--ex Paris (now London) Steve-- 8:07pm, 23 May 2007
This was real fun to process... I "cheated" a bit by doing pre-processing in bibble since its faster and more powerful at some stuff (and a LOT faster) but this could only be achived in Lightzone ...

NO GRAPHIC INVITES PLEASE
rzych 11 years ago
Paris Steve, I have a question to ask you regarding LightZone and Bibble. I have LightZone as well and as much as I like it (new tonemapper is really good), the speed of using it gets to me at times. I don't take photos to make a living and I don't shoot hundreds at a time, but LZ is just not a quick processor. I accept that I only have a gig of ram and these days, that is on the slim side for working with raw files - yes, I can go spend ~$100 or so and get the extra ram, but I am not sure that is the total speed answer. So, assuming that I wanted to spend that kind of money, I have looked at other raw image processors to sort of put another "raw converter tool" in my software kit. Bibble was one that I liked an awful lot, especially from the speed side of things. However, there was one thing I could not come to grips with and that was the "softness" of the converted Bibble image as compared to LZ as well as several others I tried. Try as I might, I just could not get the same final result using identical as possible sharpening on comparison images of the two. Close up picture of people, Bibble was OK from the sharpness perspective, perhaps a little nicer skin because of it, but farther away group picture, facial details just didn't match up between the two.

I read up a bit on Bibble by crusing through their user forum for this issue and accept that when you keep enlarging the image on the computer screen, things such as the rounded surface of an ear lobe would not pixelate nearly as much as other converters and that you don't get the artifacts 0 I did it and could see the difference at extreme enlargement. But I just couldn't get the same final result with the as sharpened image viewing it at normal size.

You use both editors, how do you view the "sharpness" issue, do you see the same thing between the two, or am I just seeing things? Thanks much for your time.

Rudy
Tough question....
Bibble starts with rh softwer image and then resolves it, it also depends what you have switched on (like sharpness and NN)
LZ resolves it all first.. but boy it can take a time...

This is why I use both :D I guess... Bibble is way faster and I tend to do things in bibble like color temp, constrast etc. these are almost instantaneous on my 1GB RAM athlon 2400 (64)...
NN and some of the other stuff takes time .. so always add these later... and also stuff like color balance doesn't *need* a sharp image... (course its nice) buty you get control back and you can tweak the next thing...

I find LZ more exacting but also much slower and so I push the mundane stuff through bibble and save as 16 bit TIFF..

I also find bibble more powerful at color temp etc. in EXTREME circumstances (such as my habit of using B&W filters on color shots).. and also Sean's plug-ins etc. are great.. personally I love his B&W one.. and bought the Full version...
rzych 11 years ago
Thanks for your comments there Steve. You know, until LZ v3 came out with it's relighter tool here recently, I would have sprung for Bibble to use on the mundane, sharpness not withstanding. However, v3 tonality control is soooo good I will use my "other converter" stash I had put aside and upgrade from v2.4 basic to v3 full. As for the speed issue (which for me is basically the time it takes to open a file and convert it to a TIF), I will suck it up for now. I don't make a living from photography, and so I am not shooting hundreds and hundreds or more at a time. If it gets onerous, I will go out and get another gig of ram and throw it into the box. For the quick, mundane, easy conversion, I still have RSE to fall back on.

While I have been "digital" for the last 4 years, it has only been since this past December I went down the "raw" path and jumped into digital PP. Now that I have had a play with most all of the raw converters and with the rapid improvement of LightZone since I first tried it at Christmas, I will stick with it and put my effort into learning how use LZ's marvelous tonality control better.
No prob's, personally I'm dying to see LZ3 when the Linux version comes out...
Groups Beta