bigwade wrote:Let the stitchers do the stitching..and don't be so lazy to convert your images the way YOU want before stitching
klausesser wrote:Seriously: they`re develloping constantly new RAW-formats so fast that youÂ´ll always have to be up-date to get best results. The quality of RAW-demosaicing is vastly underestimated when it comes to stitching panoramas!
DrSlony wrote:. I can't agree that Canon's software is the "original" and attempts made by all other software are just "translations" :]
bigwade wrote:Oké an open translator can be very usefull.
I'm just a Canon user and I haven't seen better converters than DPP for Canon RAW files.
ACR, Lightroom etc, I don't care, I've seen bizar results..
Canon will not give away their RAW-code so every 3party RAW converter is just a guess, and yes it is..
Same for Nikon, Pentax, Oly etc.
It's just as my English here, you can read it but it's not perfect.
And that's just the point :-)
hankkarl wrote:ACR and Lightroom don't quite work the same way. That is, the underlying engine is probably the same, but the UI differs. Its a matter of preference and experience.
PS was (originally) a tool for graphics artists. Photographers hijacked it. Lightroom is a new start at a tool for photographers that works in conjunction with PS.
Lightroom is good for making corrections to lots of photos quickly. PS is good for those photos that need work because the subject matter has a flaw (e.g. remove power lines, hide a pimple, etc)
Give lightroom another try-you may be surprised.
klausesser wrote:I use Lightroom for organizing shots as well as RAW-converting. It works very fine and has the same funktions as ARC in PS 3/4.
DrSlony wrote:there is nothing to guess once you have the RAW data. I can't agree that Canon's software is the "original" and attempts made by all other software are just "translations" :]
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests