Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nice Mr Adobe, please include the Sony RX100 in LR  (Read 4181 times)
stewarthemley
Guest
« on: July 29, 2012, 04:47:17 AM »
ReplyReply

...before I go entirely insane trying to use Image Data Converter.

It's not only slooooow, it crashes every couple of images. How can the same company that produced such a superb little camera (and quite a few others) let a pile of crap like this loose on the world?

In the meantime, while we wait for LR, if anyone knows of a RC, any RC, that will handle the raws, please say so.
Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2157


« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2012, 04:56:02 AM »
ReplyReply

It is probably worth pointing out that Adobe are likely hard at work giving LR and ACR RAW capability for your camera.
If they are not it is likely Sony has yet to provide them with the required information.

Apart from Phase One and possibly Hasselblad camera manufacturers seem generally incapable of putting together decent RAW conversion software.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2012, 06:29:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Hope you're right, Tony.

And I agree, Phase and Hasselblad are the only two camera makers who seem able to produce good, actually great, software. If I were Mr Canon or Mr Nikon I'd be quite embarrassed by that.
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7915


WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2012, 12:32:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I'm actually quite happy that we are not dependent on vendor software.

I'm pretty sure the next release of LR will support the RX100, Adobe seems to release four times a year.

Best regards
Erik

Hope you're right, Tony.

And I agree, Phase and Hasselblad are the only two camera makers who seem able to produce good, actually great, software. If I were Mr Canon or Mr Nikon I'd be quite embarrassed by that.
Logged

john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2892



WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2012, 12:32:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Make sure you ask Sony to offer DNG as an option. Their new cameras would then be supported from day 1.
Logged

stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2012, 10:55:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Good point, John. But am I mistaken in thinking that even with DNG there are "varieties" on offer? Is Phase's DNG the same as everone else's? It's a genuine question: probably the differences are in the metadata area and don't really affect the image quality?

And I agree Erik. If the maker's software was up to the job then we probably wouldn't have LR, C1 and a few other good converters to choose from.
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7915


WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 30, 2012, 12:07:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi!

Yes, there are different versions of DNG and different options, but Adobe defines DNG so LR would always support all options.

Now, DNG is a flexible format, so makers could add their own tags, in effect extending the format.

There is also something called linear  DNG, which is demosaiced. Not a good thing in my book.

Would camera vendors unite around a single raw file specification it would make life simpler for a lot of people. Also, Sony developing it's image data converter is just insane. The software is of very little use and they give it away free. So, where is the beef for Sony. Competitive advantage? No! Earning money? No!

Best regards
Erik


Good point, John. But am I mistaken in thinking that even with DNG there are "varieties" on offer? Is Phase's DNG the same as everone else's? It's a genuine question: probably the differences are in the metadata area and don't really affect the image quality?

And I agree Erik. If the maker's software was up to the job then we probably wouldn't have LR, C1 and a few other good converters to choose from.
Logged

stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2878


« Reply #7 on: July 30, 2012, 03:22:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Hope you're right, Tony.

And I agree, Phase and Hasselblad are the only two camera makers who seem able to produce good, actually great, software. If I were Mr Canon or Mr Nikon I'd be quite embarrassed by that.

I think Mr Nikon would disagree?
Logged

Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711


WWW
« Reply #8 on: July 30, 2012, 07:18:34 AM »
ReplyReply

I think Mr Nikon would disagree?
Funny, this same thing is coming up on the ArgyllCMS listserve.  I noted in a reply that none of my friends who have Nikon equipment nor I use Capture NX2.  I really wonder whether Nikon (or Canon for that matter) make any significant money from their software.  Using an open DNG standard makes so much more sense and frees up resources (admittedly not a great deal) for camera and lens design which is what they do best.
Logged

Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2157


« Reply #9 on: July 30, 2012, 07:24:40 AM »
ReplyReply

...I really wonder whether Nikon (or Canon for that matter) make any significant money from their software... 
I think the Nikon variety sells in retail stores but Canon bundle their RAW converter with every Canon body that shoots RAW.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
jedbest
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 352


« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2012, 07:27:47 AM »
ReplyReply

The latest Raw Developer does support the Sony Rx 100.  I just one and am using Raw Developer for it. Beware that it is a Mac only program.

Hope this helps.

Jed
Logged
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2878


« Reply #11 on: July 30, 2012, 08:44:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Funny, this same thing is coming up on the ArgyllCMS listserve.  I noted in a reply that none of my friends who have Nikon equipment nor I use Capture NX2.  I really wonder whether Nikon (or Canon for that matter) make any significant money from their software.  Using an open DNG standard makes so much more sense and frees up resources (admittedly not a great deal) for camera and lens design which is what they do best.

Some Nikon devotees use Capture because the in camera settings are honoured. They think that they are truer to what they captured. LR doesn't honour them except for WB. I am a Nikon user but very much prefer LR.
Logged

stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #12 on: July 30, 2012, 01:21:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Are you sure, Jedbest? I checked the Raw Developer supprted cameras list and its not on but I downloaded it anyway. Tried to import the files but it said no deal. I really hope I'm wrong and that there has been an update.
Logged
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2870


WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 30, 2012, 03:12:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I'm actually quite happy that we are not dependent on vendor software.

I'm pretty sure the next release of LR will support the RX100, Adobe seems to release four times a year.

It's worth noting that Phase One's ability to produce good software that tethers to their camera and converts their raw files (as well as to Canon, Nikon etc), does not make anyone "dependent on vendor software" as Lightroom, Aperture, Irrident Raw Developer etc all provide support for Phase One raw files.
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
jedbest
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 352


« Reply #14 on: July 30, 2012, 03:26:51 PM »
ReplyReply

It seems to be opening my RX 100 files. I believe it is version 1.9.5.

Jed
Logged
jedbest
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 352


« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2012, 03:29:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Just checked. Raw Developer 1.9.5 did open a Sony RAW file from the DSC RX 100.

Jed
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9225



WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2012, 05:19:43 PM »
ReplyReply

But am I mistaken in thinking that even with DNG there are "varieties" on offer?

IF Sony, Canon, Nikon etc just wrote out a DNG to spec, you’d be working with those files the day the camera shipped with any 3rd party converter that properly supports DNG. Just like you can access the JPEG the day the camera ships. Why is a raw file any different?
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1199



« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2012, 06:20:09 PM »
ReplyReply

I find the proprietary RAW thing totally mystifying.  As far as I can tell, it doesn't provide any advantage to the manufacturer, either image-quality-wise, or (given the multiplicity of RAW converters out there, some of which are open source/free) economic/marketing advantage-wise.  If there is a rational reason for manufacturers to use proprietary formats, I'd sure like to hear it.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7915


WWW
« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2012, 11:55:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Yes Raw Developer works but it does not have lens corrections that the RX100 needs badly as it has very bad barrel distortion at short focal lengths.

Also, I do admire Raw Developer but I don't see it as a replacement for Lightroom. Raw developer is a raw developer while Lightroom is a workflow solution.

Best regards
Erik


Just checked. Raw Developer 1.9.5 did open a Sony RAW file from the DSC RX 100.

Jed
Logged

stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2012, 01:07:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Jed and Erik, you're right. The latest Raw Developer does open the RX 100 files and it lacks the lens corrections.

So, if I get time today I'll try this workflow: get everything how I want it in RD then see how the lens corrections work in either PT Lens or PS.

And I agree with the consensus: why do companies think it's a good idea to release half-hearted software for their products? Seems like a bad advert IMO.

Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad