I have new computer.
Breaking with tradition I went lap top, likely due to he time of year (winter), for comfort and practicality.
The Mac book Air has the new M1 chip. This looks able to handle enormous loads, so, using cloud storage and asking less than Scorsese level movie needs, I went with the base model and so far everything is going great.
The double edged sword is, now I can load up all those better versions of the programmes I want.
I started with Da Vinci Resolve for movies, then Classic Lightroom, C1 and trial versions of DXO Pure RAW and Prolab 4. Last, but it turns out, not least, I loaded in ON1 NoNoise.
The last one came from a desire to tackle noise in a work flow friendly way.
Lets re-wind to the beginning.
I shot some night hockey in some of the worst Light I have encountered. ISO 6400+, f2.8, 1/250th with a hideous yellow-green caste kind of stuff. M43 is very capable, but that was stressing everything beyond my comfort level. I switched to my 75mm f1.8 for half the game, just to feel like I had something decent to show.
Not satisfied with the files, I decided to try DXO Pure RAW. This is a pre-processing programme, designed to tackle noise, lens and camera corrections all at once. The Deep Prime NR is amazing, but it took 5 hours to load up and process 600 images. I did it wrong, doing my vetting after processing not before, but that in itself is problematic. I want to select and process using C1, not by eye before and the difference is enough, that images I may normally dismiss can be usable after DXO.
Sure I am missing something obvious, but the time is still an issue.
Several comparisons included a new-comer to the fold. The usual DXO vs Topaz fight now includes ON1 NoNoise. No Noise, did not seem as powerful at first, but I think I missed the subtlety it offered and I failed to do direct comparisons.
What makes it more powerful to me is, it is a right click “edit with..”, a few seconds to render a single image (or proportionately more if you want several), then you can usually just hit done and save. The results are astounding, realistic and controllable (as are those from DXO and Topaz), but they are fast and easily intertwined into my standard processing work flow.
After trying LR and C1 as the test bed, the processed images look similar, but the unprocessed ones are a different story. I had forgotten the “marbling” noise in LR, especially with sharpening and NR applied at higher ISO’s.
A set of ISO 6400 and 12800 (!) test images later and I have a decent, reasonably bullet proof work flow set up. Import to C1, select candidates that need some help (most images at ISO 3200 or more), export to ON1 as TIFFs (tried DNG, but see little difference and the TIFFs seem clean and powerful), save back to C1, usually after little or no change to the auto settings applied, then complete my C1 editing. I then export the original RAW and TIFF into storage and the processed jpeg’s to the client.
Why C1 over LR?
Several reasons, some I needed to be re-acquainted with to really appreciate.
Better base file processing, meaning many images do not need any more work and those that do, don’t contrast obviously with the untouched ones. A few ISO 6400 files were good enough straight out of C1, but were clearly too noisy in LR.
The file sent to ON1 is better. The end product from both work flows looks similar, but why not start with a better file (surely the ON1 processing is gentler if the parent programme has done a better job). If I was using Pure RAW as a pre processor, I would likely stick with LR as the rental is significantly cheaper and I like the Adobe colours, but the genuine pain of pre-processing is a deal breaker.
More choices when exporting to ON1 and saving back to C1. LR only seemed to offer .psd export files, C1 had several options. I settled on TIFF’s for universal convenience and I read somewhere that C1 does not love (Adobe) DNG’s.
Much faster work flow generally (for me). The right click>select colour tagging is embedded now, much faster than LR’s left click>scroll>select.
The other concern that always lurks in the mind as much as speed, is cost. ON1 is $77 au at the moment, DXO PR $180au, PL4 $270au.
The first set of images below are ISO 6400 shots taken wide open with my 25mm f1.8.
So, a pleasant enough portrait at normal sizes of Lucy, my reluctant muse.
Clean, sharp, relatively noise free at high enlargement size.
Another, this time at 12800, an ISO I would not even contemplate using previously.
Still sharp, clean and vibrant. The Lightroom file was very mushy and unsharp at this level, but looked ok at normal size (often noise/grain can add to the perception of sharpness at distance, but detract from it closer in).
Another at ISO 12800.
Notice the detail on the nose (point of best focus-the eye is slightly out) and the lack of noise behind. These have not been extensively processed in C1, just exposure and contrast levels, with a little sharpening just to see what would happen. I have found the files are pretty robust, but little is needed to be done.
A little dark (noticing a difference between the screens on my 8 yr old iMac and the new Air).
lightened a little. Another ISO 6400 image. I would be more than happy to print this to the same size as a ISO 400 image. To it’s credit, C1 did an ok job of this one, but the fine detail was a little mushy.
A final one at 6400
Nice to be able to do fine art grade work at higher ISO settings.
DXOPR ISO 6400 file. Lots of colour correction needed and applied (one end of the ground was yellow, the other blue-green and the middle an unholy mix of the two). Something I found problematic with DXO Pure RAW was the lack of fine controls. Some files just looked a little “plasticky”. Still, impressive results, but any better than ON1 or worth the extra time? I also have DXO ProLab 4 to try out. This would be to replace all of the above with possibly one clean work flow, except my old iMac cannot load the current version, so not sure what to do there and the time issue is still real.
Further refining and testing is likely, for example, I am not sure if exposure/contrast adjustments should be done before export or after or if ON1 is best for these (It does more than just cleaning up noise).
So, how useful?
I can now handle ISO 100-1600 files natively in C1, handing off ISO 6400+ (!) files to ON1 as needed. The slightly slower flow is more than made up for by the vastly more pleasant files on offer.
This has the same effective high ISO benefit of shooting full frame and processing with C1, but keeps the benefits of M43 in all other respects. Sure a full frame camera could even go further, but no practical need. I can now use my 300 F4 in poor indoor or outdoor night lighting at ISO 6400+, 1/500th, which tops out my needs. More impressively, I can set auto ISO to 6400 without fear, instead of a very conservative 1600.