISO. ).ĭon't underestimate Polarr, anyway - it's a very handy app that can provide very nice results for something so simple and restricted in use. I was about the test PhotoScape X - but I think I'll postpone that (maybe indefinitely. This doesn't bode well, really - if the RAW engine already produces heavy artifacts, further processing will most probably make it worse. it's noticeable even at this rather modest resultion. It certainly looks as if PhotoScape X had some pretty grave issues with applying in-camera profile information additionally, the pixelating effects are rather harsh and ugly (not only in the face - the script, the greenery. Which is why I went to the RAW file expecting to be able to bring out more light. The image looks poorly exposed to me i.e. Is the Photoscape example a sign of poor software? Also, do you think a professional tool like Lightroom shows a superior RAW file to both? If Polarr seems fine I will just stick with that as I like the simplicity, but I will upgrade if it means higher quality images from the start. I assumed that I may not be getting everything from RAW files with Polarr, hence the upgrade. I did a quick edit with both tools and with Photoscape X there are far more artefacts, easily seen when zooming in on the lady's face. I am specifically wondering which is better in terms of showing the correct RAW file. Please could you take a look at the below photos and give me your opinions. But when I open RAW files they look very dark and I find it hard to make them look good. Select prefered script, and see the result :ģ5mm film Blueprint Camera Classic Lenses Computer CUBE DIY Download DSLR Events Film Simulation Gear La Gallerie Luts micro 4/3 OMSystem OSP Magazine PictureFX Presets Recipes Review Site Info Software Special Tips and Tricks Tutorial Uncategorized Video What’s In My Camera Bag Workflow Search Tags 3DLUT 3D LUT 35mm Adobe Adobe CS6 Analog Analog Simulation ART Artherapee B&W Blueprint Bushcraft Camera Canon Classic Chrome Clut CUBE Darktable Darktable Light Download DT Styles E-M1 Mark II E-M1 Mark III Eterna Events film Film Emulation Film Simulation Fuji Fujifilm fujifilm recipes Gear Gimp HaldClut Kubuntu La Gallerie Leica Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm Lens Review Linux Luminar Lut MacOS MGA Minolta Nikon Olympus Olympus 300mm f4.I recently got Photoscape X thinking it was an upgrade from Polarr. Open Rawtherapee -> -> double click a picture in file browser -> the editor opens -> top right side, fourth icon from right -> click the folder icon – load a profile from file -> in the next screen – select default folder, or go to downloaded folder Stefan Chirila – Custom Chrome – 6 sets packed with presets : realy tons of presets, awesome Stefan, thanks !.GLTR87 – RawTherapee-presets-Fuji-inspired : -> note from author : “The presets were calibrated with a Sony A7 camera, but they give good results with Canon 5D and Olympus X-Z1 RAW files, and probably others.”.Where to find (the latest can be found at the bottom of the list ) : Adams Presets for Rawtherapee :įilm Simulation Profiles ( presets ) are scripts, text files (.pp3) that can be applied in RawTherapee on any image Update: October 2022 – “A selection of Darktable Styles” by Mark G. This is a work in progress, and will be further supplemented, updated and improved as time goes on.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |