We all have thousands of photos from b5 and b4. What are you going to do with them? I’ve seen responses that say they will keep using b5 for the old ones and use asp for new stuff. That was my plan also until i came across a new problem (to me) in b5.
It is never going to be repaired (as are any of its problems) and calls into question all my previous hard work. I was making jpegs from tiffs using either pixie or pixeldust (both of which i miss. does raw noise work on tiffs - i think not) to reduce some flash ugliness. Maybe this wasn’t happening with raws but when I bounced to jpeg those plugins were not incorporated in the output. See example. Many things were broken in b5 but we hoped they would be fixed. Now there’s no chance of that and since asp can’t use the xmps, what to do?
Are you going to redo your 10,000 pix in asp? Ignore b5 pink hilights and incorrect output and keep what you’ve got? Even if you only want 500 of those are you doing them again? It’s like remixing an album months or years later. You don’t remember what you did and the new tools can’t get all of that old sound you were already happy with. It may be better in some ways but you had already finished and moved on - and the new version didn’t wipe out all your automation and plugins from the last version. People would be (and are) unhappy. Redoing work is always depressing. Much needs doing before going backwards.
Most audio programs can translate their previous versions and even a lot of mix info from competitors. I realize pictures are much more complicated than audio but why can’t a translator be built between b5 and asp color engines ala performer to protools? Without one i see a long, painful period of using two versions of our software with less than satisfactory results from one of them. Asp won’t even distinguish between b5's and its own xmp and happily overwrites it. Software usually breaks with a major os update but breaking versionally is bad. This is more or less a new version and not a new program, even though it has a new name.
B5 is making jpegs (and tiffs) from tiffs (yes, it’s a raw converter) that are color shifted, more sharpened than the raw (no output sharpen applied) and failing to include some plugins (found 2 so far). I expect the output to be nearly indistinguishable from input. I only really noticed this when starting to process all my old pre-digital tiffs. I waited a long time for that ability since b4 couldn’t.
Related - why can’t asp, like b5 should have, buy and incorporate all the plugins so there is continuity? A main reason for me not using asp is because there is no gradfilter. It, alone, saved thousands of pix. Please attend to the b5 users before the new ones. At least, it no longer has that dumb name.
Not related - no way to load an avatar from my drive. Why has the file upload size been so limited? Please use the old forum structure.
I tried to have double spaces between sentences but both forums and both programs refuse and rewrite what i wrote. An output from a file named ab**01 becomes ab*01. ← I did put 2 spaces after ab. If my computer can't handle that, let me worry about it. Don't presume to rename my files.
So, what are your plans?
right b5 with reduced sparkles in hair, gtr strings and on baffle behind. left b5 w/sparks, neutral grey tone shirt shifted slightly red. bluejean blue?
looks even worse inside b5.
MINI 2.26 4 GB ram OSX 10.6.8
Olympus E-620, E-510