Just a quick test.

[Denis de Gannes]

The file is a test file from my Olympus E510 at ISO 100. I use this to make comparisons with the various raw converters I use.
On the left is the process done with Olympus Viewer 2.0 software, the camera provided software. The center is done with Lightroom 4.0 Beta, on the right is ASP with Perfectly Clear and WS Plugin enabled. While the ASP rendition is more punchy I am very pleased with the rendition. The LR rendition is the closest to the actual objects captured.

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/92036 ... image00085

[quadrox]

I do hope you realize that by enabling "Perfectly Clear" you invalidated your results for AS? The entire point of PC is to punch up your photos, so enabling it and then saying the Lightroom rendition was more realistic is kind of disingenious.

Please note that I am the last person to defend AS (or the old Bibble), but I'm not entirely sure what your point was with this experiment?

[Denis de Gannes]

Yes, I am quite aware that PC would have that effect. All raw converters produce different renditions of raw files. e.g. Bibble 5 had several different profiles that produced results intended for different uses.
Using the particular file to view and compare the different renditions is useful to me since the items in the photograph are present in my home for me to compare. The statement that Lightroom produced a result that was the closest to reality is just to put things in perspective and not to suggest that it is better or more pleasing.

[quadrox]

I see, thanks for explaining that. And I hope you didn't take offense at my post

[tomsi42]

Yes, I am quite aware that PC would have that effect. All raw converters produce different renditions of raw files. e.g. Bibble 5 had several different profiles that produced results intended for different uses.
Using the particular file to view and compare the different renditions is useful to me since the items in the photograph are present in my home for me to compare. The statement that Lightroom produced a result that was the closest to reality is just to put things in perspective and not to suggest that it is better or more pleasing.

The problem is of course, people don't look at it that way. They will read better/worse into any comparison.

When I test and compare raw converters, I try to get a reasonalbe overview on how they work, then take some of my photos and see how easy it is to get to the results I want.

[claudermilk]

When I test and compare raw converters, I try to get a reasonalbe overview on how they work, then take some of my photos and see how easy it is to get to the results I want.

That's the best way. It's all subjective in the end anyway, so whichever tool allows you to get to your desired end the easiest way is the winner--for you.