Silkypix Now Does M8!

[elopezso]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am a long-term user of Silkypix with my Canon 5D as I felt that the colors were more accurate and the images were less plasticky than with C1 and other converters. Today, I got notice that Silkypix was handling Leica M8 files. I downloaded the new version and converted a bunch of photos I took on my trip to Fredericksburg this past weekend for Hellweek ( a week of cycling in the Texas Hill Country). I think the colors are quite accurate.

 

I would download a pic or two but the files are too big and I don't know how to get them down to teh proper size to attach them to the thread.

 

Ed

[waterlenz]

I am a long-term user of Silkypix with my Canon 5D as I felt that the colors were more accurate and the images were less plasticky than with C1 and other converters. Today, I got notice that Silkypix was handling Leica M8 files. I downloaded the new version and converted a bunch of photos I took on my trip to Fredericksburg this past weekend for Hellweek ( a week of cycling in the Texas Hill Country). I think the colors are quite accurate.

 

I would download a pic or two but the files are too big and I don't know how to get them down to teh proper size to attach them to the thread.

 

Ed

 

DNGs or JPGs?

Tom

[psquared]

DNGs

 

Here's a sample pic

 

Peter

[waterlenz]

DNGs

 

Here's a sample pic

 

Peter

 

Another point against Aperture!

Tom

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I know that was my image and it looks very good maybe a touch contrasty but the color is very good from it

[Guest malland]

I'm using Silkypix with my D-Lux 3 and Ricoh GR-D, and like it a lot. It's very flexible and powerful in almost anything can be adjusted, although the default setting provide a good starting point. I haven't figured out what to do about sharpening and smoothing, but I tend not to oversharpen and often do not smooth at all, or very little. The conversions to B&W are also excellent.

 

—Mitch/Johannesburg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

[Jamie Roberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

SilkyPix has very good image quality from Kodak sensors; they have an embedded Kodak colour engine in there.

 

I've used it with the DMR with shots that give other converters trouble (yes, including C1).

 

But I haven't tried the latest yet; the M8 has been unofficially supported for awhile now; maybe they've reworked the colour, which was a little lacking.

 

BTW--there are some tremendous pros and cons about SilkyPix, IMO...

 

Pros:

• Kodak colour engine
  
• Fastest DNG processing / preview I've ever seen. Performance is excellent
  
• Fabulous multi-option settings where you can quickly review contrast, WB, colour etc...
  
• More built-in and preset "looks" than any other raw converter I've seen
  
• More fine curve control than any other Windows raw program (at least, before LR); separate curve controls for RGB channels
  
• Good workflow--once you understand the program (see cons)

Cons:

• Least standard, most ridiculously translated interface of any program I've ever used (well, it's up there, anyway). For example (and this is only an example) if you need to do batch DNG processing, make sure you play with cloakrooms. Not kidding.
  
• Batch workflow equivalent to C1 LE, not C1 Pro
  
• No selectable input profiles. You know me, I like those
  
• Few selectable output profiles. aRGB is ok, but you can't even pick something like ProPhoto, let alone something custom.
  
• NR not as sophisticated as C1
  
• Final TIFF output--on average--a bit worse, IMO, than C1 output, which to me is still "the standard" when optimised.

FWIW, I find no RAW converter does perfect skin tones, really subtle stuff, right out of the box.

[elopezso]

Jamie,

 

I agree completely with your assessment, especially with respect to Silkypix 2.0. Silkypix 3.0 is indeed a horse of a different color (no pun intended:). The colors, right out of the box, in Silkypix 3.0, with the Leica M8, are far superior to the colors in Silkypix 2.0 and pretty much anything else, right out of the box, on the market. What I like most about it is that you don't get a blue cast or a plasticky look when you first view a photo.

 

You are absolutely right about your cons; one needs an interpreter and to keep the manual handy to get to know the interface. Once you do, however, it's really easy and yes, intuitive.

 

I don't worry about a specific profile as what I am looking for is final output and it's very good.

 

Finally, Jamie thanks for all you've done for us on this forum.

 

Ed

[Guest malland]

I've got to say it: when this forum is good, it's damned good!

 

—Mitch/Johanensburg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

[Jamie Roberts]

Edwin,

 

I was actually talking about V3 SilkyPix--I've used all the DNG compatible versions (including their betas) except for the very last one.

 

But I agree--v3 is much improved over v2.

 

I also agree that--usability issues aside--you can quickly get very good results out of the box with SilkyPix.

 

For some individual images I actually prefer SilkyPix.

 

And for quick proofing, well, it's just superb, because you can preview so many different adjustments in real time in the preview.

 

But since I usually know what I'm going for in a set of shots, and I'm also trying for excellent output (and who isn't?), I always try to optimise the RAW output.

 

This is where (at least up till the last release) SilkyPix is simply not as flexible as C1, and in most cases this affects the print quality. Certainly input and output profiles absolutely affect saturation, hue and gradations of colour.

 

So I hope they get around to adding those things some day.

 

(Thanks too, for your kind words on my contribution here. Just trying to help, as so many others have helped me).