- BEST SETTINGS FOR IRIDIENT X TRANSFORMER FOR MAC
- BEST SETTINGS FOR IRIDIENT X TRANSFORMER FULL
- BEST SETTINGS FOR IRIDIENT X TRANSFORMER PLUS
I mentioned earlier that I had discarded my original ORF files after running them through the Adobe DNG converter."īased on this point Brian wrote: "Assuming this was how your initial DNG conversions were done, in theory the DNG data could still be put through a program like Iridient O-Transformer and be processed with a different/better demosaic." "There is one point that I'm not clear on. I emailed Brian Griffith at Iridient and we went back and forth on several questions I had. and the slow pace of LR innovation), I’m not confident it does. Much as I’d like to say that O-T offers a better starting point (given the rising cost of LR subs. It has to be justified by a clear preference for differences visible in the final result. It was not clear to me that the occasional difference at the demosaicing step was sufficient to ensure better final results.Ī change in workflow - such as a change from LR/ACR demosaicing to O-T - is really costly. There are, after all, many additional processing steps that contribute to (or detract from) the final quality of the image. But I decided that there was not enough gain to persist with testing. I suppose if I tried many more images it might have become clearer why/when O-T was superior. But I did not see this in every image I tested. ACR) demosaicing showed me I could sometimes get noticeably better micro-contrast from O-T. Careful comparison - pixel peeping - of O-T demosaicing with LR (i.e. I tried out the Iridient O-Transformer a month or so back. If you're interested, demo versions are available for O-Transformer and Developer.ĭisclaimer: I have no interest in Iridient Digital other than as a satisfied customer. The RAW conversion is at least as good as Lightroom, without Adobe's subscription cost. The price of both is lower than DxO PhotoLab, especially if you include the cost of DxO's annual upgrades. O-Transformer (or Developer) may be appealing options for some photographers, however. So I purchased DxO PhotoLab and uninstalled Iridient Developer.
BEST SETTINGS FOR IRIDIENT X TRANSFORMER PLUS
Earlier this year I tried DxO PhotoLab, which IMO does a noticeably better job on Olympus files than Iridient, particularly for noise reduction and sharpening, plus I can also recover more of the image at the edges. My primary reason for using Iridient Developer was to disable Olympus' built-in lens correction so I could recover more of the image at the edges. In my experience Iridient Developer did a good job on my Olympus files, but I didn't think it was noticeably better than what I could do in Lightroom.
I am a longtime user of Iridient Developer. Lightroom and/or a pixel editor is still required with both O-Transformer and Developer, as there's no local adjustments or retouching tools in either version. It lacks many of the adjustments available in Developer, including cropping and exposure adjustments. O-Transformer batch converts ORF files to DNG, applying a choice of two demosaicing algorithms, plus optional noise reduction, sharpening, lens correction and chromatic aberration removal. I guess they've had a lot of success with X-Transformer as they've now released similar "Transformer" versions for Olympus, Canon, Nikon and Sony.
BEST SETTINGS FOR IRIDIENT X TRANSFORMER FULL
Developer is regarded as one of the best RAW converters for Fuji X-Trans files, and a while ago Iridient released a scaled down X-Transformer version limited to Fuji files for a third of the price of Developer, and which runs on both Mac and Windows (the full Developer version is Mac-only). Iridient Developer is the "full" version of the RAW converter that works for all RAW files from all cameras.
BEST SETTINGS FOR IRIDIENT X TRANSFORMER FOR MAC
It's available for Mac and Windows for USD $30. I just noticed that Iridient Digital has released a version of their RAW converter for Olympus ORF files: Iridient O-Transformer.
0 kommentar(er)
