1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Olympus Viewer3 does a good job

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by Iansky, Jun 19, 2013.

  1. Iansky

    Iansky Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 26, 2009
    The Cotswolds, UK
    I have been using the free download - Olympus Viewer 3 for my OMD Raw files and have to say that I am delighted with the results and think they are a little better than even those from Lightroom5.

    Taken with the OMD+75mm and using the FL600R flash on camera for fill.

    She_with_Cilla.
     
  2. elandel

    elandel Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 16, 2010
    Milan, Italy
    I'm not a PP boy because I shoot mostly in jpg, but I do have to agree with you since I downloaded Viewer3 and find it a fairly good tool for me as a newbee in PP; and its free!!!:eek:
     
  3. Iansky

    Iansky Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 26, 2009
    The Cotswolds, UK
    Good news that it is working for you as well, it does make life easy especially when you set it up to batch process your images.

    The only downside is the time it takes to process the batch and from my Raw files I am getting 16bit images that are 96mb in size but of amazing quality.

    Not bad for a free software package.
     
  4. Brian Beezley

    Brian Beezley Mu-43 All-Pro

    I just notified Olympus this morning of a bug in OV3. Load an ORF image, rotate it 90 degrees, and create a 16-bit TIFF. Then load the TIFF and try to use the Unsharp Mask. It really messes up the image.

    Brian
     
  5. PaulGiz

    PaulGiz Mu-43 Veteran

    231
    Jan 3, 2013
    Rhode Island, USA
    OV3 does a very, very nice job. It was smart of Olympus to let us have it at no cost. It is a great way to introduce new users to Post Processing.

    It is unfortunately too slow for general use and I ended up purchasing Aperture.

    I still do use the OV3 sometimes, The color is great, I get more shadow detail, and occasionally enjoy some of the Olympus preset filters.

    P.
     
  6. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    Bob
    It just doesn't seem as versatile to me - I guess I'll have to work with the program a bit more.
     
  7. M4/3

    M4/3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    713
    Sep 24, 2011
    For bringing out crisp detail I think Viewer is excellent. Only mediocre good at adjusting colors, however, and very poor at doing other things (e.g. can't insert arrows, draw rectangles, circles, underline, etc). And zero tech support for the program.
     
  8. Lawrence A.

    Lawrence A. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 14, 2012
    New Mexico
    Larry
    It can do a nice job, but I downloaded it on the strength of the recommendations here, and the things that have in my view always plagued Olympus software are still there. The processing options are too limited and it takes forever to do anything. Noise reduction seems clunky and the chromatic aberration sliders did not work on a bird shot made with legacy glass. CA control in Lightroom is very efficient.

    I love my Olympus cameras, especially the E-M5, but I just have never found their software very enjoyable to use.
     
  9. twalker294

    twalker294 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    543
    Aug 18, 2010
    Oh it's definitely not enjoyable to use. But the output makes it worth the pain...IMHO of course.
     
  10. twalker294

    twalker294 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    543
    Aug 18, 2010
    Why would you want an image editor to draw shapes on your photos or underline?
     
  11. Iansky

    Iansky Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 26, 2009
    The Cotswolds, UK
    I for one can live with the processing time factor and set a batch edit running then go make a cup of tea and do something else until it is complete.

    Once the files are complete, I import to CS5 and do final tweaks & borders before saving as 8bit Tiffs/Jpeg.

    For me, it still produces better output than Lightroom so I will stick with it for OMD Raw files.
     
  12. Ross the fiddler

    Ross the fiddler Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    It's pretty much all I use & am glad to have it. I occasionally like to use the Art Filters in post processing too as I always save both JPEG & RAW files. My only annoyance (I guess there are others, but I don't remember them :wink: ) is not being able to open an image directly in the EDIT window from a Windows folder etc. like I could when using OV2. It's not bad having this software free. :thumbup:
     
  13. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Well, the output might be good, but it's hard to use, lacks features and is just so, so slow. If it weren't free, would you buy it?

    LR has its faults (highest of which that it's produced by Adobe!), but the output is excellent and it's faster, has great features and supports other cameras without having to use additional tools.
     
  14. LowriderS10

    LowriderS10 Monkey with a camera.

    May 19, 2013
    Canada
    How does this program fare with stitching panoramas?

    I used to use Photoshop CS4 for it and it was awesome, but I no longer have it...back to using Photoshop CS2, which sucks hardcore at it...

    Also, how's cloning on OV3? On CS4, the little cloning circle gives you a little ghost preview of what you're about to clone...this is very helpful when cloning patterns...with CS2, you have to guess (it's just a transparent circle)...it's maddening.

    Thanks!
     
  15. Ross the fiddler

    Ross the fiddler Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    CLONING! You gotta be kidding! No, there is no such tool in OV3, but the RED EYE fix works OK.
     
  16. LowriderS10

    LowriderS10 Monkey with a camera.

    May 19, 2013
    Canada
    Oh...weaksauce haha...thanks! Does it at least stitch panos together? And if yes, is it any good at it?
     
  17. Brian Beezley

    Brian Beezley Mu-43 All-Pro

    I tried one just for fun. It was a quick handheld test that I had rather casually aligned. I wasn't expecting much but the stitching worked perfectly. However, my E-PL2 uses the focus and exposure settings of the first frame for all subsequent frames in panorama mode. I had forgotten this and began aimed at a rather dark area, so some parts of the final panorama were overexposed. More sophisticated panorama methods can overcome this limitation.

    Brian
     
  18. LowriderS10

    LowriderS10 Monkey with a camera.

    May 19, 2013
    Canada
    Awesome, thanks! That's fine, I always shoot everything in full Manual (with panos you should shoot locked exposure anyways), so that's fine...my CS2 is just having a hell of a time with pano stitches...9 times out of 10, it just fails and gives up, whereas with CS4, it was successful 9 times out of 10...
     
  19. Brian Beezley

    Brian Beezley Mu-43 All-Pro


    Well, I tried just one OV3 pano so I don't know how reliable it is. And I understand that other panoramic methods can stitch together very loosely aligned shots while compensating for exposure differences among them.

    Brian
     
  20. twalker294

    twalker294 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    543
    Aug 18, 2010
    Considering the quality of its output, yes I would.

    I won't deny that LR is a better program in every respect except for one -- output quality. And since I'm interested in getting the best possible output from my camera, I have chosen to use the software that does that for me. If LR had full support for the OMD and was therefore able to give the same quality of output that OV does, then I would use it in a heartbeat.