What RAW converter?

[mujana]

I want to shoot more in RAW. What converter do you use....and why?
CaptureOne4? Adobe CS3 (much too expensive for me though)? Silkypix? Master or Studio? I read some people use more than one...mwah...I do not want to do that.
If you had to choose one and one only....which one would it be (and why)?
Understanding RAW workflow is another thing I have to learn...anyone any tips/advise?

p.s. Paul...not anything about the E-3 grip OR the ordered 50-200 mm SWD...I'll keep you informed

[carlalex]

I have to admit that I use more than one but I tend to gravitate to Lightzone which allows you to do alot of the work you might do in another program after the raw processing.

[Paul Shields]

Hi mujana - yes, keep me informed of the grip .

As for RAW converters - I've tried them all it seems and I don't think there is a huge difference between them. I was using Silkypix for quite a while as it seemed to treat the E-1 RAW files in a similar way to Studio, but without the performance hit.

These days I'm very happy with Adobe/ACR. I did some very basic tests with a few E-3 RAW converters recently and there really was not a fundamental difference between them. Studio can be a bit aggressive in it's sharpening, though that can be toned down. Silkypix still works very nicely with E-3 ORF's, but ACR was at least as good and ties in nicely with my Lightroom/Photoshop workflow.

[oldugly]

mujana, CS3 isn't all that expensive if you can figure out a way to get the academic discount. Try PROVANTAGE SuperStore: Buy GPS Computers Electronics Software More (no, I don't have any connection to the company.) What I like about PS' raw converter is you can even play with jpegs in it. My 86 year young father just bought his first digital camera. It is a "point and shoot" but fills his needs. He brought it over to the house a couple of weeks ago, had 165 pictures on the card and no idea what to do next. Of course the ones he wanted were some of the worst exposures. Using the PS raw processor I was able to save (to his satisfaction) about 90% of the bad ones.

[Mr. Pickles]

I use Lightroom. It has the ACR engine from PSCS3 in it. Works well for me on any RAW file, including E-1 and E-510 files.

There is NOT a best one. A lot of people claim that different ones work better for different RAW file formats. Your mileage may vary. Virtually every RAW editor has a wealth of controls to adjust numerous variables. Photography is subjective. All this means that you can get the results you want from most of them. But the best looking conversion should be obtained by the RAW editor that comes with the camera (they should know how to convert their files). But then again, the software may be trying to convert the RAW to look just like the JPG version...

[Ellie237]

I use use CaptureOne4, but I've just found out you can download something from Olympus that works with Vista. I don't know what it's like
OLYMPUS Digital Camera : OLYMPUS RAW codec for Windows VISTA

[gpf]

I bought Capture NX while I was waiting for Adobe CS3 to come from the USA. Capture NX is available a reasonable price here in Germany while CS3 is about 4 or 5 times the price of that available from the discount houses in the US which only deliver to a US address. It took me a couple of months to arrange delivery of a "US" version, hence my purchase of NX in the meantime.

Capture NX is much quicker bringing in Raw than Adobe's ACR. On screen, the images look slightly better in Capture NX. Had I not already ordered CS3, I would have probably stuck with CaptureNX. You can make as many changes to the RAW file as you like and the original is always recoverable. This means you can do everything in the RAW file and just export a final JPEG or TIFF. The controls are simple and easy to use although the manual is rubbish.

However, now I've had a chance to use Adode's Bridge/ACR/PS3 workflow, I'm really happy with it. I use Capture NX less and less, especially now I've worked out how to the ACR Batch commands.

My advice would be to try to go the CS3 route - but there is a steep learning curve.

Graham

[Paul Shields]

Not sure how well Capture NX handles ORF files - I thought it was for Nikon RAW files, or am I missing something ?

[JDArt]

Originally Posted by mujana

If you had to choose one and one only....which one would it be (and why)?
Understanding RAW workflow is another thing I have to learn...anyone any tips/advise?

I have tried most of the RAW converters on the market, and like you, I wanted to settle on just one, primarily because it's just too much trouble to deal with color issues for multiple programs. The one I settled on was Adobe Camera RAW. Isn't that available in the lower-priced Elements?

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by Ellie237

I use use CaptureOne4, but I've just found out you can download something from Olympus that works with Vista. I don't know what it's like
OLYMPUS Digital Camera : OLYMPUS RAW codec for Windows VISTA

Hi Ellie237,

The RAW Codec you have found for MS VISTA will enable MS VISTA to show you the thumbnails of the ORF files in Internet Explorer/My Computer (the MS file browser window), like the JPG's

It is only a 'shower' not a 'converter' though...

...€0.02...

Kindest regards!

Max@Home

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by JDArt

The one I settled on was Adobe Camera RAW. Isn't that available in the lower-priced Elements?

JDArt,

Although it is the same RAW engine, it has less horsepower (possibilities) in PS Elements, about half the tabs are missing compared to CS3

...€0.02...

Kindest regards!

Max@Home

[gpf]

Originally Posted by Paul Shields

Not sure how well Capture NX handles ORF files - I thought it was for Nikon RAW files, or am I missing something ?

You're dead right, Paul. Got Nikon on the brain here and missed the fact that the original poster might have been using some other format. Duh!

[oldugly]

gpf, Those moments are known as "cognitive disconnects." (That sounds so much more learned than "brain fart.")

[jfrancho]

I use Photoshop ACR, Capture One, and DPP (Canon). ACR is my fisrt choice simply from a work flow stand point, DPP has the best quality output.

[gpf]

Originally Posted by oldugly

gpf, Those moments are known as "cognitive disconnects." (That sounds so much more learned than "brain fart.")

My wife insists that the full name is "age-related cognitive disconnect". Just wish I could remember what her name was so I could answer back...