Sigma Photo Pro 2.1 released for Simga SD9 and SD10

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Georgette Preddy, Aug 27, 2004.

  1. Improvements...

    - Faster
    - Even lower noise
    - Even sharper images
    - Even greater dynamic range
    - Even better color rendition
    - No more yellow biased skin tones on Auto
    - Long exposures WB adjustmented for shutter speed
    - Lots of new WB presets and options
    - Matched monochrome output option with tinting
    - SD9 and SD10 specific corrections
    - Lots of informational improvements

    Downsides...

    - 70MBs instead of 20MBs
    - All your RAW images just got better, reprocessing time

    Posted samples...

    SPP2.0: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmorr/photos/landscape_spp20.jpg
    SPP2.1: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmorr/photos/landscape_spp21.jpg
     
    Georgette Preddy, Aug 27, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Georgette Preddy

    dylan Guest

    Why are the images so small ?

    "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Improvements...
    >
    > - Faster
    > - Even lower noise
    > - Even sharper images
    > - Even greater dynamic range
    > - Even better color rendition
    > - No more yellow biased skin tones on Auto
    > - Long exposures WB adjustmented for shutter speed
    > - Lots of new WB presets and options
    > - Matched monochrome output option with tinting
    > - SD9 and SD10 specific corrections
    > - Lots of informational improvements
    >
    > Downsides...
    >
    > - 70MBs instead of 20MBs
    > - All your RAW images just got better, reprocessing time
    >
    > Posted samples...
    >
    > SPP2.0: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmorr/photos/landscape_spp20.jpg
    > SPP2.1: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmorr/photos/landscape_spp21.jpg
     
    dylan, Aug 27, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Both samples have a different but incorrect colour shift....

    "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Improvements...
    >
    > - Faster
    > - Even lower noise
    > - Even sharper images
    > - Even greater dynamic range
    > - Even better color rendition
    > - No more yellow biased skin tones on Auto
    > - Long exposures WB adjustmented for shutter speed
    > - Lots of new WB presets and options
    > - Matched monochrome output option with tinting
    > - SD9 and SD10 specific corrections
    > - Lots of informational improvements
    >
    > Downsides...
    >
    > - 70MBs instead of 20MBs
    > - All your RAW images just got better, reprocessing time
    >
    > Posted samples...
    >
    > SPP2.0: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmorr/photos/landscape_spp20.jpg
    > SPP2.1: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmorr/photos/landscape_spp21.jpg
     
    Darrell Larose, Aug 27, 2004
    #3
  4. "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Improvements...

    SNIP
    > - No more yellow biased skin tones on Auto


    Didn't you say they were good as they were????? Apparently Sigma
    disagrees with you as well.

    > Posted samples...

    http://www.pbase.com/image/33042623/
    The SP2.1 version's auto color balance (left sample) can still screw
    up skin color. Besides, there are no whites of the eye in the same
    shot, so we can't see how blue they are.

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Aug 27, 2004
    #4
  5. In article
    <mxGXc.63427$>,
    Darrell Larose <> wrote:

    > Both samples have a different but incorrect colour shift....
    > > Downsides...
    > >
    > > - 70MBs instead of 20MBs
    > > - All your RAW images just got better, reprocessing time


    Still crappy colors. Kinda dinky pics there, George. How come it's OK
    for you to post links to non-native size pics but berate the rest of us
    for doing it.
    Oh yeah...you're an asshole.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Aug 27, 2004
    #5
  6. "Randall Ainsworth" <> wrote in message
    news:270820040654400156%...
    SNIP
    > How come it's OK for you to post links to non-native size pics
    > but berate the rest of us for doing it.
    > Oh yeah...you're an asshole.


    Careful, next thing you know we'll get skin color pictures of an ...
    ;-)

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Aug 27, 2004
    #6
  7. Georgette Preddy

    Bryce Guest

    crappy!


    Sigma should sue you for making them look so bad.
     
    Bryce, Aug 27, 2004
    #7
  8. Georgette Preddy

    G. Innipig Guest

    "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    Simga? Let's hope these are better cameras than Sigma's poor efforts. Oh
    hang on ... anything is better than Sigma.
     
    G. Innipig, Aug 27, 2004
    #8
  9. Georgette Preddy

    Guest

    In message <5JEXc.849$>,
    "dylan" <> wrote:

    >Why are the images so small ?


    Also, why are they exactly the same after I cut the green a tad, and
    boost the red and blue a tad in the SPP2.0 image?
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Aug 27, 2004
    #9
  10. Georgette Preddy

    Guest

    In message <412f3c2b$0$43451$4all.nl>,
    "Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote:

    >The SP2.1 version's auto color balance (left sample) can still screw
    >up skin color. Besides, there are no whites of the eye in the same
    >shot, so we can't see how blue they are.


    Fear not; SPP2.2 will have a feature that no other DSLR's native
    software has; flesh masking. The user draws a red mask over all areas
    that are flesh, and then enters the ethnicity of the subject in a text
    box, so that the software can render the flesh as flesh color. If there
    are multiple flesh subjects of varying ethnicities, then you must mask
    them in separate conversions and layer them in photoshop.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Aug 27, 2004
    #10
  11. Georgette Preddy

    Skip M Guest

    "Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote in message
    news:412f3c2b$0$43451$4all.nl...
    >
    > "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Improvements...

    > SNIP
    > > - No more yellow biased skin tones on Auto

    >
    > Didn't you say they were good as they were????? Apparently Sigma
    > disagrees with you as well.
    >
    > > Posted samples...

    > http://www.pbase.com/image/33042623/
    > The SP2.1 version's auto color balance (left sample) can still screw
    > up skin color. Besides, there are no whites of the eye in the same
    > shot, so we can't see how blue they are.
    >
    > Bart
    >

    Dear lord, given the choice, I'd stick with the slightly yellow cast on the
    right rather than the blue/green mess on the left.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Aug 28, 2004
    #11
  12. Georgette Preddy

    Crownfield Guest

    Skip M wrote:
    >
    > "Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote in message
    > news:412f3c2b$0$43451$4all.nl...
    > >
    > > "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > Improvements...

    > > SNIP
    > > > - No more yellow biased skin tones on Auto

    > >
    > > Didn't you say they were good as they were????? Apparently Sigma
    > > disagrees with you as well.
    > >
    > > > Posted samples...

    > > http://www.pbase.com/image/33042623/
    > > The SP2.1 version's auto color balance (left sample) can still screw
    > > up skin color. Besides, there are no whites of the eye in the same
    > > shot, so we can't see how blue they are.
    > >
    > > Bart
    > >

    > Dear lord, given the choice, I'd stick with the slightly yellow cast on the
    > right rather than the blue/green mess on the left.


    that is am embarrasing image on the left.

    >
    > --
    > Skip Middleton
    > http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Crownfield, Aug 28, 2004
    #12
  13. Georgette Preddy

    Skip M Guest

    "Crownfield" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Skip M wrote:
    > >
    > > "Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote in message
    > > news:412f3c2b$0$43451$4all.nl...
    > > >
    > > > "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > > > Improvements...
    > > > SNIP
    > > > > - No more yellow biased skin tones on Auto
    > > >
    > > > Didn't you say they were good as they were????? Apparently Sigma
    > > > disagrees with you as well.
    > > >
    > > > > Posted samples...
    > > > http://www.pbase.com/image/33042623/
    > > > The SP2.1 version's auto color balance (left sample) can still screw
    > > > up skin color. Besides, there are no whites of the eye in the same
    > > > shot, so we can't see how blue they are.
    > > >
    > > > Bart
    > > >

    > > Dear lord, given the choice, I'd stick with the slightly yellow cast on

    the
    > > right rather than the blue/green mess on the left.

    >
    > that is am embarrasing image on the left.
    >
    > >


    It is, indeed.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Aug 28, 2004
    #13
  14. "Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote in message news:<412f3c2b$0$43451$4all.nl>...
    > "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Improvements...

    > SNIP
    > > - No more yellow biased skin tones on Auto

    >
    > Didn't you say they were good as they were????? Apparently Sigma
    > disagrees with you as well.
    >
    > > Posted samples...

    > http://www.pbase.com/image/33042623/
    > The SP2.1 version's auto color balance (left sample) can still screw
    > up skin color. Besides, there are no whites of the eye in the same
    > shot, so we can't see how blue they are.


    The X3F you used is freely available on Sigma's website. OOOOPS, you
    got caught red handed in a lie!!! Here is the X3F of the sample you
    posted...
    http://www.sigma-photo.com/Images/sd9samples/JenniferandBlackjack.X3F

    Anyone can reproduce what the picture really looks like, by
    downloading the new software from Sigma and doing an Auto process,
    right here...
    http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/downloads/software.html

    It must really stink to be so desperate that you have to lie to feel
    good about the ancient technology you cling to, for fear of change and
    improvement. Feel free to stop posting here now that I proved you are
    a dishonest person. You'll never live this down. Let it be known
    "Bart the liar" has arrived. I always knew that you knew I was right,
    but now it is there for all the world to see.

    On this terribly embarrising note, you have conceeded this argument
    forever, and nothing you can say or do can help you recover from lying
    to make "your case." Bart van der Wolf just said, "Foveon is better,
    I know it, and I can't do anything but lie about it."

    Everyone else who posted so far fell for your lie, good job, you
    proved they are all cluless.
     
    Georgette Preddy, Aug 28, 2004
    #14
  15. Georgette Preddy, Aug 28, 2004
    #15
  16. Randall Ainsworth <> wrote in message news:<270820040654400156%>...

    > you're an asshole.


    What a shame that is all you can come up with. Seems you've finally
    come to grips with the fact that Foveon is way ahead of Canon.
     
    Georgette Preddy, Aug 28, 2004
    #16
  17. Crownfield <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > Skip M wrote:
    > >
    > > "Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote in message
    > > news:412f3c2b$0$43451$4all.nl...
    > > >
    > > > "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > > > Improvements...

    > SNIP
    > > > > - No more yellow biased skin tones on Auto
    > > >
    > > > Didn't you say they were good as they were????? Apparently Sigma
    > > > disagrees with you as well.
    > > >
    > > > > Posted samples...
    > > > http://www.pbase.com/image/33042623/
    > > > The SP2.1 version's auto color balance (left sample) can still screw
    > > > up skin color. Besides, there are no whites of the eye in the same
    > > > shot, so we can't see how blue they are.
    > > >
    > > > Bart
    > > >

    > > Dear lord, given the choice, I'd stick with the slightly yellow cast on the
    > > right rather than the blue/green mess on the left.

    >
    > that is am embarrasing image on the left.


    What is embarrasing is having to lie. It's easy to prove for yourself
    that Bart is a completely clueless liar, right here...

    http://www.sigma-photo.com/Images/sd9samples/JenniferandBlackjack.X3F
    http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/downloads/index.html

    Download the image, download the software, do the processing yourself,
    there is no way to come up with what Bart the liar posted.
     
    Georgette Preddy, Aug 28, 2004
    #17
  18. wrote in message news:<>...
    > In message <412f3c2b$0$43451$4all.nl>,
    > "Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote:
    >
    > >The SP2.1 version's auto color balance (left sample) can still screw
    > >up skin color. Besides, there are no whites of the eye in the same
    > >shot, so we can't see how blue they are.

    >
    > Fear not; SPP2.2 will have a feature that no other DSLR's native
    > software has; flesh masking.


    It'll actually ship with a special keyboard that issues an electric
    chock when a lemming repeats a lie told by the Canon fearful, like
    Bart just did and you fell for it.

    He made the mistake of using freely available images, see for yourself
    who is lying and who is telling the truth by downloading the X3F image
    and the software, and doing the processing yourself...

    http://www.sigma-photo.com/Images/sd9samples/JenniferandBlackjack.X3F
    http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/downloads/index.html

    I'm sure we won't be hearing from Bart again. You should acknowledge
    that your comments about Foveon are rooted in ignorance as well. This
    is a bad day for blind followers.
     
    Georgette Preddy, Aug 28, 2004
    #18
  19. "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Randall Ainsworth <> wrote in message

    news:<270820040654400156%>...
    >
    > > you're an asshole.

    >
    > What a shame that is all you can come up with. Seems you've finally
    > come to grips with the fact that Foveon is way ahead of Canon.


    Too bad it's in a piece of shit Sigma, that nobody buys....
     
    Darrell Larose, Aug 28, 2004
    #19
  20. Georgette Preddy

    G. Innipig Guest

    "Georgette Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > I'm sure we won't be hearing from Bart again. You should acknowledge
    > that your comments about Foveon are rooted in ignorance as well. This
    > is a bad day for blind followers.


    Blind! Oh my god, the penny has finally dropped! Preddy is blind! This
    explains SOOOOO much.
     
    G. Innipig, Aug 28, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. betty swallocks

    The newsgroups are buzzing about the SD9, SD10, and Foveon

    betty swallocks, Nov 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    355
    Jan Brittenson
    Nov 19, 2003
  2. Dan Sullivan

    Sigma SD9 - SD10 - SD?

    Dan Sullivan, Dec 24, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    623
    George Preddy
    Dec 25, 2003
  3. George Preddy

    Paul Harcourt Davis on the SD9 and SD10

    George Preddy, Feb 1, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    661
    Braindead Preddy
    Feb 3, 2004
  4. George Preddy

    Many new SD9 and SD10 lens choices

    George Preddy, Mar 5, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    464
    Jupiter
    Mar 6, 2004
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,159
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page