227 replies to this topic

[VadimG]

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

[flysurfer]

While it only seems to work with half resolution as of now, I like the good highlight recovery and the film-like look you can get from it. This is from a DR400 RAW (F1.8/75mm Voigtländer Heliar):

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

These were my settings:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

I just added a few minor tweaks to the TIFF in Aperture. Very old-school and a huge difference to the OOC JPEGs.

Astia (internal RAW converter with identical Aperture tweaks):

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

Provia (internal RAW converter with identical Aperture tweaks):

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

[scho]

While it only seems to work with half resolution as of now, I like the good highlight recovery and the film-like look you can get from it. This is from a DR400 RAW (F1.8/75mm Voigtländer Heliar):

I get full size images by checking VNG.

[flysurfer]

I get full size images by checking VNG.

I get a crash when using VNG.

[scho]

I get a crash when using VNG.

No crashes using VNG with my computer. Mac OS 10.7.3 RPP 4.5.0 (1518)

[flysurfer]

No crashes using VNG with my computer. Mac OS 10.7.3 RPP 4.5.0 (1518)

No luck with 10.6.8

[flysurfer]

Another example with the Heliar and RPP:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

[pcg]

I've used RPP for some time. Very much an under-appreciated tool.

[VoxPixel]

No crashes using VNG with my computer. Mac OS 10.7.3 RPP 4.5.0 (1518)

Crash Using Mac 0S 10.7.4 and RPP 4.5.0 (1518) under certain circumstances.

If you chooses to Enable The Highlight Recovery AND to use VNG, then it crashes, otherwise no problem. So if you want VNG, remove Highlight Recovery.

[cyberprimate]

"Why my Raw files look underexposed (dark, gray veiled) in RPP compared to other converters?
Because they really are underexposed. By default RPP shows images as they captured by camera in Raw with only necessary tonal range adjustments and they may look darker than you expect. Usually this happens because your camera light meter is calibrated to some low gray point value by camera vendor. Most (if not all) modern DSLR cameras do this to preserve more highlights and most of other converters quietly apply compensation to your image to correct that. There are two ways to resolve this - apply exposure correction in RPP or adjust the camera light meter. For exposure correction try value 0.7 in Compressed Exposure field. (...) Adjusting your camera meter is a more complex procedure and I’d recommend this option only for advanced users who understand how metering works and all possible implications. You’ll have to check if your camera has option to apply some kind of metering bias. This option called differently for different cameras and you may need to dig through your camera manual."

Has Fuji applied this common lower light meter value in their camera or, on the opposite, is it why the X-Pro1 seems to expose very slightly more than other cameras?

[flysurfer]

I can't say my X-Pro1 exposes more than other cameas, but then again, my other cameras are Fujis, too. In any case, since I have deliberately chosen DR400 RAWs (which are considered "difficult" by some users) to test the look and feel of RPP 64, I really can't say that "underexposed" RAWs (even by -2 EV) appear to be a problem. The processor offers a compressed DR function, which is nice, so I simply played with it. I'm not unhappy with the results. I reprocessed both files with VNG and found that there's some color noise to deal with at the pixel level, so I used NIK Dfine to take care of that within Aperture. I also muted luminance noise a bit. It's a nice alternative, kudos to the auhor to think of Fuji users and acually get stuff done.

[Johan Rylander]

I have been using it today and is pleased with results although it gets awkward combining it with LR. Anyways, what I wanted to give as tip is that when it crashes on save (not uncommon) it helps to save with half interpolation set first and then try again with VNG. Also just changing exposure, changing back and then saving also works quite often. Silly? yep. Works? yep.

[Alfred]

I've been playing with RPP also. The interface is a bit getting used to, but once you get the hang of it it's not too difficult.

My initial impression is that the quality of the files is very good. the interpolation of the unique fuji sensor layout is implemented well and give nice sharp details that are on par with fuji's own results.

However I do have problems with the color red. Whatever I do I get an orange red. Perhaps it's due to my lack of understanding how to develop files with rpp. Has someone else experienced this or know how to correct the red channel in rpp? I have included a couple of examples below. (B.T.W. I do know that each raw convertor has it's own interpretation of RAW data and it will never be the same as the in camera conversion but the red color is way off in this case)

The 100% crop below show how nicely the interpolation algorithms renders the details from this portrait (60mm lens). But the skin tones are a too orange...



This is a comparison from an out of camera jpeg (Provia, with some levels adjustments). Just as detailed but the skin tones (and especially the lips) look much more natural



This photo of a deep red rose shows this effect in an extreme way (although in this case the rose does have a nice soft look with a lot of texture compared to the rpp version)



Compare this with the original jpeg (Velvia). Intense red (a bit clipped though) but it lacks a bit of texture.

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

by

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

, on Flickr

[flysurfer]

As for the portrait, I vastly prefer your RPP version. It's so much more film-like. Love it! Others pay big bucks to get such results with film simulation PP software.

As for the rose, the difference is obviously there, but it's hard to tell what's nicer. I'm pretty sure the JPEG is more like it looks like in reality, but then again, is that really the point? The lack of texture compared to the RPP version is amazing. The difference is more than "a bit", if you ask me.

I guess texture may be the issue here. RPP appears to give priority to texture, the internal engine gives it to color.

[jknights]

I prefer the last picture of the mare and foal.

I have looked at the other photos of the portrait and the flowers.
Rendering of either is a matter of taste I think.
For me I can like either of the two flower renderings but I prefer the lower of the two pictures for the portrait.
Just my 2 cents.

[cyberprimate]

As for the portrait, I vastly prefer your RPP version. It's so much more film-like. Love it!

I feel the same. The RPP version has the charm of film. It's the one i'd keep.

[Alfred]

As for the portrait, I vastly prefer your RPP version. It's so much more film-like. Love it! Others pay big bucks to get such results with film simulation PP software.

As for the rose, the difference is obviously there, but it's hard to tell what's nicer. I'm pretty sure the JPEG is more like it looks like in reality, but then again, is that really the point? The lack of texture compared to the RPP version is amazing. The difference is more than "a bit", if you ask me.

I guess texture may be the issue here. RPP appears to give priority to texture, the internal engine gives it to color.

I've been playing somewhat more with rpp, the results I get intrigue me. Maybe it's because as you say that the results are more film like, but there's definitely something to the files. They're not as accurate in color but somehow very pleasing to the eye and very detailed. I processed another portrait of my daughter and I got very lively results. This time I used one of the film simulations and that gave a lot of additional pop to the file. I think the contrast and tonality in her face is stunning! I printed this one out on my epson 3800 and man I got a really fantastic print! For the rose I have mixed feelings. The result is nice soft but with lots of texture details (amazing as you say). But it bugs me a bit that the color is to far off. I'm going to reprocess a couple of more files to see what I get. Fun times ahead

RPP using K64 film simulation

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

by

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

, on Flickr

Out of camera jpg looks a bit bland compared to the rpp version. The shirt, although more accurate to the fabric color just doesn't look as pleasing and has color clipping that ruins details. (I probably could improve upon that though)

[flysurfer]

Huge difference. Like you, I used a RPP 64 film simulation (A100F) for my samples.

[jknights]

Agree that the lower pair of portrait that the film mode simulation version is better. Do they have an Agfa RS100 film simulation?

[scho]

I made a custom icc profile within RPP from a shot of a ColorChecker chart. This seems to help getting more accurate colors. Shot below from X-Pro1 with 60mm Fujinon.

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

OOC jpeg



RPP raw with default profile



RPP raw with custom ColorChecker icc profile

[VoxPixel]

Apparently, there is a new beta version, which corrects the crash problem when using VNG and 'Higlight Recovery'.
The new beta version :

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

[flysurfer]

Works nicely. I have just reprocessed and old pre-production favorite, using K64 and some custom Aperture treatment:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

by

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

, on Flickr

Another typical result from this unusable camera.

[nandemofoto]

The RPP works really well with files from cameras without AA filter. Processing files from Leica m9 and Ricoh GXR gave me great results (I didn't like it with Nikon d3x though). Can't wait to try it with my X-Pro1 files.

[Ario Arioldi]

Works nicely. I have just reprocessed and old pre-production favorite, using K64 and some custom Aperture treatment:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

by

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

, on Flickr

Another typical result from this unusable camera.

Excellent.

[flysurfer]

RPP doesn't correct the 18mm lens, so in conjunction with RPP utilizing the entire sensor area, you get quite different results in comparison with the OOC JPEGs.

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

by

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

, on Flickr

[Alfred]

I made a custom icc profile within RPP from a shot of a ColorChecker chart. This seems to help getting more accurate colors. Shot below from X-Pro1 with 60mm Fujinon.

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

That's a big difference in color. Thanks for making the profile available, i'm going to try it out

RPP doesn't correct the 18mm lens, so in conjunction with RPP utilizing the entire sensor area, you get quite different results in comparison with the OOC JPEGs.

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

by

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

, on Flickr

I like both your samples a lot! The portrait of the old lady is stunning!

It's great new processing options like rpp are getting available now...

[nandemofoto]

Although the RPP works well with midrange shots, it is introducing some strange noise to shots set to infinity at higher f stops.

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

post no.60

[scho]

That's a big difference in color. Thanks for making the profile available, i'm going to try it out

Be sure to set white balance to "as shot" when using the profile.

[Sapphie]

Thanks for the profile, Carl. Here's one using it from the 18mm, WB As Shot, K64 film type:



Lee

[jknights]

Ditches are full. Hosepipe ban enforce ?
Only in UK!!

How do you find the output compares to straight from DCRaw ?