Firmware & Software

Lightroom 4.3 and Camera RAW 7.3 Update | Nasim Mansurov

If you happened to launch Lightroom today, you might have been notified that a new version of Lightroom 4 is available. Today, Adobe released the final production version of Lightroom 4.3. As usual, plenty of bugs have been fixed and a lot more cameras and lenses have been added to the release. Full RAW support for Nikon D600 has now been finalized and new cameras like Canon EOS 6D, Nikon 1 V2 and Sony RX-1 have been added to the database. Lots of expensive Leica lenses, Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II and other third party lenses have also been added to the Lightroom Lens Correction module.

Here are the download links for both:

Adobe Lightroom 4.3 Final for Windows / for Mac
Adobe Camera RAW 7.3 Final for Windows / for Mac

See full article on photographylife.com

Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator CS6 now support Apple’s high-res
Retina displays | Imaging Resource


 
For photographers, the latest-generation Apple MacBook Pro notebooks are mighty appealing thanks to their extremely high-resolution displays. All those extra pixels let you see more of your images on-screen at once without discarding the fine detail. Even if you fit your image to the screen, you’re still looking at a full five megapixels of detail, more than double that provided by even the best MacBook Pro models from 2011. There’s a catch, though. Your software has to support Apple’s Retina HiDPI displays to take full advantage of all those extra pixels, and until now a key tool in the photographer’s arsenal hasn’t done so. Today, that changes, with the announcement by Adobe of an update to Photoshop CS6 that brings support for Retina displays, fulfilling a promise made last August. Retina support in Photoshop puts an end to blurry interpolation of images displayed in Photoshop, not to mention the surrounding buttons and icons that make up the user interface. Instead of a 1,440 x 900 pixel display that’s been scaled to fit a 2,880 x 1,800 pixel screen, your images will take advantage of every screen pixel, and the surrounding UI elements will be sharper and easier on the eyes as well.

See on www.imaging-resource.com

X-Pro RAW‘s: Silkypix Pro 5 vs. Lightroom | Mehrdad Abedi

Ich habe schon seit einiger Zeit meine Fuji x-pro1 und bin nach wie vor sehr begeistert von dieser Kamera. Ganz besonders interessant finde ich die kamerainterne jpg Engine. Ich bin mit meiner anderen Kamera (Canon 5D MkII) eigentlich ein absoluter RAW Shooter. Bei der x-pro1 allerdings habe ich aber aus zwei Gründen diese Angewohnheit abgelegt. Zum einen, weil die OOC jpgs so gut sind, dass sie so gut wie kaum eine Korrektur benötigen und man die tollen Fujifarben hat. Zum anderen, da es nur sehr wenige RAW Konverter gibt, welche mit den x-pro1/x-e1 RAW‘s umgehen können. Mir sind im Grunde nur drei bekannt: Lightroom 4, Raw Photo Processor (RPP) und Silkypix. Letzterer ist der x-pro1 im Lieferumfang in Version 3 mit beigefügt.

RPP habe ich einmal zum Testen geöffnet, aber ich finde es sehr kompliziert oder besser sehr benutzerunfreundlich, und das Ergebnis, das ich herausbekam, war hässlich. Muss freilich nicht für jeden gelten, ich für meinen Teil habe den aber wieder von der Festplatte geschmissen.

Lightroom ist ein alter und sehr guter Bekannter von mir. Ich bin absolut überzeugter Lightroom Benutzer. Auch wenn ich Lightroom schätze, so kann man nicht von der Hand weisen, dass Lightroom die x-pro RAW‘s beim Schärfen nicht sauber verarbeitet. Es kommt zu aquarellartigen Konturen. Bei Silkypix ist dies nicht so. Silkypix schärft sauber ohne aquarellartigen Konturen. Das war einer der Hauptgründe für mich, warum ich mir diesen RAW-Konverter denn genauer anschauen wollte. Silkypix Pro 5 gibt es für Mac und Windows Rechner und es lässt sich eine 30 Tage Testversion auf der Homepage des Herstellers herunterladen. Die Version 5 kommt etwas benutzerfreundlicher und mit mehr Einstellmöglichkeiten als die der Kamera beiliegende Version daher. Im Gegensatz zu Lightroom benötigt Silkypix aber zwingend eine längere Einarbeitungsphase. Viele Entwicklungsfunktionen sind nicht gleich offensichtlich. Es gibt ferner eine Vielzahl von (Vor-)Einstellungen, um Silkypix seinem gewohnten/gewünschtem Workflow anzupassen. Hier bin ich noch am rumexperimentieren…..

Google Translater (ENG):
http://bit.ly/Y1Za6h

See on www.qimago.de

FujiFilm RAF/RAW Process Interactive Comparison | Terrance Lam

Just a small follow up on all the RAW experimentation I’ve been doing with the FujiFilm X-Pro1 RAF files. Here’s an interactive mouseover table to see the differences. Areas too look for are in the wood grain (you’ll see a lot of colour or chroma noise in the different examples), Smearing of details (look at the texture of the walls to see how it gets smeared and creates the water colour effect), Aliasing issues (look on hard contrast edges to see a zipper aliasing effect), and lastly loss of details (in the red brick you’ll see the various levels of details in the pores of the brick).

Some quick comments:

DCRAW 9.16: Gives the highest details, however has aliasing artifacts. Some chroma noise (even after filtering). Command line prompt only. Requires some technical know how. I use VNG interpolation and 15 pass median filtering.

1/2 Median: Is the filtering I apply to DCRAW to combat the aliasing artifacts. Requires a program that has Median filtering, and very process intensive.

Raw Photo Processor (RPP 4.7): Utilizes DCRAW and acts as front end. Works very well for details, but aliasing and chroma noise is high. My technique of 15 passes of median averaging in DCRAW clears up more chroma noise than what is produced by this program.

Graphic Converter (Patched): Patched with DCRAW 9.16 gives very similar results to RPP however this program is much friendlier to use than RPP and has some real nice post processing options. Could almost be used as an all in one solution.

In Camera JPG: The default standard. Still exhibits some detail smearing compared to something like DCRAW output, but has no aliasing or chroma noise artifacts.

SilkPix Developer Pro 5: The software that is part of Fuji’s RAW processing uses an older SilkyPix engine. This current version is very clean however does show some chroma smearing (look at the green colour that appears under the window ledge and the loss of other colours). Shows very little chroma noise and no real aliasing errors. Very clean output and slightly softer than raw DCRAW output, but lot less aliasing even over the 1/2 Pixel Median filter. I would highly recommend this option if it weren’t for the fact that the cost of the software is pretty high.

FujiFilm Raw File Converter: This software bundled with the camera uses an older SilkyPix engine. It does a pretty good job, but the interface is very difficult to use and understand. Compared to the latests version of SilkPix it exhibits chroma noise and some detail smearing.

Lightroom 4.3: Has low amounts of chroma noise, but very heavy detail smearing. Loss of details but no aliasing artifacts. Even at 100% it’s hard to see the ‘Watercolour’ effect if you don’t know what to look for. I suspect a very heavy pre-demosaic median filter and bicubic interpolation algorithm is the cause of the issues. However it’s still one of the easiest to use, and if you can handle some of the image quality loss, most likely won’t notice the detail loss.

See full article on frontallobbings.blogspot.de

Demosaicing the Fuji X-Pro1 Part 4 | ChromaSoft

Well, I wasn’t expecting to come back to the topic of Fuji, the X-Pro1 and its X-Trans sensor. However, I have been putting a lot of work into the suppression of artifacts when demosaicing. A lot more work than I had intended to, but that’s another story. This is for a new product that I hope to release in a few weeks time (several months later than I’d hoped). But I did stumble into a better understanding of the nature of the chroma smearing (or watercolor effect, as it has also become known). The previous posts about Demosaicing the Fuji X-Pro1 are here, here and here. In previous posts, I compared renderings from Adobe Camera Raw, SILKYPIX and Fuji’s in-camera JPEG processing, as well as DCRAW and RPP. Finally, I compared those renderings to renderings from PhotoRaw, both in its “retail” configuration, and in modified form with post demosiac filtering. Practically, DCRAW and RPP were pretty much outclassed — they use VNG algorithms that generate substantial zipper effects. In post three, I hypothesized that the chroma smearing effect that you see very visibly in the ACR conversion, and to a lesser extent in the SILKYPIX conversion, was due to filtering, possibly mean filtering post demosaic. I now think that I was probably wrong, or at least partially wrong – the effect is due to filtering, but not mean filtering post demosaic. Rather, it’s as a result of filtering during the demosaic process itself…..

Part1 - Part2 - Part3

See more on chromasoft.blogspot.fr

Lightroom 4.3 Release Candidate and Camera Raw 7.3 Beta Are Released

Just after having a heavy discussion about HiDPI here at The Phoblographer internally, Adobe goes ahead and releases Lightroom 4.3 Candidate. When a product is released as a candidate this just means that they feel that it is well tested but it would benefit from additional testing before being released to the masses. Along with HiDPI support they a squashing quite a few bugs. Along with version 4.3 of Lightroom they are also releasing Camera Raw beta 7.3. The big cameras added this round are several canon point and shoots, the new Olympus Pens including the XZ-2, the new Pentax K-5 II and IIs and full support of the Nikon D600.

You can find the press release here
http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2012/11/lightroom-4-3-release-candidate-now-available.html

as well as the Lightroom Canidate 4.3 here
http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom4-3/

and the Camera Raw beta 7.3 here
http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/cameraraw7-3/

See on www.thephoblographer.com

Firmware Update V2.01 for X-Pro1 | Fujifilm Global

See on Scoop.itFuji X-Pro1

The firmware update Ver.2.01 from Ver. 2.00 incorporates the following issue

  1. Adding the compatibility with “XF18-55mmF2.8-4 R”.
    *You will get the full performance with the new zoom lens “XF18-55mmF2.8-4 R”.
    *Size of the bright frame displayed on OVF can be magnified in relation to zooming motion of XF18-55mm lens.
  2. The phenomena below will be fixed.
    1. When using the focus checking function with “3-time” magnification in manual focus mode, you could find a few dots (black or color) only in live view image on EVF/LCD. (Please be sure even with the firmware version 2.00, these unwanted dots are not recorded in the image data.)
    2. The auto focus accuracy with XF60mm Lens could not be enough.
    3. When using the M- Mount Adapter, under exposure could occur.

<Notice>

  1. To enable those features, please confirm the firmware version of your Fujinon XF lenses (XF18mmF2 R / XF35mmF1.4 R / XF60mmF2.4 R Macro) is Ver 2.01.
  2. The firmware version of XF18-55mmF2.8-4 R LM OIS is shown as Ver 1.00, and no firmware update is required.(as of Nov/2012)
  3. Please confirm the firmware version of X-Pro1 is Ver 2.00 or later, when firmware update of these XF lenses are required.

See on www.fujifilm.com

Fuji X-Trans RAW conversion conundrums | David McGaughey

See on Scoop.itFuji X-Pro1

 
Fuji has a history of unusual sensor design. While the big sensor designers and manufacturers like Canon and Sony focused on boring stuff like making tinier pixels, reducing on-board circuitry, and improving read-out speeds, Fuji was doing wacky stuff like non-square pixels, tiny helper dynamic-range boosting pixels, and 45 degree rotated pixels. Fuji abandoned their SuperCCD approach around 2010 and for 2012 we have another new tech: X-Trans. Will Fuji abandon this effort in a few years, suffering from mediocre sales and 3rd-party support? We’ll see. What is X-trans? Well, it’s basically a new way to filter color onto the sensor. Image sensors only detect the number of photons striking the sensor. To be capable of creating a color photograph,a color filter is applied over the sensor. Each pixels gets either a green, red, or blue filter. It’s arranged in a 4 pixels pattern: two greens, a red, and a blue. To create a human-pleasing image from this, a demosaicing algorithm is used to give each pixel intensity information for all three colors. This requires a bit of interpretation and guesswork using the adjacent pixels. Because virtually every digital camera ever made uses this filter pattern there is excellent support, from both the manufacturers and third parties for converting this information into a photograph. Bayer isn’t perfect though. How could it be? Each pixel on knows about one color. When resolving very fine detail the demosaicing algorithm can get confused and product strange patterns and colors – moire. This is dealt with by, believe-it-or-not, placing a filter in front of the sensor to prevent certain frequencies of light from passing through. Which blurs the image….
 
See on www.dmcgaughey.com

Maximum detail RAW processing. DCRAW – Fuji X-Pro1 & XE-1 |
Terrance Lam

See on Scoop.itFuji X-Pro1

So after playing with this for weeks, I believe this is probably the maximum that we can get out of the Fuji RAF files until the other developers come up with better understanding of the unique X-Trans CMOS sensor. Now this is still not the most ideal workflow for most people. Pixel Peeping aside, the Fuji X files are fantastic, even in Adobe Lightroom. My goal in this was to get a better understanding of what is going on. I wish I knew how to program, because I’d love to create a simpler way to do this. If there’s anyone out there that is interested in taking what I’ve done and turning into a nice little drag and drop application, I think you’d get a lot of fans.

The Process

  1. Using command line DCRAW: dcraw -a -H 0 -o 4 -q 2 -f -m 15 -g 2.4 12.9 -6 -T
  2. Convert TIFF file to LAB file in Photoshop
  3. Resize image 200% with Bicubic Smoother
  4. Select Lightness Channel under channel panel.
  5. Select Median filter under Noise in Filter. Select 1 pixel
  6. Resize image 50% with Bicubic Sharper (Nearest Neighbour is actually a more subtle effect which I kind of prefer)
  7. Save.

SilkyPix and RPP both process very similar files and although I know for certain that RPP uses DCRAW, SilkyPix I believe is a proprietary RAW engine. What I do speculate is the chroma smearing is a result of interpolation errors. Much of it can be suppressed with chroma noise reduction without loss of image quality. However one of the big nagging issues was this ‘zipper’ aliasing that was happening. After analyzing the files, it seems specifically the red sub-pixels are causing much of this zipper effect, but also part of the interpolation issues. I was able to get rid of a good portion of the chroma smearing by doing 3×3 multi-pass median filtering through DCRAW…..

Full article on following Website:
http://frontallobbings.blogspot.de/2012/11/super-detail-with-fujifilm-x-pro1-raf.html

See on www.flickr.com

RAW Conversion for X-Pro1: Lightroom vs. Out-of-Camera | Cody Hatch

See on Scoop.itFuji X-Pro1

 

Before purchasing the X-Pro1 I read about the RAW conversion woes reported by many other people. I saw their examples posted to their websites, read the forums, and read the rumor sites. I work exclusively with RAW due to the wide latitude the files provide. I try to expose to the right of the histogram, without blowing highlights, but I have always preferred the flexibility afforded by RAW output. Besides, Canon’s out-of-camera JPG’s were awful. So, if I knew the issues surrounding RAW files on the X-Pro1, why did I take the plunge anyway? Quite simply, the RAW converter in camera. You see, as we sit today, the best RAW converter for X-Pro1 images is the camera itself. The camera allows one to do quite a bit of in-camera processing of a RAW file, make multiple JPG files from a RAW, and generally make out-of-camera JPG files something to actually consider rather than abhor. Besides, high-quality JPG’s from the camera provides some flexibility that I had not considered with my Canon. Now, if I don’t feel like processing a RAW file, I can often use the JPG straight out of the camera and have an excellent image. What about the times when I need to process a RAW file outside of the camera? Well, I use Adobe’s Lightroom for almost all of my image processing and cataloging and Lightroom’s RAW processor for X-Pro1 files isn’t too great yet. Colors are generally there but sharpness is questionable, especially with foliage, where it is left looking like a watercolor painting. Just how bad is it? Check out these examples of a 100% crop from a recent image. The first one is the output after processing in Lightroom 4.2, while the second one is the output of an out-of-camera JPG utilizing the Velvia film simulation…..


See on www.codyhatch.com

Page 5 to 10« First...34567...10...Last »