Raw Processor

[okuma 64]

I am running a PC, Microsoft XP, P/S CS2 and a D-200.

 

What is your recommended raw processor and any particular advantages to this one?

 

Thanks in advance!

[Lionfish43 0]

I use capture 4.4 for three reasons:

1.Any in camera settings are automatically applied when you open the file.

2. It's my opinion that I get more vibrant color when using capture.

3. I like the option of using the D-Lighting feature.

 

I tried Capture NX but it was too slow on my computer.

[Cerianthus 55]

rawshooter gives the same for #1.

 

the pro version is a bit on the expensive side though, but there is a LE version as well.

 

Is there any current overview of Raw conversion software?

 

Maybe when Adobe lightroom is really hitting the streets we can get some updates and comparisons with other current software. The 1.0 version will even come with a clone tool and healing brush. If it really gives an almost -single use program- experience i would be really tempted.

 

Gerard

[LChan 0]

I'm a bit confused....

 

 

 

the literature says if you want to start CS2 from lightroom, you have to use Lightroom's converted JPG/TIFF. Not RAW. So is Lightroom a RAW converter?

 

If Lightroom doesn't convert RAW, it is a pretty useless program for workflow.

[ce4jesus 1]

I've used Bibble, Rawshooter and the adobe RAW converter plug in. Rawshooter is a nice batch processor that is really quick however I like the quality I get out of adobe. So for about 90% of my photos I'll use the free program Rawshooter (now owned by Adobe) and for photos I want to print I'll use Adobe CS2 with the plug in.

[John Bantin 101]

I tried a number of trial versions of RAW converters but was always drawn back to CS2. It's much more intuitve to use than the others and I like the results. The only thing I wish it had (and maybe it does and I don't know it) is the ability to straighten out horizons on surface Fish-eye shots at the click ofa button like Capture (NX?).