SILKYPIX : a new Japanes Raw Converter and may be the best !!!

[yb98]

I have discovered this Raw conversion software and I'm very impressed. You can dowload it here :
http://www.isl.co.jp/SILKYPIX/english/

The first tests I have done are very promising. I'm just talking about the raw conversion quality, not about the user interface or the workflow. You can find some comparaison pics with RSE here : http://rawforum.online.fr/viewtopic.php?t=25

[Scottes]

SilkyPix's default has blown out a number of areas on the pic. His SilkyPix custom is 5 times as bad. Even his custom RSE isn't blown out as bad as the default SilkyPix. The default RSE has very very little blown out.

I have no desire for a RAW editor to blow out my colors, thank you.

The "default" settings of a RAW editor are meaningless, IMHO. I'm glad to see that he did compare custom tries. But this is also fairly meaningless, since it would only be fair if the user is knowledgable in both, and equally knowledgable in both. Then there should be very, very little difference.

RAW editors should only be compared by the workflow - the ease and time it takes to get to the best processed file. Of course, features should also be compared - things like RSP's Vibrance and Highlight recovery, and CS2's ability to fix Chromatic Aberration. Besides specific features like those mentioned, any 2 RAW editors should be able to produce very-near-identical processed files.

[nadtz]

Have to agree with Scottes on that one. On my monitor the silkypix images dont look anywhere as good as the RSE images.

[yb98]

Strange, may be my monitor is not well calibrated...
Anyhow I don't agree with Scottes :
1. The fact that some parts of certain pics can be blown out is sometimes a necessity. Since the dynamic range of sensors is not so high, sometimes I prefer to blown out some unimportant parts of a pic to have a good exposure in other more important parts rather than to have no blown out at all and have a flat pic at the end.

2. I have done some other tests and I'm really impressed. I have obtained better pictures than the conversion I did with ACR or even C1 before. The color rendition is in particular incredibly accurate.

3. I agree that the workflow is important, but I think this is not the most difficult part when developping a raw converter. I think that the algorithm used during the conversion is the most difficult and most original part. Everything else is just a question of programming time and forces and can more easily evolves.

Did you try it ?

[Gary_E]

i have the new rawshooter 2006 it is great

[Scottes]

1. The fact that some parts of certain pics can be blown out is sometimes a necessity.
Yes, when that's the photographer's desire at the time the picture was taken, NOT when the default automatic settings of the RAW editor do it to you. No thanks.

If SilkyPix works for you, great, but I am not about to bother with a program that will do that.