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

Silky Pix and raw processing in general

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by ricks, Dec 6, 2010.

  1. ricks

    ricks SC Veteran

    204
    Nov 23, 2010
    I have had an LX5 for a few weeks now, my first raw capable camera. I have tried SilkyPix a few times. On my old computer it seems to take ages to render. I am not sure what aspects of processing are best accomplished in the raw state. It seems that if I do nothing some of the lens distortion is removed. At least small areas of pixels starting from the center seem to be rearranged. The interface seems unusual, and the online manual seems to give me a headache.
    Is there any difference with other raw processing programs? Are any more usable on an older computer?
    I tried this one last night. It was taken hand held under a street lamp, with iso set to automatic, so I think it might be 1600. The sky and the porch were quite noisy, so I tried the noise reduction setting. I converted the tiff to bw in ps.
    I had originally posted this in the LX5 thread and BB suggested it might be better here.
    Any help greatly appreciated. Thanks.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Fuddlestack

    Fuddlestack SC Regular

    138
    Dec 1, 2010
    Alsace, France
    The RAW file is the internal data format of the camera, whereas the JPEG is a derived form developed according to preset values for saturation, contrast etc. In obtaining this, certain data are lost. These are conserved in the RAW file, which can therefore be tweaked with more flexibility than JPEGs.

    I use RAW for my own pictures and JPEG for 500-pic cycling-event shoots where people are more concerned with recognizing their own mugs than with art.

    RAW files are usually much bigger than JPEGs, and so are TIFFs - this would affect performance. E.g. the RAW files (Nikon calls them NEFs) my D300s turns out are about 4 times the size of the corresponding JPEGs, say 12Mb as opposed to 3.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. BillN

    BillN SC Hall of Famer

    Aug 25, 2010
    S W France
    Bill
    Investing in an application like Lightroom, (and keeping your PP software down to one good application), which manages the total workflow is, in my view, very worthwhile. OK, it is expensive, but it is a complete workflow package, which is easy to learn and very powerful and flexible.

    I only started on this digital/PP "lark" last February, I was completely new to digital processing, but with suggestions on the Mu43 Forum, (thanks again Don!), I picked up a free trial of LR from the Adobe web site and used it for two months. At the end of the trial, I thought long about the cost, but quickly realised that I could not work without it, so I bought a copy of LR3. I have not looked back and consider it as an essential purchase alongside a camera and lens and of equal importance ....... to me, it is that important in the enjoyment of my hobby.

    As I said Adobe always provide a free trial plus Video tutorials on their web site and not only it is a great PP and workflow tool but it also provides a pathway to the other aspects of digital photography that you need, (or are very useful), in the enjoyment of this fascinating pastime, (for most of us anyway).

    Check it out and following all the "free" information on the magical "world wide web"

    So my advice is, if you can afford it "bin the rest" and get Lightroom 3

    Good luck

    (PS - I have no connection with Adobe or any of their affiliates - [I wish I did!!!!])
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. ricks

    ricks SC Veteran

    204
    Nov 23, 2010
    Thanks John and Bill. You have convinced me of the benefits of RAW. Lightroom seems to be the preferred way to go. I have yet to hear of someone sticking with Silky Pix. I can see that the increased file size and the minimum system requirements of Lightroom are going to require a new computer. Hopefully soon.