Which RAW software is best?

[DavoMrMac]

Just wanted your opinions on which RAW software is best.

I was considering using either PhotoShop or the Canon supplied software, but also heard of some website that develops RAW software and is currently offering a free download, but now I have lost the article.

Any help is appreciated.

[Nightcrawler]

Here is the link to the program I think you are referring to - RAWShooter Essentials

http://www.pixmantec.com/products/rawshooter_essentials.html

[Nightcrawler]

I use it and it works very nice. The main thing that I like about it besides being free is the fact that you can process a bunch of images quickly. When I don't use that program, I use the one in CS.

[DavoMrMac]

Thanks for that Jason, I will check it out.

I saw the mention of the software (not sure if it was RAWShooter) in a UK magazine Digital Camera Review, will check it out again and post here if I find any more info.

Thanks though, this looks very good.

Keep the info coming everyone.

[drisley]

Everybody is different. You almost have to try them yourself and decide.
What suits one person won't necessarily suit another.

[cowboyupphotos]

Wow - thanks for the link to what appears to be a great little app for RAW. Better than $500 bucks on CaptureOne!

[jbradc]

I have several RAW conversion applications including Capture One PRO 3.6, but I find myself using the Photoshop CS converter most of time. For me it just makes sense to start in Photoshop because that is where I will perform any additional image editing.

[Mike Panic]

ive heard people rave about phase one's software... i myself use ps cs

[PrimaPhoto]

This looks really good I just downloaded it and installed.

I see in the list it supports Canon G3 but I could not get these files loaded. I'm going to try a shot from my 20D

Thanks for this info!
Here's the camera list:
Canon EOS-1Ds
Canon EOS-1D
Canon EOS-1D Mark II
Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II
Canon EOS 20D

Canon EOS 10D
Canon EOS D60
Canon EOS D30
Canon EOS 300D
Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL
Canon EOS 300D DIGITAL
Canon EOS KISS DIGITAL
Canon EOS Rebel XT
Canon EOS EOS 350D
Canon EOS Kiss Digital N
Canon PowerShot G3
Canon PowerShot G5
Canon PowerShot G6
Canon PowerShot S30
Canon PowerShot S40
Canon PowerShot S45
Canon PowerShot S50
Canon PowerShot S60
Canon PowerShot S70
Canon PowerShot Pro1


Mark

[drisley]

I have several RAW conversion applications including Capture One PRO 3.6, but I find myself using the Photoshop CS converter most of time. For me it just makes sense to start in Photoshop because that is where I will perform any additional image editing.

That is EXACTLY why I like PS CS.
Well, that and the fact that the skin tone colour reproduction in C1 Pro 3.6 is not that good for the 20D.

[rfreschner]

I'm fairly new to shooting in RAW so I started with the ACR plug-in within Photoshop Elements 3. Recently I was reading the posts on RawShooter essentials 2005, so I downloaded it and have been very impressed with it so far (of course I have limited experience with other tools so I'm easily impressed). And, once I've finished with an image, I can click one button to convert it to TIFF and open it in PSE3 or whatever application I choose.

[Jim_T]

I'm a Linux user, so there's only one commercial RAW converter I can use :)

Bibble Labs makes a pretty good RAW converter for the PC, Mac and Linux platform. It was actually deloped for Windows and ported to the Mac and Linux.. It can be used with Photoshop.

One thing I find with the Bibble software is that the the sharpening algorithm is superior to Canon's Digital Photo Professional (DPP) or the EOS Viewer Utility (EVU)
I can see the difference.

The 'auto level' function seems to almost always get the exposure just right.

It's $69 for the 'Light' version and 129 for the 'Pro' version

http://www.bibblelabs.com/

[cmM]

I just downloaded this RawShooter yesterday and played around with it a little bit. i like it very much.

PSCS ACR is ok, I hate DPP, I used to love C1 (1.3.1), now I upgraded to 3.6 for 20D support and I'm kinda disappointed.

As already mentioned, depends on prefferences.

[mdm]

I'm new to the raw verses jpeg. What kind of benefit would there be to saving raw instead of jpeg? All I hear is editing but the jpeg shot looks pretty good. Canon digital rebel.

[Steven M. Anthony]

I'm new to the raw verses jpeg. What kind of benefit would there be to saving raw instead of jpeg? All I hear is editing but the jpeg shot looks pretty good. Canon digital rebel.

A search of this site on the key word "RAW" should turn up several spirited discussions on this topic!

[PrimaPhoto]

drisley, I agree with you.
I downloaded the plug-in for PS CS and just from the one portrait photo I converted from RAW mode I find the PS plugin far better. I'm so glad I stumbled upon this thread.

I'm going to send some prints to the photo lab on Monday to see what they look like.
This is the link for the PS plug-in http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=2701

I did one output at 300 dpi with the dimensions 4096 x 6144 pixels and the print size is 13.7" x 20.5".

[osbie]

I was looking into this myself recently and as a linux user it has its own little twist. To that end, I stumbled upon this http://www.cybercom.net/~dcoffin/dcraw/ (http://www.cybercom.net/%7Edcoffin/dcraw/) dcraw was created for linux but has since been incorporated into many programs ( in whole or part) by Photoshop CS, bibble and many other share/free ware.

The site has linx to these programes, many worth a try (It all depends on how you work). Also some good info on the subject. http://www.cybercom.net/~dcoffin/dcraw/index_en.html (http://www.cybercom.net/%7Edcoffin/dcraw/index_en.html) .

[drisley]

drisley, I agree with you.
I downloaded the plug-in for PS CS and just from the one portrait photo I converted from RAW mode I find the PS plugin far better. I'm so glad I stumbled upon this thread.
Yes, if the quality of C1 Pro 3.6 was far superior to PS CS, then I would just re learn my C1 Pro workflow again. But, when I tried it, I was a little disappointed with the results... definately no better than PS CS for noise, maybe slightly better for detail, but for colour reproduction, especially skin, PS CS was much better IMHO.
Also, using PS CS for Raw is just so seamless, and I find it takes much less tweaking to get the results I want.
But again, everybody has to figure out for themselves what is best.

[HJMinard]

Also, using PS CS for Raw is just so seamless, and I find it takes much less tweaking to get the results I want. But again, everybody has to figure out for themselves what is best.

Does Elements 3.0 use the same RAW translation "engine" as PS CS?

[rfreschner]

Does Elements 3.0 use the same RAW translation "engine" as PS CS?

If by engine you mean does it use the same Adobe plug-in, yes.

[mbze430]

I have tried most of the commercial and free RAW. I personally still use Bibble Pro.

[DavoMrMac]

Just to let everyone know that the software I referred to in my original post was at www.pixmantec.com - so thanks for pointing me that way early on.

I have downloaded the software, but not yet tried it. So busy today, that I only got as far as dusting lenses and fitting filters, plus an Exim screen shield on the back of the 350.

I will also take a look at Bibble.

[PrimaPhoto]

Yes I tried www.pixmantec.com's software and I find the editing ability better with the PS CS plug-in. I guess this is a case of "you get used to using the same software" I started with PS to develop my RAW images from my G2 and liked it.

[psk4363]

Until recently I've been using the CS RAW converter but since buying the 1D I've been impressed with Canon's Digital Photo Professional, especially for the batch processing part.

Barry

[CyberDyneSystems]

Canon's freebie DPP is no slouch.. they made huge improvements with it over there previous software (zoombrowser)

[Paul Engen]

Check the camera reviews of Canon Eos 20D and Canon Eos 350D on www.dpreview.com. They are using different RAW converters and they show you the results in pictures. They are in favor of the Adobe Camera Raw.

[Pekka]

Check the camera reviews of Canon Eos 20D and Canon Eos 350D on www.dpreview.com. They are using different RAW converters and they show you the results in pictures. They are in favor of the Adobe Camera Raw.

The page http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos20d/page19.asp does its conclusions based on default settings. In feature set list of any RAW converter "factory default" is just not important at all. A converter allows you to set custom camera profiles, custom output profiles, file format, curves, saturation, color hue and WB, sharpening, detail extraction, noise suppression etc. etc. so that you get your image tweaked out in best possible way. The most important features in a converter are flexibility of settings (especially how it maintains quality when you need to go to extremes), and workflow (ease and speed of use).

To treat a RAW converter as a tool for saving directly to JPEG means you do not actually use RAW's benefits.