Example 3 – click to see at 100%Īgain, this has more detail and is sharper than the Adobe version but also looks more natural.
Example 2 – click to see at 100%Īnd here is the RAW Therapee conversion at 100%. Although lacking in midtone contrast, the image is more natural in appearance and there is greater detail in the foliage. In the following image you can see the same image processed with Iridient, also at 100% magnification. RAW Therapee for example has a very large selection of tools in an interface that’s hard to grasp initially. I am very impressed with both of these as RAW converters but they lack some of the tools of Lightroom and/or are a little trickier to use. Since encountering this I have been experimenting with a number of RAW converters including RAW Therapee and Iridient. Whilst this isn’t a severe problem I don’t care for the detail in the image foliage as much as I do the results of other RAW processors I have now found.
In the following screenshot you can see a section of the above image at 100% magnification (you may need to double click the image to view it at full resolution). Sometimes foliage would have an unusual appearance that was almost false. Now to be clear, it wasn’t that the image quality was bad but rather under certain circumstances fine detail was lost during the RAW conversion in Lightroom. Many of you reading this will be aware of my move to a Fuji XT1 and the concerns I had regarding the image quality.