Jump to content

On1 Photo Raw

  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 19 December 2016 - 06:54 PM

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)



does anyone have experience with On1 Photo Raw?

#2 porterbasset



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 20 December 2016 - 04:27 AM

I've tried it over the last couple of weeks and downloaded the finished program today and used it on some ARW files.

1. I like the menus and workflow up to this point.

2. I normally use DxO Optics Pro. ON1 surprised me that it is fractionally slower exporting files than DxO (thought it would be faster from the claims). The sharpening and noise control seem better on DxO. Can't comment yet on shadows and highlights and color and white balance, since I haven't played enough with ON1's settings. I'll be sticking with DxO for now, but I'll give ON1 a chance to learn more about it. (The skin tone options I like.)

3. Not sure if I would call this a finished product. It's supposed to be 4k happy, but watch out for the child windows, they don't resize (Lightroom problem too). Also the tiff file output has some compatibility problems.

#3 porterbasset



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 20 December 2016 - 04:42 AM

Oops, forgot to mention in my unfinished product comments. ON1 has no lens and camera support yet. Will be released in the future.

#4 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 20 December 2016 - 03:06 PM

They just released it today. Well, it works, there is some potential, in some ways I think C1 is working better ... as this feels a little like LightRoom.


Only real performance issue I noticed was browsing photos in Film Strip mode, where on my 5K iMac it was taking a few seconds to load each image. Once loaded editing was smooth, which is a vast improvement over C1.

#5 MikeM481027



  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 20 December 2016 - 04:26 PM

I have looked at ON1 Raw, as a possible replacement for Aftershot Pro.It is better than ASP in that it has selectable blending modes, and better selection tools.This means you can get all your workflow from a single program. 


Taking into account ASP's noise management plugins (which are free), I think ASP is better at dealing with noise.It is difficult to comment on ON1's lens correction facilities, but those of ASP are, well, not very good.


I read from ON1's webinars that it is very sensitive to the speed of your graphics card.It is pedestrian on my laptop, but not noticeably slower than DxO Optics (which is great for IQ, but doesn't provide correction layers).If you have a gaming oriented machine, expect it to be faster than DxO, I think.


In the end, I decided that Affinity Photo is the new contender for my workflow.Mind, you need a system capable of at least DirectX10.

#6 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 20 December 2016 - 06:53 PM

This is really interesting, perhaps more in the direction of Lightroom than C1 - in terms of processing some of the effects are too strong IMO, but still using less solves that. I prefer C1 sharpness and clarity, however this is likely a learning curve ... how to do subtle adjustments. The included presets do make nice strong images, too strong for me, but fine for Flickr.


I think I will be ditching Capture One ... they (Phase One) have a policy of not supporting competing cameras, and I really can't be stuffed with that kind of BS anymore.

#7 firemist


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 07:25 PM

Lots of issues. Many of these are well documented by now, so I won't bore anyone here.


One issue I've had that I have not seen documented is trying to print directly from ON1 Raw. You can use the Resize Module to - resize your image (d'oh) but it also allows you to choose paper type, size and surface (e.g. "Epson Resin Coated 16x20"). That seems to apply some output sharpening, probably (I'm guessing here) to offset blurring caused by resizing. Then you have to go to File>Print to get a dialog box for your printer, and set it up with paper type, path, and most importantly the paper profile you want to use. So far so good - until you view the results


ON1 seems to consistently oversaturate reds. Skin tones look terrible. I printed a printer test pattern (the 2014 TIFF file from digital dog.net) from both ON1 RAW and Lightroom, using the same paper and same profile. I also printed a couple of typical images. Same result. The LR output is spot on, the ON1 is way too red. I've used Red River San Gabriel V2 (Photo Black) as well as Epson Hot Press Bright White (Matte Black), same results.


I have no idea why this situation exists, but it does and needs to be fixed. Pronto.

A7R | 25 Batis | 55 Zony | 85 Batis

A6000 |Sony 10-18/4.0 | Sigma DN 19/2.8 30/2.8 60/2.8

#8 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 29 December 2016 - 08:04 PM

At least one major difference is the handling of blown highlights. The image above, from C1, is noticeably better than the one from On1 Photo Raw (below). With ON1 Photo Raw, I don't see any way to recover from that ...???





#9 porterbasset



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 29 December 2016 - 10:40 PM

Interesting to read the posts about ON1. Thanks for the pics timde. The highlights are brutal in your ON1 pic.

I haven't had the time to play with ON1 in the last nine days. I should mention that the computer I'm trying it on has a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M GPU. That's why I'm rather surprised that the RAW conversion process and other tasks don't seem all that fast compared to DxO. But, I do need to give ON1 more time, which I probably will when it gets lens and camera support.

#10 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 30 December 2016 - 09:25 AM

ON1 is really interesting, I'm not that worried about missing functionality and performance, since development is active. Some elements of the design are really great, and some not so ... like too many idiot dialogs, for instance after an Export I have to click away an "OK" window. But, C1 has the same idiot dialogs. I get the feeling that the people writing and supporting the software, particularly at C1, are not paying attention to the annoying little things. I was surprised to see the _exact_ same idiot dialog with ON1 ... so perhaps the problem is me?


Never the less, the blown highlight processing of ON1 is a problem, and some point I have to post the image at their support forum.

#11 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 04 January 2017 - 07:04 PM

For very little effort, correcting exposure and applying a preset, this was a good image and better than I could probably do with C1. Not sure why, just playing ... full size on 500px.


[attachment=4617:DSC02832 copy.jpg]


#12 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 04 January 2017 - 07:12 PM

However, sometimes the Auto exposure is not working very well at all. In the following case it applied (right) 87% contrast boost - which is clearly wrong.




So far I don't find anyway to report these problems ... and I wonder a little about file management? Can this tool import from an SD Card? I don't really like the C1 catalog, however it does offer very fast file management for reviewing and deleting images.



Right now I see an easy way to export from C1 catalog, and then work from the file system with both C1 and On1 Raw. This means it will be easy to migrate, now or later.


Some of the On1 Raw adjustments are very good, it seems to have much more potential than C1, but so far I'm not convinced its ready. If *I* can find problems without too much effort ... and the export dialog ... "Export Complete, No errors encountered" perhaps reflects the maturity of the product.


I don't really expect errors in any case.

#13 porterbasset



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 08:36 PM

Yeah, the Auto exposure needs work. Your Four Winds picture, timde, does come out nicely with ON1.

I was messing around with blown highlights (thinking of your post about that).

Here's ON1:



This would be the same selection but the photo was processed with DxO:



Either I need more practice using ON1 to recover blown highlights or ON1 can't recover them as well. Probably both.

Have you tried anything more with blown highlights?

#14 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 04 January 2017 - 09:07 PM

I could not recover blown highlights in any useful way. I think the RAW conversion is faulty, both yours and my sample show that, and from that point onwards its not possible to recover the highlights in an acceptable way. The On1 RAW conversion of blown highlights is "blotchy" rather than "smooth", and from that point onward I did not find much to help. Its OK, there is no data to recover since the highlights are blown, but the transition from blown sections should be smooth and nice.

#15 porterbasset



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 11:25 PM

I'll look forward to more of your photos, timde. You've got a lot darn nice photos, so I hope you'll post more of them here as you use ON1. Any pointers and tips you might add that work for you would be great too!

#16 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 07 January 2017 - 11:47 AM

There is one thing which On1 Raw is doing which is very different from Aperture or C1, and that is how your files/photos are organized. You put your files where-ever you want, with whatever structure you want, index/add them to On1 Raw. Then, if you want a logical grouping, create an Album and manually add photos to that, or create a Smart Album and dynamically/automatically create the album based on metadata, ratings or flags.


This is significantly more useful than the Catalog system of C1, or what Aperture had before that. The Projects, Albums, Collections, Groups and Collections make absolutely no sense what-so-ever. They were, and still are, one of the most confusing aspects of C1. When migrating from Aperture to C1 this was the biggest problem, the abstract structure of Aperture was not compatible with the abstract structure of C1 ...


Personally, I want my files organized by Year and Month, with Metadata used to create Albums on various topics - With On1 Raw that is easy and sensible to achieve, create the folders on the computer for Year/Month and then stamp the images with Metadata. Obviously if you are a working Pro you want something else structure wise, and you can achieve that with the same simple technique - if your needs are simple. The abstract concepts, different with each tool (C1, Aperture, LR) can just be done away with. Basically you can do what ever makes sense for you.



+1 for On1 Raw.

#17 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 07 January 2017 - 06:19 PM

I had a really frustrating day with On1 Raw, here is the summary:


  • White balance tool is cumbersome, please do something like C1. Auto WB seems to do nothing ... and at the very least I want to manually change the white balance to a specific number, not play with an abstract slider.
  • Masking is as annoying as with C1 ... eventually it works ... I think I need to use a Pen Device for this, the mouse/trackpad just does not work.
  • Most effects are putting a dark blue cast to clouds (see image below), C1 is similar (you see it most with vignetting. This might be valid processing but its a real hassle to deal with.
  • Unfortunatly, many effects are creating a Halo on sharp edges. Again, a really pain to deal with. Again, you get that with C1 too, but not so much as with On1 Raw.
  • Seems not to be possible to create multiple versions of the same image.
  • A lot of rough edges and weird behaviour in the GUI.

Did anything go well? 


I probably got a better image from On1 Raw, some of the effects were nice, it took some effort ... but once you learn how the effects work they become faster to use and adjust. Aside from Masking, which was slow and laggy, On1 Raw was fast and responsive (C1 is not).


Its (On1 Raw) is new, the too common Halo effect, and White Balance tool are problems, along with highlight handling ... the concept is overall better. I just think some effects are too strong, for landscape photos most of the presets are introducing Halos and thats really a pain. They should really think a little more about that because its a problem.


Here is the image. Full size at 500px


[attachment=4646:DSC03017 copy5.jpg]

#18 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 07 January 2017 - 07:55 PM

Quite a bit from the list of problems I encountered today are scheduled to be fixed in 2017. And the Halo in the above image, particularly noticeable along the cliff edge, was mostly caused by the Structure slider. C1 has the same problem.


Ultimately, with Structure (from LR, C1 or On1), its really useless for the above images (focus was exactly on the brick work of the Lighthouse). I must be doing something wrong.


Tomorrow,I will experiment a little with Sharpening, that is another one that makes things hard, it takes a while to figure out how much to use before false sharpness is introduced. My experience with landscapes using C1 is that Sharpening and Structure usually don't work well together.


This is the updated image, with less Halo ... its possibly nicer overall too.


[attachment=4647:DSC03017 copy6.jpg]

#19 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 07 January 2017 - 09:41 PM

On1 Raw is working much better here. Auto Exposure + a Preset + a light vignette. No sharpening, it did not work, created false details on the fine elements. Same as for C1.


I'm happy with this one.



Before and after, full size on 500px.



#20 Guest_all8_*

  • Guests

Posted 08 January 2017 - 02:04 PM

Do you see the halo in the above image?


Sharpening - it took some learning, however On1 Raw is the clear winner.



If you have a good camera (i.e. A7 series), use a very good lens with high micro contrast (i.e. Batis, Loxia, G, GM), focus very carefully (i.e. Manual Focus) and view your images on a 4K Monitor ... then you will not need much sharpening, just enough to either remove the effects of the AA Filter (A7/s range), or the effects of diffraction (A7r range).


On1 Raw is offering a Sharpening tool with three variations:

  • High Pass - too much will cause halo, but just a little will add crispness the an image. If your image is correctly focused then this is not the right option.
  • Progressive - allows more control of which details and edges are sharpened, _very_ useful for preventing false sharpening and artifacts in detailed images (i.e. rocks, foliage). No halo effect at all from this one!
  • Unsharp Mask - seems to offer more control than High Pass, can cause a halo but generally does not.

When you consider that sharpening really is, then there is an additional effect called Dynamic Contrast, which also has a sharpening effect. I like it very much. In the image below I used Progressive + Dynamic Contrast and I think the sharpening effect is very natural - its done what I wanted and there is no halo introduced.




This is a very good sharpening, if it is not obvious, no bright edges have been introduced (false detail) and there is no halo.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


New Members Welcome!

Not yet registered? Really?

Registration is free and takes only a few minutes.

After the free registration you can discuss with members from all over the world, put questions and present your images.

We are looking forward to you!

Admin Andreas und Sony Alpha Forum Team

Register now! X