| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/16/2004 01:22:42 PM · #1 |
//www.bibblelabs.com/products/bibble/bibble4.html
I haven't made time to do any comparisons yet, but it's both standalone and PS plugin.
|
|
|
|
11/05/2004 10:55:35 AM · #2 |
I'm wondering if you've had a chance to form any opinions on Bibble 4.0. As a Linux user it's one of a very small list of options I have, and one I'm getting very close to committing to.
Knowing your skills, I'm thinking your opinion would carry a lot of weight with that decision. Thus far its quality seems to trump stand-alone dcraw, and its batch queues seem to be extremely powerful (but not yet fully grokked by me).
Anyway, wanted to let you know that at least one person is anxious to know your thoughts on Bibble 4. For that matter, if anyone else is using Bibble (on any platform) I'd appreciate your thoughts.
|
|
|
|
11/05/2004 12:27:41 PM · #3 |
Summary
Pros
1. fast
2. supports CMW
3. very fast
4. batch queues
5. really fast
6. cross-settings xfers easy
7. configurable views for different modes
8. available as PS plug-in (didn't test this)
9. bibble is a cat!
Cons
1. operations on many tagged files a bit slow
2. CWM+batch not ideal (for me)
3. switches views when changing directories
I haven't committed to purchase yet (having PS CS w/ACR is already sufficient). From a workflow perspective, Bibble 4 is far and away superior to ACR. It has a few interface "glitches" which I'm sure will be ironed out as updates become available. The only operations which are somewhat slow are tagged operations on large numbers of files, but that's expected (and is not really that bad). My trial version expired before I had a chance to do any comparisons between ACR/Bibble/C1.
Bibble comes with custom profiles for many cameras. This profile is used automatically, so the only way to see results without the profiles is by applying your own custom profile. To properly compare ACR with Bibble, this is necessary. ACR's method of calibration is a little too subjective and doesn't use profiles. C1 can be compared with Bibble by using the same profile. Strangely, I don't think the WB settings translate one-to-one from ACR to Bibble, but that's not conclusive as I didn't get around to do this kind of testing.
My biggest issue is with the color management and batch processing combination. I want to have a batch queue which generates sRGB JPEG output and another that generates ProPhotoRGB (or AdobeRGB) TIFF output. Overlooking the fact that histogram/gamut changes occur depending on which color space you're using, I'd still like to do all my workflow in the wider space and generate throwaway/autogen'd JPEGs in sRGB (for throwing up in a gallery or something else that doesn't require critical attention to the wide/small space issues). Meanwhile, I just have to tag all images and change the color space to match the batch queue I'm using.
I have no reservations about highly recommending this product, especially if you're using Linux. I know that C1's workflow is also very fast and supercalifragilistic-expialidocious, but for $69 you get everything you really need from Bibble. I can't say I paid close attention to Bibble Pro features, so it might be worth the extra $60. A couple of C1 critical (to me) features aren't available unless you get the Pro version and that's like a gazillion dollars or something.
Message edited by author 2004-11-05 12:28:32. |
|
|
|
11/06/2004 08:26:27 PM · #4 |
Actually, I think both versions are very resonably priced. $69 for basic, $129 for pro. Nikon Capture is $100, and makes my machine feel like it has 8mb of RAM, so I'm ok with the price.
This is about the only convenient color managed workflow solution for Linux, although I haven't been able to figure out how to use LCMS/lprof for anything better than a coarse profile. It's also (as you so subtly stated) psycho-fast. I can manipulate RAW faster than JPG with Bibble which is a big change from my dcraw workflow.
After absorbing most of their support forum archives I'm *really* impressed with the developer's attitude towards customer satisfaction. It's almost too much to believe. The upcoming 4.01 should do some interesting things - too many to detail, but unlike most minor releases, this one had some really compelling stuff.
What I like most is that with dcraw I have to work hard to get my settings right, but Bibble makes a great image with almost no effort. It seems to have more smarts about how to interpret the RAW, which I'm assuming from your previous statement may be due to a built-in awareness of my D70's profile? I've been tryign to figure out how to obtain and use a profile for my camera, but from your note it seems that's uneccesary.
At any rate, thanks for the detailed response. It sounds like from an image quality perspective there's nothing I need to fear in committing to Bibble other than a learning curve. Those batch queues look intimidating (but very compelling).
|
|
|
|
11/06/2004 09:02:42 PM · #5 |
I uninstalled Bibble because I could not view the thumbnails of my images in the PS CS browser.
|
|
|
|
11/08/2004 02:47:56 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by spydr:
I uninstalled Bibble because I could not view the thumbnails of my images in the PS CS browser. |
Yes, only one plugin at a time can "own" a particular format.
On my platform (Linux) there is no browser other than Bibble which can handle RAW files, so Bibble works nicely as an all-in-one solution. The browser isn't as porful as say, Adobe's, but it sure beats having to create jpeg thumbnails via dcraw before you can even view your work.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/16/2025 08:27:03 AM EDT.
