A&P RAW editing software

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by twinturboteddy, Apr 16, 2008.

  1. twinturboteddy

    twinturboteddy Bling Bling!

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2000
    Messages:
    1,056
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Gabriel, Ca, USA
    Anyone else using Acdsee Pro 2 to edit RAW files?

    I'm finding that I actually prefer it over Photoshop CS3. Here is an example for every setting for noise reduction maxed.

    ISO 3200 from a D200 with NR turned off on the camera.

    Left is JPG FINE quality from camera, middle is JPG quality maxed from raw to jpg conversion in cs3, right is jpg quality maxed from raw to jpg conversion in acdsee pro 2

    [​IMG]

    I'm just curious to see what your thoughts are comparing RAW editing between CS3 and other RAW editors for that matter.
     
  2. jared_IRL

    jared_IRL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,737
    Likes Received:
    55
    the CS3 version looks like it's a stop more exposed.

    Other than that, my opinion is that the NR is too strong and makes everything look out of focus and without detail.

    But it's hard to tell when you're looking at a shadow and some random background area with no in focus subject.
     
  3. emorphien

    emorphien New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,115
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    ಠ_ಠ
    Adobes RAW converter isn't the best generally IMO. It's not bad, but it can do some funny stuff. Personally, I think Capture 1 is the best and so I don't use Adobe (ACR or Lightroom), or anything else most of the time.
     
  4. jared_IRL

    jared_IRL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,737
    Likes Received:
    55
    really? I hated capture 1. everything just came out... wrong.
     
  5. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Thats what I was going to say.

    I only use DPP for raw editing and NR. I find I get the best results converting from DPP and that NR applied to the chroma channel leaves the picture with a simple grain look which is very acceptable to me.
     
  6. nastyboy132

    nastyboy132 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,509
    Likes Received:
    0
    all three of those look like garbage.
    thing is, if you want clean raw conversions, you pretty much have to stick to your companies converter. they're proprietary formats and so far canon and nikon etc haven't played nice and shared the info with adobe, or anyone else for that matter. only they know what all the 1's and 0's mean, so to get the most accurate, clean conversion you have to stick with their converters. adobe etc just guess as best they can. i convert with dpp(actually really, really decent software as soon as you get a feel for the layout of it) and then do other needed work in cs3. been playing with lightroom with the 16bit tiffs...i'm still not sold on it.
     
  7. nastyboy132

    nastyboy132 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,509
    Likes Received:
    0
    preach!
     

Share This Page