it is full Latest Version setup of SILKYPIX Developer Studio Pro 8.0.16.0 Premium Pro DMG for Apple Macbook OS X.īrief Overview of SILKYPIX Developer Studio Pro 8.0.16.0 for Mac OS X I don't know why you would need to run different software programs for JPG and RAW if you have LR.Download SILKYPIX Developer Studio Pro 8.0.16.0 for Mac Free. I can actually do quite a bit to the files, and they print nicely, so far up to 18x12. I've not tried it much yet on the older 16mp files from earlier Fujis, or on earlier Nikon files, but with 24mp Fuji and the 20mp files from my D500 it does really well. That part really doesn't matter here, I only mention it as part of saying that LR works good for editing JPG files. I actually run all of my images through it, and they are all JPG, since I don't shoot RAW at all. In some ways Aperture was easier, but as time goes on I'm finding LR to be as good if not better in many ways. I'm using the LR desktop version of CC, I think they call it Classic, on the monthly subscription model. I used Aperture for many years, but when I replaced my older 2011 iMac with a new one a few months ago I had to finally make a switch. I think it's already been said, but Lightroom seems to work pretty well for editing JPGs. In these applications you can edit a JPEG as many times as you like, no worries. I believe Apple Photos is also non-destructive. It keeps track of your edits but does not write the edits to your JPEG file, so your original JPEG is not getting edited and recompressed and does not suffer from JPEG degradation. Lightroom, however, is a non-destructive editor. But if you tell your image editor to keep your JPEGs quality High (low compression), and if you only edit and save the JPEG file only a few times, then I doubt you will see any quality issues due to editing your JPEGs. (Multiple Saves during the same editing session do NOT cause quality loss.) And that's especially true if you have your JPEG "quality" slider set too low. It is true that if you open a JPEG file in SOME image editors, edit it, and then save and close it and if you repeat that process many times, then it can harm the image quality and can introduce artifacts. RE: The previous suggestion that it is necessary to convert JPEGs to TIFF for editing "to avoid JPEG artifacts." I never do that. But the person who really knows how to use limited crappy software A is going to get better results than someone who owns magnificent software B but has not put in the time it takes to learn how to use it. Yes, some are easier to learn than others, and some have more capabilities. It may not be the easiest software to learn how to use, but sticking with the same interface for both RAW and JPEG might be easier than trying to learn a different application for each.īut having said that, the best editing software is the one you know how to use. In my opinion, Lightroom IS the "one piece of software to rule them all." It's not just for RAW but also works very well for JPEGs. You have Lightroom, so you already have one of the most capable image editors available.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |