[Richard Day]

I use iMatch for all my image management tasks. Awsome.
Still looking for a RAW converter. Perhaps Lightroom..

I've just started to use iMatch and have a lot to learn about DAM! I have Peter Krogh's book on DAM and have been familiarising myself with the techniques for some 3 months now!

As far as Raw converters go, I use Silkypix at the moment, mainly because of it's excellent colour and IQ rendering. Although it can handle just about all the formats including K10D PEF and DNG, it doesn't utilise the full DNG capabilities and writes it's own sidecar files (rather than into the DNG file) that are not XMP compliant, so any tagging, grading or adjustments are not replicated in iMatch, whereas Bridge/ACR does, and the adjustments you make in the DNG Raw file are visible in the embedded JPEG, plus tagging, grading and any private metadata.

It will be interesting to see if ACR v3.7 due to be released today, will offer any improvements IQ wise for the K10D. I have always found that the default colour profiles in ACR for any camera I have are always incorrect, I cannot understand why they cannot get them more accurate, just about everyone else manages, it means that you have to mess around with a Greytag chart and make your own calibration. I also find that the noise and detail from ACR is not anywhere near as good as Silkypix or even Bibble.

As Lightroom uses the same engine as ACR I don't expect any significant difference. Also Lightroom forces you to adopt it's own DAM sysyem so is often in conflict with iMatch or any other true DAM software, e.g. iView which many people favour (far too expensive in myView and now very suspect as it has been bought by Microsoft).

---

Last edited by Richard Day; 02-19-2007 at 02:48 AM. Reason: spelling mistake

[WMBP]

Also Lightroom forces you to adopt it's own DAM sysyem so is often in conflict with iMatch or any other true DAM software

I'm not sure what it means to say that Lightroom forces you to use its DAM system. I put my Raw files where I want to put them and Lightroom simply references them. What's coercive about that?

Will

[wheelgate]

I have no connection with the manufacturer of Helicon Filter, http://www.heliconfilter.com/, other than having paid $30 for the Personal version. I tried the Free version for several months. I recently bought the Personal version to support the manufacturer, since the Free version does everything I need at this time. I highly recommend that you check out this software to bring order to and to edit your photographs. Not only does it handle and convert most raw and standard graphic files (including the .PEF and .DNG files from my new Pentax K10D), but it also organizes my photo editing in an easy-to-use "work flow" fashion. If you find the Free version a bit limited, you can buy the $30 Personal Version or the $40 Pro Version. I've a half-dozen different photo editors and managers installed on my PC, but I've been abandoning them one by one in favor of Helicon Filter.

[amateur6]

I know I'm a relative newbie here, but I'll add my voice to the chorus...

As an advertising art director/designer by profession, Photoshop is a natural fit for me (especially considering that I've been using it for 14 years now).

I can imagine that it would be quite a bear to dive straight into, though. Rather like being thrown into the deep end of an ocean!

[X Wolf]

I voted "other" because I am still using Photoshop 6.0. I'll probably go to Photoshop Elements when I switch to a Mac.

George

[Mike Cash]

Put me down for The GIMP as my primary processing software.

Others:

Paintshop Pro XI
IrfanView
Stepok's RAW Converter
Noiseware (Free Edition)

[luxart]

Hi Will, good idea.

I use Silkypix 3 (because in my opinion it renders the best colours), then Photoshop.

I think that Silkypix would deserve a box of its own rather than being in the "other" category.

I will have another go at Capture One (Phase1) when they support the K10D (which is supposed to be in March) as I found the colour rendition excellent too. (You are entitled to a free download if you buy a Sandisk Extreme III at the moment, and to an update).

---

Last edited by luxart; 03-25-2007 at 12:31 AM. Reason: correcting and fine tuning my answer

[Richard Day]

I'm not sure what it means to say that Lightroom forces you to use its DAM system. I put my Raw files where I want to put them and Lightroom simply references them. What's coercive about that?

Will

My mistake!

I hadn't figured out the interface/command system properly, contrary to others, I found Lightroom confusing and Silkypix fairly easy! I also find Photoshop quite intuitive and straightforward.

I still find the colours from Lightroom (and ACR) poor. Until I have a profile that gives me colours that are accurate/similar to Silkypix/Pentax Photolab, I will stick to Bridge/iMatch -> Silkypix -> Photoshop as my PP workflow.

[skaktuss]

My main photo browsing and simple editing software is Faststone image viewer, it's 100% freeware. If I need something more serious, can't escape from Photoshop.

[dhodgeh]

Coming out of lurk mode.

Silkypix and Picture Window Pro.

I still have Photoshop CS installed on my machine, but I only use it for frames and fancy effects.



Picture Window Pro can handle all of my photographic post processing, but it does not have the fine level of control that Silkypix offers for raw conversions.

A real strong plus for PWP is that it can be setup to run from a USB flash drive, so I can take it with me on a trip and use as needed.

[kurt]

Hi,

I use mainly Silkypix, and sometimes Photoshop Elements. In most of the cases Silkypix is enough for me, but occasionally the "artistic"-mood hits and you'll try to do something "fancy" stuff.

Part of the workflow I also use Adobe DNG Converter to compress the DNG files from the cam.

Happy post-processing folks

kurt

[Dana G]

I have a big problem with anyone saying that an application is "an industry standard", because it tends to become a self-fulfilling prophesy and a move towards a monopolistic situation.


Simon

You missed the bit about clients expecting you to use it. Even if they don't even really know exactly what it is.

[HawaiianOnline]

Photoshop CS2 & 3 Beta user here. I'll be upgrading once the final version of CS3 comes out.

[Simon]

You missed the bit about clients expecting you to use it. Even if they don't even really know exactly what it is.

...but there is (or at least need be) no evidence in the resulting image to indicate which package you used to arrive at it. It would be very similar to stipulating the use of Microsoft Word to produce a text file (as opposed to a Word format .doc).

If I really needed "Photoshop" in the EXIF (and I can't think why) I could either fake it, or run the image through Elements at the last moment.

I wouldn't want anything to do with an HTML file that had been produced by any Microsoft application (including FrontPage) because they're mess, but providing the result was neat (impossible in Microsoft) I wouldn't know or care where it had come from. It has to be the same with image files.

I know, I am being naive, but equally, to think there is no way you can give the impression of using Photoshop while using a "favourite" package is lacking in thought.

Simon

[Dana G]

If I really needed "Photoshop" in the EXIF (and I can't think why) I could either fake it, or run the image through Elements at the last moment.

I know, I am being naive,

Yes, you are

but equally, to think there is no way you can give the impression of using Photoshop while using a "favourite" package is lacking in thought.

Simon

It just so happens I like Photoshop, I have tried other programs and Photoshop is still the most powerful. Plus it comes with Image Ready for Web work.