Best raw editor for Canon

nsydr

I'm new to photography and have a Canon XSI/450D. I have been researching raw editing programs and learned that each program's finished output looks different (some a lot better then others) and that not all are created equal. All of the info/tests that i have found are 2007 and older. Anyone know what's the best current program for Canon users when it comes to post processing work and conversion from raw?

Anthony

nsydr wrote:

I'm new to photography and have a Canon XSI/450D. I have been researching raw editing programs and learned that each program's finished output looks different (some a lot better then others) and that not all are created equal. All of the info/tests that i have found are 2007 and older. Anyone know what's the best current program for Canon users when it comes to post processing work and conversion from raw?

Well you have the Canon software which offers the ability to post-process images and save them out as tif files - which can then be opened in a number of different editing programs. Alternatively, using Photoshop either full or Elements will offer the use of Adobe Camera Raw for raw file processing and adjusting, then the ability to open the file in Photoshop itself for further processing.

But this misses the point really: No Converter/Processor automatically produces finished images - the way *you* want them by just clicking a couple of buttons. Experience and some know-how is necessary to get a better finish out of the software. The fundamentals are easy to learn and like anything worth while; practice, practice, practice is required. Fortunately, there are loads of tutorials on the 'net and trials for software available for free, so the world is your oyster in this regard.

I would recommend downloading a trial of Adobe Lightroom for a start and hunting around the Adobe TV site for tutorials by Julianne Kost and on the NAPP website for tutorials from Matt Kloskowski. Other people may offer different ideas of course.

Anthony.

MarkR

nsydr wrote:

I'm new to photography and have a Canon XSI/450D. I have been researching raw editing programs and learned that each program's finished output looks different (some a lot better then others) and that not all are created equal. All of the info/tests that i have found are 2007 and older. Anyone know what's the best current program for Canon users when it comes to post processing work and conversion from raw?

Honestly, Raw converters are like religions -- everyone "knows" which one is best, which is the one they use on a regular basis, and the best end results are as much a result of the skill of the operator as the program. I'd suggest downloading a few trial versions of different programs, see which one fits your needs.

Yes, raw converters initially render images slightly differently, but those "looks" are usually easily modified.

pathfinder

nsydr wrote:

I'm new to photography and have a Canon XSI/450D. I have been researching raw editing programs and learned that each program's finished output looks different (some a lot better then others) and that not all are created equal. All of the info/tests that i have found are 2007 and older. Anyone know what's the best current program for Canon users when it comes to post processing work and conversion from raw?

Digital Photo Pro that came with your camera some folks swear by.

Adobe Camera Raw - either in Photoshop or in Lightroom - probably accounts for a greater number of users than any other Raw processor, and is what I prefer. One of the reasons is that ACR offers several different profiles for Canon cameras. Not for Panasonic cameras though, and I wish it did for my GF-1. It integrates well with Lightroom and Photoshop also.

There are many others, from dcraw to Capture One, to DXO Optics, and Raw Therapee.

The most important factors is learning to use the tool you have well, I believe. Even creating your own camera profiles is important to some folks.

Here is a review of Raw Processors that is an interesting read and favors the beta version of LR 3. I am not certain how the Raw software engine in LR 3 ( beta ) is different than the latest versions of ACR

mrcoons

In this post there is a link to a review of several of the better know conversion programs. This might give you some perspective. My experience with most of these programs would offer this advice: download the trial versions one at a time and see which one is the easiest for you to produce the results you want. Because no matter how good a program is, if it is not easy for you to use you won't use it. Just my 2 cents worth.

nsydr

Thank you everyone for the input... i'll get to reading and doing my homework with the links given.

I have Lightroom 2 and CS4 Master for right now. Researching Lightroom is how i learned that not all Raw editors are created equal... when looking at sample shots of an image (supposedly with the same settings) there were noticeable differences but it was from 2006 era so probably out dated.

dmmattix

nsydr wrote:

Thank you everyone for the input... i'll get to reading and doing my homework with the links given.

I have Lightroom 2 and CS4 Master for right now. Researching Lightroom is how i learned that not all Raw editors are created equal... when looking at sample shots of an image (supposedly with the same settings) there were noticeable differences but it was from 2006 era so probably out dated.

The one thing that will change with time is the capability of Raw Converter software.

Now this is just my observations but I had downloaded the latest version of ACR with Lightroom V2.6 so I could process images from my new 7D and I began looking at files from 2002 that I shot with my old D30. I could do things with those files that I never could before with Capture One, RawShooter, and old versions of ACR. I may have never noticed it before but I could pull much more detail from the shadows with the latest version. I had seen this phenomena on the 7D files but had attributed it to the 7D files but it is also possible on the old 3 mega-pixel D30 files.

Just another reason to not give up on not perfectly exposed files. The software is very likely to improve to the point of making those files real usable.

The only real problem is you end up staying up to 3AM working on the old files...

Mike