Thanks Mark, that is a very useful description of your flow. Maybe I'll give Silkypix another go. I might have some questions for you! :) I think the biggest problem I have is that to import an image, there does not seem to be a conventional dialog that you can navigate through directories. It seems to want you to type in the whole path.
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Mark C <pdml-m...@charter.net> wrote: > Thanks, Gonz. I share your disdain for Silkypix - the user interface is weak > and it lacks a lot of functionality found in Adobe Camera Raw. > > I don't use lightroom - locked in with Photoshop CS6 for the time being. > Adobe stopped updating ACR for CS6 with the K3II as the last Pentax > supported camera. I'm not sure what that means - ACR still opens K1 DNG > files, but does not seem to process the pixelshift images as well as > Silkypix or in camera JPG's. But the version of ACR I have was updated to > support pixel shift mode. I don't know if that means it supports only K3II > pixel shift mode or if it also supports K1 pixel shift mode. Last I looked > (4 to 6 weeks ago) ACR did not support motion corrected pixel shift mode. > > I did some testing with to tools I have SIlkpix, in camera JPG's, the > outdaed version of ACR. My workflow is to shoot in motion corrected > pixelshift mode and use Zerene stacker combine TIFFs . (Zerene stacker does > not work with raw file, afaik). I see more difference in focus stacked / > pixel shift images than in single pixel shift images. In my tests, the > hierarchy is: > > 1. > DNG's converted in Silkypix - the amount of detail in stacked images is > really impressive. > 2. > In camera JPG's converted to TIFF's via ACR - almost as good as DNG's in > Silkypix but some artifacts appear in the stacked images - maybe JPG > artifacts amplified by stacking? > 3. > DNG's converted in ACR - notably less detail than the above two options, > but... > 4. > Non pixel shift images converted in ACR - less detail than the above, > including pixel shift DNG's converted with ACR. > > So - it seems that even the outdated version of ACR I have shows some > improvement with pixel shift mode, but not on par with SIlkypix or in camea > JPG's. FWIW, I use pixel shift in motion corrected mode because at high > magnification I see vibrations in images every now and then. A garbage truck > hitting a pothole half a block away can create visible motion in the subject > even at just 1:1. > > That's where I am at with testing Pixel shift images. I doubt that I will > ever move to Lightroom since blending of layers is an integral aspect of how > I post process and LIghtroom does not support layers. Aside from the > updated ACR I have not seen any update in Photoshop CC that is very > compelling. > > Mark > > > > On 4/26/2017 12:01 PM, Gonz wrote: >> >> Excellent series Mark. I don't like Silkypix user interface, it is >> very confusing and I find it difficult to find the files, etc. I >> bring them into Lightroom instead. Have you seen any difference >> between the images processed by Lightroom vs Silkypix? >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- -- Photography takes an instant out of time, altering life by holding it still. Dorothea Lange -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
