SilkyPix is, err, not good?

_larky · 03-10-2011

SilkyPix that comes with the X100 appears to be a bit bad. I wonder if this is me, and wonder if anyone has used it to get good output? My TIFF conversions are full of noise, artefacts, and in general really bad. Anyone else get this?

hausen · 03-10-2011

Really? I have only converted a couple of test shots so far and exported to Lightroom and thought they looked OK. Will have a close look later today. really have just been playing with it so far. How are you finding it?

_larky · 03-10-2011

Mine look like ****e.

Try converting in camera, then in Silky, the difference is massive for me. I get loads of mess added to my shots, wondering if I'm doing something wrong. All I do is add the shots then run a batch conversion.

Hmm.

I'm on Mac.

eurotramp · 03-10-2011

from: http://www.tony-hart.com/files/x100_initial_review.php

the catchily named 'RAW FILE CONVERTER EX powered by Silkypix' - the simply appalling bundled software that is required to handle the X100's .RAF files - is not only abysmal, but to some extent stands between me and a true understanding of what the X100 can and can't do. I know how to edit a file in LR, I know how to get the best out of it. I haven't a clue in the bundled abomination mentioned above. I'm not sure anyone does. It's slow, unresponsive and Mac Paint on my Mac Plus is capable of doing more advanced work.

_larky · 03-10-2011

Not just me then

MPerson · 03-10-2011

Not just you. I wasted a couple of hours trying to get useable files from RAW with SilkyPix RAW converter. Total crap. Used the CD as a frisbee into the English Channel!

I will stick to JPEGS from the X100 until RAW Developer & Lightroom are updated.

_larky · 03-10-2011

I wonder if the PC software is any better? No idea why it would be, but just wonder.

I too wil stick to JPEG's until something better comes along, then have a major day of converting

Rogier · 03-10-2011

One word: JUNK

jsrockit · 03-10-2011

Any word on LR adding the X100... ?

Catto · 03-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit

Any word on LR adding the X100... ?

I'd count this as BAD news - Adobe Labs have just released their latest release candidate / beta for Lightroom / Camera Raw, which does NOT include the X100...means we have to wait for the next update to get started! Argh...unfortunate timing.
http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/cameraraw6-4/
http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom3-4/

Dang. Our only hope is this:
"Will additional camera or lens support be available in the final release?
It is possible that additional cameras or lenses will be supported in the final release."
R

JoeV · 03-10-2011

I've used the version 3.0 of SilkyPix, bundled with the Lumix G1 micro4/3 camera, since 2008, and it's still my primary raw converter. The image quality output by the converter is fine, and I find myself doing almost everything in SP except clone stamping (which I rarely do to a digital file).

I'm no computer genius, so if I can manage good files from SP, I'm certain that others can. One thing I do know that takes some adjusting to is the little "busy" symbol in the lower right hand corner of the software. When you open up a full-sized view of an image, wait until it's fully rendered (the busy symbol is gone) before doing any adjustments to your image. Conversely, wait until the busy symbol is gone before developing to TIFF or JPEG.

Now, it's also possible that the version of SP bundled with the X100 may be buggy. But the one for the G1 works fine.

~Joe

GarethO · 03-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by eurotramp

from: http://www.tony-hart.com/files/x100_initial_review.php

the catchily named 'RAW FILE CONVERTER EX powered by Silkypix' - the simply appalling bundled software that is required to handle the X100's .RAF files - is not only abysmal, but to some extent stands between me and a true understanding of what the X100 can and can't do. I know how to edit a file in LR, I know how to get the best out of it. I haven't a clue in the bundled abomination mentioned above. I'm not sure anyone does. It's slow, unresponsive and Mac Paint on my Mac Plus is capable of doing more advanced work.

the sums up my situation exactly

peterm1 · 03-10-2011

I have used SilkyPix for some Lumix shots in the past and found its output to be OK. However I do not like the software's GUI and partly for this reason I dont use it that much. Fortunately the Lumix's jpg engine produces some darn nice photos so I do not much have to rely on SilkyPix.

Of course this does not necessarily mean it works well with the x100 files!

kbg32 · 03-10-2011

SillyPix.....!

Catto · 03-10-2011

Wonder if there's somewhere to download it, so I can try to get to grips with it before the camera arrives...anyone seen a link?
R

aad · 03-10-2011

It works fine on my Lumix, but again, I prefer to shoot jpeg anyway.

You can get a trial of the "pro" version from the Silkypix website.

Catto · 03-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by aad

You can get a trial of the "pro" version from the Silkypix website.

But I'm assuming, since it was last updated in December, that it doesn't support the X100? That's what their site seems to be saying, anyway - the X100 isn't on the list of supported cameras there.
R

Arjay · 03-10-2011

I wonder if that bundled Silkypix minimum software contains specific camera profiles that could be loaded into the normal Silkypix software, making the full-blown RAW editor compatible with the X100. This could be worth a call at Fuji's customer service hotline. They can possibly provide the info about which subfolders ought to be installed in the full-version Silkypix software. Also, a specific installation routine might be helpful.

Just dreamin', I know. But maybe there's a grain of salt to it?

acheyj · 03-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterm1

I have used SilkyPix for some Lumix shots in the past and found its output to be OK. However I do not like the software's GUI and partly for this reason I dont use it that much. Fortunately the Lumix's jpg engine produces some darn nice photos so I do not much have to rely on SilkyPix.

Of course this does not necessarily mean it works well with the x100 files!

Recently got a G1 (old stock cheap !) to try out and satisfy my adversion to M4/3 as opposed to AP-C / FF . SilkyPix works well for me tho its a new learning curve for me as I use LR and PS so of course feels strange.
Same comments as peterm1.

ron

Pablito · 03-10-2011

sikypix, used it a few times to convert raw from LX3, found it to be really awful.

35photo · 03-10-2011

This crap is is crazy! These dumb camera companies that don't use the .dng RAW files instead opting for there own RAW file type and give you some crap bundled software to try to convert the files. Then you to wait til the 3rd party companies like Adobe or Apple to update there software so you can process the file. Its the biggest joke ever really! Come on....I so turned off by the whole thing. I even made the comment directly to Fuji that PLEASE USE .DNG RAW FILE FORMAT....fell on deaf ears because I was really interested in their camera.....I have second reservations now and I'll wait. Thanks

aad · 03-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catto

But I'm assuming, since it was last updated in December, that it doesn't support the X100? That's what their site seems to be saying, anyway - the X100 isn't on the list of supported cameras there.
R

It may not support the X100, but you can get a feel for it so when your X100 arrives, you'll be familiar with the in-box version.

Personally, I'd just wait and play around with it. I think raw is a bit of a silly thing anyway.

Catto · 03-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by aad

I think raw is a bit of a silly thing anyway.

Oh god, don't go starting THAT argument...

True enough about figuring out how it works on other files, I suppose - does anyone know whether 'Raw Converter EX driven by Silkypix' (or whatever it's called) is actually the SAME as the Silkypix you can download? Or is it a customized / messed up Fuji-specific programme that just uses their conversion engine? ie. would learning to use Silkypix actually gain me anything?
R!

kuzano · 03-10-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by _larky

SilkyPix that comes with the X100 appears to be a bit bad. I wonder if this is me, and wonder if anyone has used it to get good output? My TIFF conversions are full of noise, artefacts, and in general really bad. Anyone else get this?

Silkypix has ALWAYS been the worst aspect of Fuji. Great camera's.... total loser software package. From day one. Still going. Damaging to the best Pro offerings from Fuji... the S2, S3 and S5 Pro's....

The S5 has 12 EV of DR, but wouldn't know it from the software packaged with.

maddoc · 03-10-2011

.. for a moment I thought I was mistakenly at a dpreview forum ...