At 14th April 2006, Ichikawa Software Laboratories announced new Silkypix Developer Studio 2.0 beta "Sakura". So let we see how about this beta is.
This beta version of Silkypix made Fujifim's HANICAM CCD which sensor for Fuji's digital cameras such like FinePixS3 down. However, it is not only what's new. At this version, their announcement telling they made dinamic range wider at usual CCDs. So, I made test because I've just shoot the SAKURA (cherry blossom) and it named to this beta version because it's season.
(data / CANON EOS 1DsMkII EF 24-105mm f4L IS ISO100 1/100sec. f16)
TestingLike all of my currente test result showing, Silkypix is one of the best RAW develping software. At this latest beta, no disappointment at all. Sakura shows very good result. However, other software like DxO coming better too. So Ichikawa Lab has no time to sleep. Please keep update.
At the very small thing, Sakura shows sharp edge with wide range details. Background "BOKE" zone (ouf focus zone as background) has no noise and very smooth at both Silkypix2 and Sakura.
Also one of the better thing at Silkypix when compared with DxO is "processing speed". It is quicker than DxO. DxO doing more things for each photos automatically but one time I spent several hours to wait 46 shots of RAW developped as same as waiting E-6 at pro-labs. Silkypix is quicker but you have to settled things manually so it is even, I think.
At the fine details of petal, Sakura showing very good result, too like example right.
Maybe another best answer is "Aperture". Because time saver for the busy professional photographers (not amateur). Because they just select and put suggestion into meta data then they can leave to the next job. This is very dependent on a work-flaw at the team. But, I'm sorry because I have no idea about result what gonna happen on result when use the Aperture.
However, even at the busy photographers, sometime they might be want to develop and complete the best shot by who's self as same as we were been to the darkroom.
DxO is very unique one when compare with others. DxO's result is good but takes too long time to complete. I felt I need more power and memories even using G5 2.5 Dual Power Mac. However, it is dependent on a type of picture. If the picture being packed like puzzle, DxO's sharp result with no distortion are must be very welcome.
Very big disappointment since I find why we need RAW development software is "poor result at Photoshop". It is still very useful and friendly software then I do not saying I do not need it. However, just about developing the RAW data, I do not want to develop my RAW data on Photoshop. Adobe is the kind of "KING" software house but maybe their power is been to the different part. Such like bought Macromedia or going to make Lightbox against Aperture, their mind is not onto "giving best result to the users". Maybe their concern on to the other things, mostly.
You can browse my astro pictures at http://www.pictinas.com/tomi/astro co-web site. At there, I have several of moon pictures. Why I've stick with Silkypix frist because it was outstanding result at moon's pictures. At this moment, I tested moon picture with same RAW data. Result is right. Sharp effect works more better without showing any over unsharpen edges. Noises are more few than last one. And then, surface details are really very well shown. Would you please let you compare with it.
With this test result, I feel Silkypix is one of the best answer as the RAW developing tool for everybody who loves photography.
April. 18, 2006 Daisuke Tomiyasu