RAW Developing Options - E-M1

nstelemark

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
3,309
Location
Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
Real Name
Larry
I always shot RAW + JPG with my EM-5 and I would say in general I was quite pleased with the Aperture RAW conversion with these files. The JPGs did not look a whole lot different. And, I still shoot RAW+JPG with my E-PM1 and Aperture does a pretty good job here too.

For a long while I was shooting JPG only with the E-M1 because there was not RAW support in Aperture with my OS version (10.6, and stuck there for a bunch of unrelated reasons). I am now on the latest (10.9, Aperture 3.5x and I have the RAW support for the E-M1, so I went back to shooting RAW+JPG. I am more than a bit surprised that the Olympus Viewer 3 does a significantly better job with the EM-1 files than Aperture does. This may not be news but it is very much news to me :smile: . Also the JPG output from Aperture with a RAW E-M1 file is not really great either.

So I have a couple of options - move to something other than Aperture or shoot JPG. The move from Aperture is kind of a no brainer but I am wondering what does as good a job as OV3 for the E-M1 RAW files. OV3 is far too slow to interest me for day to day use. Moving back to JPG is not a huge issue either as I tend to shoot a lot of files and JPG in some ways is easier, but I lose some PP options of course. I don't have any real issues with Aperture, it handles 1000s of files pretty seamlessly and I don't do a ton of PP.

Here is an example (Aperture on the left):

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

nstelemark

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
3,309
Location
Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
Real Name
Larry
I downloaded CaptureOne and Lightroom (aside from some annoying issues getting Lightroom to even run) this was pretty painless:

Clockwise from Top left - LR, Aperture, OV3, CaptureOne (all default settings).

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


I still like OV3 the best and I think LR is a close second. This still leaves me thinking I should just shoot JPG :smile:
 

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
6,558
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
Raw converters all have their own different default settings and the results vary a lot due to this. I suggest you play around with your likely favourites until you get an output you like. I doubt any of the popular raw converters are poor per sem
you want
 

OzRay

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
4,991
Location
South Gippsland, Australia
Real Name
Ray, not Oz
At the moment, I believe that LR is the best; the moment it goes to CC, it becomes the worst and I'll likely move back to C1. I would never have left C1 had they provided a faster camera update program, but under the new management, they appear to be a bit more proactive when it comes to new cameras.
 

nstelemark

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
3,309
Location
Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
Real Name
Larry
Raw converters all have their own different default settings and the results vary a lot due to this. I suggest you play around with your likely favourites until you get an output you like. I doubt any of the popular raw converters are poor per sem
you want
Yes this was my thinking too. Unfortunately I simply can't get the level of detail in Aperture to match OV3. LR is close, and I suspect I can tweak it to get there, but CC is really a non-starter in my mind.
 

nstelemark

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
3,309
Location
Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
Real Name
Larry
At the moment, I believe that LR is the best; the moment it goes to CC, it becomes the worst and I'll likely move back to C1. I would never have left C1 had they provided a faster camera update program, but under the new management, they appear to be a bit more proactive when it comes to new cameras.
I will spend a bit more time tweaking C1. What it did out of the box did not thrill me.

I am wondering if the algorithms in OV3 (and in the E-M1 processor) are simply better with an Olympus RAW file. They should be.
 

OzRay

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
4,991
Location
South Gippsland, Australia
Real Name
Ray, not Oz
I will spend a bit more time tweaking C1. What it did out of the box did not thrill me.

I am wondering if the algorithms in OV3 (and in the E-M1 processor) are simply better with an Olympus RAW file. They should be.
That won't really happen with any raw converter, they are a bit like cameras, you need to understand adjustments and then modify them to suit the situation. Only factory raw converters are likely to be able to emulate the JPG engine, as you would expect, but then they tend to be cumbersome and not very capable of doing much else. To be honest, I'm rarely content with default output of any converter or camera JPG.
 

mcasan

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Feb 26, 2014
Messages
1,663
Location
Atlanta
The only digital asset manager I know about that can do the same plugins as Aperture is Lightroom. I have tried Capture One and DXO. I did not see any magic with either compared to LR. Also neither had a integrated way for me to round trip to my plugins (Nik and Perfect Photo). So I am sticking with LR unless Apple performs a miracle with Photos next year. Hope springs eternal.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom