AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Iridient x transformer fujifilm profiles8/15/2023 My summation is that each of them all three of the converters alter the color balance in some way. The resulting DNG files were fed to Lightroom with no options turned on. There is no "Before or elsewhere." I took the SD card out of my X-T3 and fed it into the 3 converters. So what I am seeing are the deference's created by the 3 converters as they assembled the DNG. But, in my case I have turned all of these options off. This can be a real time saver for professionals. You can set Lightroom to do a number of processes on a DNG file as it opens it. RawDigger would show you the RAW data before conversion. All three examples should all look about the same in terms of color and contrast, and usually only reveal differences with a very close look. The color and contrast you are seeing in the three conversions must be set the same for each in Lightroom after the conversion, otherwise they will, unless your default import settings are set otherwise, typically retain whatever profiles that were applied before or elsewhere (which in this case are all different). But before that the recorded raw data has to be converted and this is where Adobe Raw Converter and Iridient differ, with the latter under circumstances giving more detail.Īnything having to do with 'duller", or "more vivid" will have to do with Lightroom's processing after conversion and is why it needs to be equalized for all three examples. But that is the second step and can added by taste. This rather suggests to me that you are looking at / talking about the color / tonality / contrast. That would be interesting, but I will leave that to someone else. ![]() This would tell us which converter is staying the most true to the color profile as captured by the camera. I guess someone could use that to look at the raw files histogram and then compare it to the histogram post conversation with each product. My eyes tell me that Adobe DC is rather dull and the other two are about equally more vivid. Outside of something like a histogram all you have to compare the conversion made by these three converters is your eyes. I don't place emphasis on the histogram, it was just some information that I had that I thought might be meaningful to someone. But, I must have given you the wrong impression. If you want to see what is going at the raw file level you need to look at a true raw histogram such as that produced by a program like RawDigger: You should be aware that the histogram you are seeing in LR is not based from the raw data but on the image as processed by LR. Noise reduction is optional and can be adjusted (low/med/high) or disabled.You seem to place a lot of emphasis on looking at the histogram. The noise reduction processing in Iridient X-Transformer shares much in common with the latest noise reduction available in Iridient Developer and is specifically optimized for RAW image processing. The lens correction processing in Iridient X-Transformer uses the same high quality resampling algorithms as Iridient Developer. The lens correction stage is optional and lens correction information can also be passed on through DNG opcode metadata and left to later processing stages or ignored altogether. Corrections are based on native Fujifilm lens information specified in their RAF metadata. ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |