Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Photo Software

Photo Software Discussions of all the photo software - except scanning software which is in the forum with scanners.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Which RAW processor for M9?
Old 4 Weeks Ago   #1
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,685
Which RAW processor for M9?

Have had an M9 for awhile and have always used Lightroom. I have one of the last stand alone versions (Lightroom 4) as I'm just sorta morally opposed to renting core software.

However I feel like there is a little more in my RAW files than I'm seeing.

What RAW procesor do you like for the M9? Newer version of Lightroom (bite the bullet and get CC), Capture One, Irident, RPP (this one would be a stretch as UI is so primitive).

Just feel like there is a little more sharpness and better color rendition in there. I generally like Lightroom's file management, just wondering if I can improve my images that extra 10%.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #2
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,293
I use Photoshop with the Camera Raw plugin. I prefer my own filing system, and just never managed to settle in with Lightroom or Aperture. I really like the ease of Photoshop, especially as I've logged so many hours with it. I used Capture One when I first got the M8, but quickly settled on Photoshop/Camera Raw. I use CS6.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #3
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 68
Posts: 1,710
Agree 100% with sepiareverb.

Simple and lots of smiles!
__________________
Happiness is having the time to do the things I want to do!
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #4
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,685
I used to use Photoshop with my own file naming convention (based on the DAM book) when I was shooting a lot of film and scanning.

When I started shooting more digital I switched to Lightroom and I don't think I'd go back.

Not as concerned with the organization as with the actual RAW conversion. Seems like there might be better options that Adobe's solution.

Will probably just download a trial copy of C1 and play with it myself.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #5
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 50
Posts: 3,846
Over years I have grown to use SOOC. Quality sensor and good lens with correct exposure gives the best. IMO. I have LR 6, which seems to be standalone. I have it with new M-E as download.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #6
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,914
I am reasonably happy to use Lightroom for basic processing but run both Nik software and Corel Paint Shop Pro as plug-ins running under it for anything more than basic conversions. Lightroom is simply not capable of the sort of post processing I usually perform.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #7
sevres_babylone
Registered User
 
sevres_babylone is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,542
I use Adobe Camera Raw in Photoshop (I use Photo Mechanic for keywording, and "organizing.") Happy enough with ACR, and very comfortable with it.
__________________
Visit me at Pbase
and at Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #8
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,903
Photoshop cc works for my M8 & 9.

I don`t seem to get the hang of catalogs, but I am sure I could get it if I chose to spend a lot of time. ACR seems to work quite well.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #9
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald M View Post

I don`t seem to get the hang of catalogs...
+10. I really disliked having the software decide that stuff for me. I know where the file is, and know how to find it. Maybe I just have too many images for that system to fit.

EDIT: I've been corrected. Lightroom didn't decide anything for me, it just kept meticulous records of every click I made? Anyway it did way more than I needed. I'm simple.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #10
tom.w.bn
Registered User
 
tom.w.bn is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightfly View Post
Have had an M9 for awhile and have always used Lightroom. I have one of the last stand alone versions (Lightroom 4) as I'm just sorta morally opposed to renting core software.
There is LR 5 standalone and LR 6 standalone. We still don't know if there will be no LR 7 standalone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #11
tom.w.bn
Registered User
 
tom.w.bn is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by sepiareverb View Post
+10. I really disliked having the software decide that stuff for me. I know where the file is, and know how to find it. Maybe I just have too many images for that system to fit.
I don't get this. LR works with any file structure you have or want to have. It does not force you into a structure of your images you don't want. The is only the restriction that you are not absolutely free where the catalog itself is located. Or do you think that the images are inside the LR catalog? They are not.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #12
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is online now
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,714
LR 5 and LR cc seem pretty good with M9. I use Picasa (u can still find it) to browse my edited RAWS- which I export as Jpegs. This keeps me from scrolling around too much in LR, as it is not the greatest for that.

10 bucks a month for LR and PS is not a bad deal. Two good beers a month LOL

But there may be better options, and I love to hear what everyone likes best

I have better things to do with my limited time than edit, which is one reason I love M9
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #13
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom.w.bn View Post
I don't get this. LR works with any file structure you have or want to have. It does not force you into a structure of your images you don't want. The is only the restriction that you are not absolutely free where the catalog itself is located. Or do you think that the images are inside the LR catalog? They are not.
I always ended up with multiple versions of images with Lightroom. Granted I haven't tried it since LR2, which I loaded and IIRC I had trouble integrating with my LR1 catalog/library. A long time ago, and I never looked back. PS/ACR (and Bridge) do everything I need in a (for me) very straightforward fashion.

EDIT: I've been corrected, this was not what happened, however, I still don't like Lightroom.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #14
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,952
I use LR5 to transfer images from RAW to jpg, and I use CS2 for small changes here and there,
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #15
Gregm61
Registered User
 
Gregm61 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 196
Lightroom or Photoshop, the Adobe Camera raw processor is the exact same thing. Just arranged a little differently and I also do like the freedom and putting files where I want to put them using Photoshop. I need no "village" keeping me straight on where things are.

The raw profiles Huelight sells for the M9 are rather good too. Multiple color options and a great monochrome option.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #16
jarski
Registered User
 
jarski is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregm61 View Post
Lightroom or Photoshop, the Adobe Camera raw processor is the exact same thing. ...
yes. bit odd to read so many recommending one or another of the two.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #17
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregm61 View Post
... The raw profiles Huelight sells for the M9 are rather good too. Multiple color options and a great monochrome option.
Not familiar with these, do they have one that addresses greens on the M9?
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #18
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,297
Quote:
Originally Posted by sepiareverb View Post
+10. I really disliked having the software decide that stuff for me. I know where the file is, and know how to find it. Maybe I just have too many images for that system to fit.
LR decides nothing for you.

LR Catalog = a diary of every rendering and display change you made to an original file.

LR Library Panel= a virtual display of how the original folders/files are organized on your HD.

Catalogs have no direct relationship "with where the file is".

The LR Library tells you exactly where and how the images are located on your HD. In LR the files on your HD are virtually mapped to the LR Library Panel. Your OS determines where the folder/files located. LR just adopts your existing file organization[1]. Adding (Import) new images creates new folders/files on your HD. You always know exactly where the original images are located. The limit to how many images can "fit" is determined only by the limits of your HD storage space.

The Catalog can be understood if you think of it as a diary. Every change you make to an image is recorded in the Catalog. This means the original files are never irreversibly modified. It also means it is necessary to have a back up of the LR Catalog. I have two real-time back ups and two more recent back ups. One disadvantage of the Catalog is over time it can become very large.

In LR you can make virtual copies. These do not exist as files on the HD. Virtual copies do not exist in the Catalog either. When you view a virtual copy, LR goes to the Catalog; finds all the rendering and display parameters you once applied to that un-rendered image; and displays a version rendered with those parameters. Even if you don't use a virtual copy LR does the same thing. The advantage of virtual copies is you can save and compare different renderings for the original image.

[1] This one-to-one mapping has one consequence. After you start using LR, you should only reorganize, move or create new image folders using the drop and drag features of the LR Library Panel[2]. These changes physically change your HD organization via background OS commands executed by LR. The LR Library and the OS Folder/file organization are always identical.

[2] If you move folders and, or files just using the OS, LR will lose track of them. It is possible to teach LR where you moved the Folders and, or files. This can be very tedious if you decide to use the OS, instead of LR, to make significant organizational changes.
__________________
"Perspective is governed by where you stand object size and the angle of view included in the picture is determined by focal length." H.S. Newcombe

williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #19
Darthfeeble
Accidental Photographer
 
Darthfeeble's Avatar
 
Darthfeeble is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Logtown, California, USA
Age: 70
Posts: 981
Lightroom 6, the UnCC version. It's all you need.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #20
Duane Pandorf
Registered User
 
Duane Pandorf's Avatar
 
Duane Pandorf is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: I'm currently in Brevard, North Carolina.
Posts: 428
Have to agree with what William says above about LR CC and file management. When I bought my M-E that came with a free copy of LR I took the time to learn it and moved away from Apple Aperture. I also purchased and follow George Jardine's Lightroom Library and Workflow techniques. (George is well known for his managing role on the original development team for Adobe Photoshop Lightroom.)

For those that want to try out the Color Fidelity Huelight profiles for the Leica M9 can find them here: http://www.colorfidelity.com/leica.htm
__________________
Duane Pandorf
--------------------
Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #21
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
LR decides nothing for you.

LR Catalog = a diary of every rendering and display change you made to an original file...
This then is what got in my way. I certainly have no use for this, thus my preference for PS.

Every one I know personally who has used both LR and PS has gotten fed up (independently) with LR and gone back to PS for the same reasons of having trouble with finding images because of the Catalog/Library, and having duplicate files (or it seems not actual files, but duplicate versions or virtual versions or aliases) getting in the way. All of us are old darkroom folks tho. Now that you mention 'Importing' I am reminded that this is what I disliked most. This 'Importing' is where the virtual aliases and versions seemed to breed. As an admitted moron I likely was not opening/importing/closing/saving in the proper Lightroom fashion. No matter, I've not opened LR since 2008, soon after LR2 was released and I deleted everything Lightroom from my hard drive, I am not going to try it again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
...The Catalog can be understood if you think of it as a diary. Every change you make to an image is recorded in the Catalog. This means the original files are never irreversibly modified...
Redundant in my workflow as I shoot DNG only, and always save as .psd (I save jpegs for emailing or web use and tiffs for client use from my .psd files). Photoshop/ACR remembers how I have opened the RAW file so I can return to that same starting point if I wish, and there is always the option of zero-ing out those adjustments (or select individual ones) to start again. In Photoshop, working with layers and saving versions before flattening groups of layers – when helpful – is my means of being able to return to certain points of the process. If I am dodging something gently and make 12 passes over it I don't see much point in being able to go back to pass 9 next week, as then everything else I did since that point would be gone (or can just pass 9 be deleted from the file?). History allows me to make comparisons on the fly, as does working on a new layer which can be toggled visible/invisible. Returning to a selected point in the process can indeed be helpful, but returning to that point by having to wade through every click in the process seems much too time consuming. I don't doubt I have several thousand clicks in a given average image. I'd rather choose useful moments along the way to return to myself. Simply my way of working. I come to this from the darkroom where making a decision and moving along is part of the game.

I do have to delete no longer useful versions after I've finalized an image. Perhaps slightly time consuming, but I know where the versions are and what they're called, and then they are gone so no longer turn up when I look for an image. I've gotten used to working this way so it is second nature. Different methods are more intuitive for different folks and Lightroom just confused me no end. Again, moron here.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #22
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,297
Well I tried.

You still don't understand.

95% of your objections are due to misconceptions.

The main limitation with LR is the lack of layers. You have to use a plug-in to import a LR rendered file into PS; work with layers in PS; and then import the final PS result back into PS, While this is import/export is automatic, it is necessary to use PS features LR does not have.
__________________
"Perspective is governed by where you stand object size and the angle of view included in the picture is determined by focal length." H.S. Newcombe

williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #23
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
Well I tried.
Sorry if you tried on my account, I've no reason to use Lightroom.

And apologies to the OP for going so far off the rails from the original question.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #24
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,685
Really concerned with image quality of RAW converters rather than organization/workflow.

As far as I can tell all Adobe products use same RAW converter.

Capture One, Irident and Raw Photo Processor (RPP) all seem to use their own with varying results. Some claim much better results with the M9.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #25
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightfly View Post
Really concerned with image quality of RAW converters rather than organization/workflow.

As far as I can tell all Adobe products use same RAW converter.

Capture One, Irident and Raw Photo Processor (RPP) all seem to use their own with varying results. Some claim much better results with the M9.
To that end, I found ACR to be better in my workflow, tho I do have to correct the color green often, occasionally red. I shoot with Auto White Balance, so this may be a factor?
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #26
tom.w.bn
Registered User
 
tom.w.bn is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by sepiareverb View Post
This then is what got in my way. I certainly have no use for this, thus my preference for PS.
Isn't it nice that there are more than one possible workflow available?

I tried these tools (PS-Elements for example), where raw conversion is the first step and then you have a developed photo and work with other controls and levels. Whenever I wanted to change a setting from the raw conversion process I had to throw everything away and start with the raw conversion again. For me the way LR or C1 works is easier.

Back on topic:

The quality of C1 is better for me because of the better handling of colours. LR sometimes produces extreme colours (for M9 and M240) and I have to tweak a lot with white balance in combination with the colour profile to get it right. With C1 the starting point of the colours is most of the time far better. The reason why I come back to LR sometimes is, that I find it easier to operate and I have some fancy presets that I like. I finally have to make the move to C1 completely because handling two of these tools is just complicated.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #27
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,914
I regularly use the following software suite for my processing needs. (Noting I have an M8 not an M9 - but don't suppose this makes any difference except perhaps in file size given they are both DNG files.)

For many years I have used Corel Paintshop Pro as it is about equivalent to Photoshop Elements but both cheaper and more functional than this program. In the early days the Corel product was pretty naff software but it long ago improved out of sight and is now excellent software for photographers and is constantly being upgraded at quite low cost.

I also discovered quite some years ago, the various Nik Effects plugins which will run under all 32 bit versions of the above but not the 64 bit (more recent) versions of the Corel software which no longer support the various Nik plugins. As these plugins are now available free as so called "abandonware" (Google bought the firm then dumped it deciding I suppose it is not core business for them) I would counsel grabbing the installation files as they provide superb processing capabilities. These do need to run under a host program however.

As Corel does not any longer support Nik in its latest versions, I bought a stand alone version of Lightroom on eBay mainly to use as the host program for the Nik plugins but I now do my basic processing of my RAW files in Lightroom. I do not find it to be much use though for advanced processing of the sort I like to do.

Here's the thing. Both Corel Paintshop Pro and all the Nik plugins will run under Lightroom - effectively as plugins to it. When installed, a click of a button within Lightroom exports the file you are working on to which ever of these programs you wish to use for more sophisticated processing, then when you are finished allows you to export the file out of that plugin back to Lightroom again. This is perfect for me as it allows initial basic processing in Lightroom (basics like tone, saturation etc for which LR works fine) and then all the fancy stuff can be done using either the Paintshop Pro or Nik plugins running under Lightroom.

Sounds complex but its not and it answers the problem I had which was similar to yours....."I feel like there is a little more in my RAW files than I'm seeing" when using Lightroom alone." I simply find Lightroom is not enough for me to get the ebst out of my images but is fine for a quick clean up of them.

Given you already seem to have Lightroom, my advice to you would be to at least go onto the net and download and install "Google Nik Plugin" suite. When installing, it will automatically look for Lightroom and automatically install itself to run under it. But as a starter bit of advice, I can say you will find the list of Nik plugins when in Develop mode under the menu item - Photo/ Edit in/......... Doing this will instantly give you a huge boost (at no cost whatsoever) to your processing capabilities for your M9 files. Learning how to use the Nik plugins is quite easy and intuitive but advice on how to install the software under Lightroom (in case you do have a problem, but you should not) is available on the web as are tutorials on using the software.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #28
x-ray
Registered User
 
x-ray's Avatar
 
x-ray is online now
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Age: 68
Posts: 3,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by sepiareverb View Post
To that end, I found ACR to be better in my workflow, tho I do have to correct the color green often, occasionally red. I shoot with Auto White Balance, so this may be a factor?
Try doing your own color profiles. IMO it makes a substantial difference. I use the ColorChecker Passport. Here's a little article.

https://m.dpreview.com/articles/6497...a-calibration-

I profile all of my digital cameras and apply the profile in Lightroom. Ive profiles under a variety of lighting conditions for each camera and apply as a part of my workflow. I carry my colorchecker while I'm working and shoot a new profile if I encounter unusual lighting. Mostly you'll only need a half dozen or fewer as lighting color / spectrum is fairly consistent between light sources now. My profiles I use are, daylight, studio strobes, SB700 and fluorescent, SB700, fluorescent and tungsten.

Fluorescent lights have a funky spectrum and this really helps. Of course it's a good idea to shoot the colorchecker under the lighting you're shooting under and use the appropriate patch to sample in LR when you're color correcting the image after you've applied the profile.

I don't have an M9 any longer but it worked great with it and works equally well with my Nikons.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #29
tom.w.bn
Registered User
 
tom.w.bn is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post

I also discovered quite some years ago, the various Nik Effects plugins which will run under all 32 bit versions of the above but not the 64 bit (more recent) versions of the Corel software which no longer support the various Nik plugins. As these plugins are now available free as so called "abandonware" (Google bought the firm then dumped it deciding I suppose it is not core business for them) I would counsel grabbing the installation files as they provide superb processing capabilities. These do need to run under a host program however.
This must be Windows specific then. On a Mac you can use the Nik Plugins to open files directly. Using a host program maybe convenient but you can export a jpg or tif from any image processing software and open the file with the nik tool.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #30
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by x-ray View Post
Try doing your own color profiles. IMO it makes a substantial difference. I use the ColorChecker Passport. Here's a little article...
Thanks for that. I've been debating the ColorChecker for a while, seems like that may be the next game I learn. I've long carried a grey/white card to help settle WB, but the colorchecker does seem much better.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 20:29.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.