AfterShot Pro 2.0

[mipopa]

RawTherapee NR:

coat-RT.jpg (119.24 KiB) Viewed 10076 times

[scorpi11]

Is there anyone I can talk to about my specific problems? Maybe I'm just doing things wrong.

Why not open up an extra thread on the specific issues?

I already tried, without success:

http://forum.corel.com/EN/viewtopic.php?f=90&t=51529

[thazooo]

My Gripe
Ran into a conversion problem using the .dng files from a Pentax K50.
WB being way off. Camera set to 5000K, asp2 interprets as 6075k.
Loss of detail compared to Pentax supplied converter.
I used Bibble/ASP since 3. It's always done a very good job at keeping the files looking like they came out of the Pentax software, without a lot of adjustments.
This version isn't. I'll assume that it's because of the .dng format rather than .pef.
No upgrading here

Dana

[Dutchmm]

@Mipopa

That's quite impressive! I might have a go (just for that set, I am not normally so absent-minded about ISO)

Mike

[brucet]

Given limited time to run a full test!!! I've tested ASP2 against ASP1 and Nikon NX-D beta. I tested with very basic adjustments and full tweaking on an individual basis. I can't see a great deal of improvement other than speed in the 64v. In my samples NX-D is a clear winner. (I'm addressing many issues in PSPx6 so I have USM and Noise reduction addressed in PSPx6 and not in the raw conversion. It's my work flow. Old dog new tricks etc).

Now my GRIPE. White balance is still a cot case. Not fixed as far as I can tell. Files out of ASP1 & 2 still have a heavy green tint. Cloudy and Shade settings are broken IMHO. (I haven't tested other white balance presets).

Sorry Corel. No money for an upgrade from me at this stage. I'll keep testing but if I have to fine tune every file for white balance then I'm not interested.

I would like someone else to confirm my findings. I will be more than happy to rescind my gripe if it's my error.

regards

[m33]

Just updated to AFT2 (Mac OSX x64).

Thank you guys on the forum
Thank you Corel

[futhark]

Parallel install of the ASP2 on rpm machines can be fixed with:

Code: Select all

rpmrebuild --change-spec-preamble='sed -e "s#^Name:.*#Name: AfterShotPro2#"' --change-spec-provides='sed -e "s#AfterShotPro#AfterShotPro2#"' --notest-install -p AfterShotPro2_2.0.0.133.i386.rpm

phew :S

fixed output file is then placed in ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/

(worksforme)

On Fedora 19, prior to the rpmrebuild I had to disable the %__prelink_undo_cmd macro in /etc/rpm/macros.prelink. I don't have a good understanding of prelinking but that got me where I wanted.

With prelinking in place, installing the rebuilt rpm produced the following error:

Code: Select all

error: unpacking of archive failed on file /opt/AfterShotPro/lib/libstdc++.so.6;5380b70b: cpio: Digest mismatch

[clifford]

I've just taken a look at the 64bit version on fedora running gnome shell.

whats with the windows title bars that overwrite gnomes defaults? Aftershot 1.0 didnt do this and I'd prefer the window to follow my desktop theme.

[Steb]

I've just taken a look at the 64bit version on fedora running gnome shell.

whats with the windows title bars that overwrite gnomes defaults? Aftershot 1.0 didnt do this and I'd prefer the window to follow my desktop theme.

For me the window management for ASP2 is completely broken in Gnome. I cannot get the ASP2 window to the foreground, I cannot get it to the background, I cannot resize it. It is always maximized and the minimize button is the only working button in the window title bar. Really uncomfortable way of working. This is with latest Ubuntu 14.04.

[spoilerhead]

whats with the windows title bars that overwrite gnomes defaults? Aftershot 1.0 didnt do this and I'd prefer the window to follow my desktop theme.

got to agree with you there. Can't stand it when an applications thinks it needs it's own look.

[nex4]

Given limited time to run a full test!!! I've tested ASP2 against ASP1 and Nikon NX-D beta. I tested with very basic adjustments and full tweaking on an individual basis. I can't see a great deal of improvement other than speed in the 64v. In my samples NX-D is a clear winner. (I'm addressing many issues in PSPx6 so I have USM and Noise reduction addressed in PSPx6 and not in the raw conversion. It's my work flow. Old dog new tricks etc).

Now my GRIPE. White balance is still a cot case. Not fixed as far as I can tell. Files out of ASP1 & 2 still have a heavy green tint. Cloudy and Shade settings are broken IMHO. (I haven't tested other white balance presets).

Sorry Corel. No money for an upgrade from me at this stage. I'll keep testing but if I have to fine tune every file for white balance then I'm not interested.

I would like someone else to confirm my findings. I will be more than happy to rescind my gripe if it's my error.

Have you tried a version of ASP that does not have green tint with your NX-D? It seems Corel is taking individual camera to do profiling. And the profile is hardcoded to ASP. If the profiling isn't done right, you are stuck. I have previously done experiments by changing Camera ID in EXIF and I see that each camera has a different setting:

http://forum.corel.com/EN/viewtopic.php ... 15#p287751

I see some very extreme differences. NEX-3N rendered RAW files have a greenish tint. Color temp values also varies a lot. My workaround is adding an extra step to my workflow - import photos to HDD using exiftool and change the camera ID. Good thing is there are multiple cameras to choose from - from the more accurate NEX-5N (but broken white balance slider) to warmer NEX-6.

[brucet]

I think one of the problems with comparing ASP 1or 2 with Nikons software is that Nikon knows their NEFs. So ASP is behind to start with. So is every other non Nikon software for that matter. I have been using Bibble and ASP for a while now and always accepted what came out of Bibble/ASP as the correct colour. It wasn't until the release of Nikons NX-D that I started to look at 'other' converters. Wow what a difference. For the first time I could see how 'bad' the ASP white balance was. Even with some fiddling I found it difficult to emulate what NX-D was producing. Simple matter is that what Nikon calls cloudy is not what ASP calls cloudy. What Nikon calls shady is far from ASP's shady. And so it goes. (One caveat is that loading an NEF into NX-D brings with it imbedded data from the Nikon camera. That information is lost going into other converters such as ASP). Regardless all photos still have a green tone to them in ASP.
There are limits to Nikons NX-D. Don't get me wrong. It's not perfect. But if I can't get the white balance right in ASP then all else is a waste of time. Using NX-D gets me great white balance and the ability to fine tune it. 'Almost' everything else I can do in PSPx6. But I need that 'perfect' conversion to start with.

Come on Corel. Fix the white balance issue and the rest will be ok. Well for me it will be.

regards

[mbellot]

I think one of the problems with comparing ASP 1or 2 with Nikons software is that Nikon knows their NEFs. So ASP is behind to start with. So is every other non Nikon software for that matter. I have been using Bibble and ASP for a while now and always accepted what came out of Bibble/ASP as the correct colour. It wasn't until the release of Nikons NX-D that I started to look at 'other' converters. Wow what a difference. For the first time I could see how 'bad' the ASP white balance was. Even with some fiddling I found it difficult to emulate what NX-D was producing. Simple matter is that what Nikon calls cloudy is not what ASP calls cloudy. What Nikon calls shady is far from ASP's shady. And so it goes.

The same is true for most RAW conversion software I've tried. Canon, ASP, PhotoShop all have slightly different settings for the "presets".

(One caveat is that loading an NEF into NX-D brings with it imbedded data from the Nikon camera. That information is lost going into other converters such as ASP)

Nikon made a really stupid move when they decided to start encrypting some of the NEF data... It is your picture, why on earth would they choose to encrypt your data?

[wongjai888]

Thank you to all the serious posters (AFX included) .. I've enjoyed reading the posts and learned a lot!
I'm a photography enthusiast who has always liked ASP's simple, straightforward workflow.
I've used the initial ASP quite a bit, together with ACDSee Pro, Lightroom, Photo Ninja, etc., as I love to play around with these apps.
I've just upgraded to ASP 2, with the hope that Corel will continue to improve the product, which I think is worthwhile supporting.
Cheers!

[afx]

Nikon made a really stupid move when they decided to start encrypting some of the NEF data...

I do not think they ever encrypted it.
They only encoded the WB in a silly annoying proprietary way that took Eric a few days to decipher.
Real encryption is something different

It is your picture, why on earth would they choose to encrypt your data?

Why would they even keep the file format proprietary?

cheers
afx