- #Sony raw image converter how to
- #Sony raw image converter manual
- #Sony raw image converter full
- #Sony raw image converter software
However, I guess Sony put a lot of work into their software.
#Sony raw image converter software
It's unfortunate that, at least in my case, the DarkTable default output is so much lower quality than whatever the software in the camera is producing.
#Sony raw image converter manual
Perhaps for the future, I should read the user's manual and try to get the camera to save high-resolution JPEGs, but for my immediate needs, the exiftool extraction option produced a suitable resolution and far superior colors. The tool that I had been using is DarkTable, and the command-line is very simple: darktable-cli IN.ARW > OUT.jpg The other option for me, since I didn't want to use proprietary software, was suggestion to use the command line interface of a GUI tool.
On my 14-year-old camera, the preview image extracted by ExifTool is 1616 x 1080, not quite the resolution of my monitor, but good enough for a web page.
#Sony raw image converter full
One of the other answers, by has a negative score, and that is the one that I ended up preferring: exiftool -b -PreviewImage IN.ARW > OUT.jpgĪs pointed out in the comments, this has the disadvantage of not preserving the full resolution of the image. It's the viewer that I used to batch-output my photos. Imaging Edge is actually three programs (viewer, editor and camera remote control). So, as Michael C says, try the Sony program and see what happens. Some looked ok at the regular size, but when I zoomed in on the photo, there were a LOT of extra color and pixels that distracted from the image. It was VERY slow, taking about 24 hours to convert the photos (it's hard to tell exactly how long, because my laptop kept sleeping after a few hours, and I'm not sure the processing was working in the background.) Also, the resulting photos were very 'noisy'. FastStone has some other options that could be tweaked that might make more of a difference, but I didn't play with them.įotor was not very good. The jpeg file sizes were much larger, around double the size. The quality was nearly indistinguishable. It was as fast, or nearly as fast, as Imaging Edge. I used the "Quality = 100" setting, everything else default. It's also reasonably fast, 500 pictures took around 30-40 minutes.įastStone Viewer was nearly as good.
#Sony raw image converter how to
It's made by Sony and going by the logic that "Sony knows Sony", I trust that it knows how to work with it's own camera's images. I've tried a small handful of programs so far- Imaging Edge, Fotor, FastStone Image Viewer. We've found conversions made with recent versions of ACR to be almost identical to dcraw when dcraw's demosaicing option is set to match ACR's method, so we're pretty sure ACR isn't applying any noise reduction "under the hood" like it used to.I recently found myself in the same situation, took some RAW shots, not RAW + Jpeg, and now have a ton of photos that I need to improve in order to show anyone. Lately, though, we've switched to Adobe Camera Raw with its noise reduction and sharpening options set to zero. We used to convert raw files used for comparison crops with dcraw (an excellent freeware raw converter), as we could count on dcraw not to apply any noise reduction, sharpening or other corrections. RAW Comparison Compare the A99 to its competitors (in the raw). See how the Sony A99 performs in this difficult task.
High ISO NR Noise suppression is the enemy of detail at High ISO's. In-depth image analysis In-depth analysis of Sony A99 test images, focusing on factors like color, white balance, sharpness, active D-lighting, dynamic range, low light and print quality. Image quality comparison Compare the Sony A99 to its competitors in detail, color, noise and noise suppression across a range of ISOs.
0 kommentar(er)
