RAW developers for DMR

[Overgaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Inspired by this thread http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-forum/63106-raw-developper-lr2.html I made some conversion that might inspire some thoughts.

 

All made straight through the software, not special settings or tweaks. Just trying to decide on raw converter and workflow. At least there seem to be no difference between Lightroom 1.4 and Lightroom 2 (so at least one possible confusion out of the way).

 

And can't use Aperture for DMR files because highlights are purple due to lack of DMR support in the Aperture 2.

 

Se the four side-by-side in the bottom. I should make some with skin-tones. Might do that a bit later.

 

Any comments and advice are welcome.

[Advertisement]

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

[robsteve]

My bet is thatFlexcolor had the more true rendition of the red, followed by Raw Developer.

 

Lightroom has the best workflow though.

 

Robert

[harrisfoto]

Try BibblePro

 

Bibble Labs - Professional Photo Workflow Software

[james05]

Nice post, Thorsten. After a lot of informal experimentation, my preferred workflow is RAW to TIF conversion using FlexColor v4.8.6, (mostly without autocorrection), followed by TIF to TIF conversion with DxO Optics Pro v5.2.1 Build 7024. The second step seems incongruous, but images print beautifully after this, and if anything, the “Leica look” (3dimensionality – analogueness- clarity) is enhanced, IMO. Given my observations, I would definitely like to see support for DMR RAW files by DxO Optics Pro, even without lens correction. Or do I now have the best of both worlds: Flexcolor – Imacon colour handling and DxO magic?

[Overgaard]

Dear Robert,

You're about right there. At least I get the most pleasant colors with the FlexColor. I think what I'm trying to get at, is a standardly workflow that will attain the "film look" I want, or "my look." Unfortunately, as is, that means working with Lightroom for workflow, and FlexColor for conversion, and then - jut to add some pain to it all - Microsoft Expression for DAM (Digital Asset Management).

But when in the field for picture agencies, I tend to use just Lightroom so that I don't need to stay up all night. But my prefferred workflow at this point is comparing Lightroom and FlexColor files one by one of the selected files and choosing the best presentation in each case.

I'm considering using colormeter and the possibility of shooting JPG as I've had very good experiences with external lightmeter for film slides and Digilux 2 work. The RAW workflow easily slide towards slopp shooting of white balance and light metering because everything can be fixed later and I believe one can save a lot, and be very knowledgeable and competent, in shooting things correct the first time - a bit like you have to with slides.

However, the end goal is to have "my own style" which should combine the best of digital and film in a look that is uniquely mine and not the product of a standard workflow.

 

In all this, I remember when I first looked at digital files; and there is this trend of blowing everything up to look at sharpness and noise. I was very confused, and didn't get rest before I started looking at pictures as a whole, the color expression, contrast, the "feel" of the picture. Rather than just the technical details. And I feel very much we tend to do the same in RAW workflow. Of course it is of interest which conversion gives the best sharpness details, noise reduction, etc. But when those details has been studied, it's a matter of the overall expression.

 

Dear Harris and James,

I've downloaded Bibble Pro just now and will test it as it has DMR support. The DxO Optics is interesting, but not as a workflow tool, but to fix up or save pictures. I've had a very successful workflow within PS CS3 to fix and remedy both slide scans and Digilux 2 JPG's to a smaller or larger degree (as needed). For a long while I've been occupied with maintaining the "original" look of things, but how thinks look and what is possible seem to slide these days, thanks to software. And I think it's interesting and kind of OK to do so. Thanks for both those links to stuff I didn't know about.

[Overgaard]

Here's a test with Bibble Pro 4.10 as well:

[Overgaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So, here is some samples with skin color. And an even more tricky one following in the next post.

[Overgaard]

And here's a tricky one with a special look and special lightning. You want the RAW software to respect that and not trying to "normalize" it.

 

Clearly, some changes has to be done in the RAW converter and/or Photoshop. But this gives an idea as how to much time one has to spend getting at the desired result with which converter.

 

(Sunset in the back with a golden reflector to the left, 80mm Summilux at f/1.4)

[Overgaard]

As a general thing, I would say Lightroom get close in many cases and that FlexColor has the most pleasant look - but has a tendency to close down in the dark areas. Look at the eyes on the girl in blue dress; The eye color and liveliness on the FlexColor is perfect, but the area around the eye is closed beyond what can be gotten back in Photoshop. But apart from that, the FlexColor is ready for print, whereas the others require some adjustment; but the Lightroom very little adjustment of contrast, and perhaps colors, to arrive there.

 

Please comment and give input.

[sandymc]

And can't use Aperture for DMR files because highlights are purple due to lack of DMR support in the Aperture 2.

 

Aperture can be "persuaded" via DMR2M8: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-forum/33185-solution-dmr-files-aperture-dmr2m8.html

 

Sandy

[Overgaard]

Aperture can be "persuaded" via DMR2M8: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-forum/33185-solution-dmr-files-aperture-dmr2m8.html

 

Besides having been unable to place the txt files in the library as described in the thread, and not having an working Aperture at present, then the question is:

 

Would that still work when Aperture is updated from Apple?

[sandymc]

Besides having been unable to place the txt files in the library as described in the thread, and not having an working Aperture at present, then the question is:

 

Would that still work when Aperture is updated from Apple?

 

Yes, it will work as long as M8 files are supported by Aperture - post modification, there isn't any practical way for Aperture to tell the difference. As regards the txt files, they are only relevant if you want the files to appear as "DMR" files rather than "M8" files.

 

Sandy

[Dantist]

This will be only my tiny cent :

 

Details in the grass (bottom, eq. not centered...) from the first set of comparison have definitely the best rendition with Capture One.

 

IMHO