Those thin branches/twigs are there, more clearly than they were before, but indeed any imperfections might be more obvious. Though not as finely detailed as with Capture One, or Iridient for example. Less of a thick mush than with Lightroom (or however you want to describe it). The way it rendered the base image is not too bad actually. But that part is more a matter of taste and settings. Or avoid learning it at all, process your images as a whole, let the fine detail be what it is, keep shooting and be happy with the results!Īftershot seems to have mostly inverted halos, dark edges/shadows around edges instead of light, to create the illusion of detail. just have to learn how to spot these things i guess. If the file hasn't been translated correctly then you can still do all those thing as it is raw after all, you can even be fine with it or not even notice, but it might look unnatural at detail level, worse with sharpening, and certain kinds of adjustments would reveal more unnecessary artifacts, things that neither the lens or sensor actually captured. Then it can be processed to taste (like sharpening) however one wishes. Personally I'm looking at if the Raw data is translated (to something humans can see) naturally/correctly, and without artifacts. Are you looking only at how much detail is present in the raw files?
0 kommentar(er)
