1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Developing X3F Files

Discussion in 'Sigma DP Forum' started by Maczero, Mar 25, 2013.

  1. Maczero

    Maczero SC Regular

    30
    Mar 19, 2013
    Fife, Scotland
    Andrew
    I'm asking this question here because X3F files are specialised.

    I have a DP2 and a DP1X. I use a Mac.

    I need to convert the X3F files into TIFFs or JPEGs before bringing them into my library (currently Aperture, may be C1 7 in future), where you can carry out further image editing (e.g. straightening). The options I have are to:

    1. Convert in SPP 4.2.
    2. Convert in SPP 5.5.
    3. Convert in Iridient Developer.
    4. Convert to DNG and then further develop in Raw Photo Processor.

    I can't see the advantage of converting to DNG and then using RPP. So, I am basically left with a choice of SPP or Iridient Developer.

    Is there any advantage in using SPP 5.5 over SPP 4.2 given I don't have a Merrill camera?

    Iridient Developer seems to produce sharper but flatter files at default settings. It also seems to apply adjustments quite quickly. Is it possible to approximate the SPP colours in ID? How does ID deal with Foveon noise?

    Now that my only truly compact cameras are Sigma DPs, I need to get to grips with image developing in a more serious way than I have before. I would welcome any advice on the best way forward. I don't want to buy any more software!

    Andrew
     
  2. grebeman

    grebeman Old Codgers Group

    Jul 13, 2010
    South Brent, south Devon (UK)
    Barrie
    As a non Mac user I have no experience of Irident Developer, indeed I hadn't heard of it before your post. As a user of a two Merrill's then I have SPP 5.5. Since it is a free piece of software there is no cost in running the latest version, even if the updates are mainly aimed at the Merrill cameras. I find that it performs sufficiently well for initial processing before saving as a 16 bit tiff.

    Barrie
     
  3. Andrewteee

    Andrewteee SC All-Pro

    Jul 8, 2010
    I'm as yet undecided on ID over SPP 5.5. ID seems to "expose" the shortcomings of the Foveon sensor whereas SPP seems to make up for them. Things like noise even at ISO 100 (very slight) and banding/color splotches at higher ISOs. I convert almost exclusively to B&W. Right now I'm working with SPP to process a good TIFF then do any further tweaking in ID. I have a number of custom profiles set up in ID.
     
  4. Chris2500dk

    Chris2500dk SC Top Veteran

    598
    Dec 22, 2011
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    For B&W I prefer the older 3.x versions of SPP, the monochrome WB setting there turns off all noise reduction leaving a much nicer grain than version 4.x and newer.
     
  5. Andrewteee

    Andrewteee SC All-Pro

    Jul 8, 2010
    I do not believe that older versions of SPP work with the Merrills?
     
  6. Chris2500dk

    Chris2500dk SC Top Veteran

    598
    Dec 22, 2011
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    No, but Maczero wrote that he has a DP2 and a DP1X so it'll work fine with his cameras.
     
  7. Andrewteee

    Andrewteee SC All-Pro

    Jul 8, 2010
    That's right, but confirming for my own uses. I believe there is a site where you can download previous versions of SPP?
     
  8. Chris2500dk

    Chris2500dk SC Top Veteran

    598
    Dec 22, 2011
    Copenhagen, Denmark
  9. Maczero

    Maczero SC Regular

    30
    Mar 19, 2013
    Fife, Scotland
    Andrew
    Thanks to everybody who chimed in here. Chris2500DK: thanks for the guide towards Carl Rytterfalk's download site. He doesn't seem to have posted much recently, which is a pity since he was quite prolific before. Still it looks like he has video tutorials which I ought to check out. Andrewteee: I shall give the SPP to ID to [whatever] workflow a go. hat way I should at least get the Foveon colours, which I have struggled to do with ID (although it is generally a much more sophisticated convertor).

    Does anyone know whether there is any practical difference for non-Merrill cameras of going with SPP 5.5 rather than 4.2 (i.e. has noise reduction been improved for all Sigmas, rather than just the Merrills)? If it hasn't it is probably more efficient to work with 4.2 because I can't access the Merrill-only tools on 5.5.

    Andrew