Digilux 2 RAW - how to get "Leica color"?

[bernd_muc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sorry for interveening, but I really like Silkypix and don't want you to miss the chance of working with it. Since I discovered this software a year or so back I left other packages I used

Sorry for intervening, too

I'm by no way a professional photographer and recently bought a D-Lux 3. Of course I looked around for a good RAW developing software, so I tried out some trial versions: Lightroom, Silkypix, RAWdeveloper and Lightzone. So I took some pictures out of the window with houses, trees, bushes, and grass, and a macroshot of flowers and ivy, did some basic white balancing and saved the pictures. As Silkypix is very affordable and it seems to be pretty popular in this and other forums I really thought that I'd go with it. So I started comparing Silkypix to RAWdeveloper and was almost shocked: Details, such as leaves of bushes or structures on the ivy leaves looked as painted with crayons in Silkypix. RAW developer and all the others did way better with crisp, detailed JPEGs (they were all 95% Quality and the same file sizes). Actually, someone in another forum complained once about the bad pictures that the D-Lux 3 supposedly takes - he used Silkypix to develop his RAW files...

 

Colors looked "nicer" in Silkypix - yellow a bit "yellower" than the others, so I wonder which would be off color in this case.

 

I eventually bought Lightroom, mainly because it is easier to work with than RAWdeveloper and Lightzone (maybe I'm wrong in that respect, but if the image quality seems right, the rest can be left to subjectivity).

 

Just my two (Euro) cents,

 

Best regards,

Bernd

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[gennfiks]

Hi Berndt,

Completely respect your oppinion about Silkypix, but let me tell you why I abandoned RawShooter and went with the Silky package. As you mentioned the RawShooter was

giving you sharp and well defined images. I was also observed the same, but when I amplified the image and checked "WHY" these edges were so well defined and giving you this 3-d sensation I realizaed that a heavy, heavy sharpening was done to acheive such an effect, even when sharpennig was off. That's when I decided that Silkypix was a more natural way to see pictures, as you mentioned it a crayon-like, even though I don't feel the same.

 

Just my subjective oppinion about the subject, even though I feel the pictures that come out are very "leica-like"

Gennady

[bernd_muc]

As you mentioned the RawShooter was

giving you sharp and well defined images. I was also observed the same, but when I amplified the image and checked "WHY" these edges were so well defined and giving you this 3-d sensation I realizaed that a heavy, heavy sharpening was done to acheive such an effect, even when sharpennig was off.

Hello Gennady,

I agree with you that RAWdeveloper probably does some sharpening even though it's set to zero, but I have the impression that Lightroom treats the data "better" than Silkypix as even in Lightroom details come out much better - and I don't think that Lightroom sharpens if not told to. And in either case - RAWdeveloper or Lightroom - sharpening can do nice things but it can't add structure which isn't there in the first place.

 

That said, it's good that there's a selection to select from

 

Regards,

Bernd

[wda]

Amin, it may be worth having a look at the various Lightroom tutorials available on the web. I have learnt some good techniques from them.

 

I can echo these remarks. I am in the midst of a learning curve for LR and the tutorials are most helpful, rather better than a book although I have ordered Martin Evening's tome on the basis that I constantly refer to his treatise on PSCS.

 

David

[rivi1969]

Hello,

 

After many trial and error tests I decided to use my Digilux 2 exclusively @ iso 100 in RAW. I don't mind waiting 5-6 secs between shots because at the end I know I will have a terrific file with far more information to play with. I work with Lightroom and the color depth and tonal range I get from raw makes the wait and time worthy. I just did some tests with my dogs this weekend and I found a significant difference comparing jpgs and raws from the same files.

[rivi1969]

Here they are, 2 of my pics that I took with raw... I don't have the jpgs anymore but the difference in depth color was huge. These files look more beefy to me, richer...

 

Regards!

Ricardo

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!