Daniel,


Thanks for the pat. I did learn something today. I was glad I waited until I got home to look at some things before I posted. I was amazed to see those images on my new HP monitor. Obviously, we're all not seeing the same thing when it comes to high gamut renderings like these red flowers. On my HP2275w there is no visible clipping that I can see in the OP's image.


So Picasa uses a dcraw derivative for thier engine. That's interesting. I've heard that name many times. Can't say I've used it, but It's got quite a reputation along with RawTherapee (I think that's it).


Any way, I'm a SilkyPix diehard. It just flat out works for me 99% of the time. It's nice to see the differences with ACR and something as simple as Picasa from time to time. Helps keep my SP output honest and serves as a good scale for hard to render photos like this one.


Colin, Each RAW converter will render the RAW data slightly different from one another. I'll let Daniel do the in-depth. The originals are for anyone who wants to check the gradients up close and personal. If you really want to see something wild, develop this CR2 with ACR 4.4 or higher along with the Canon camera profiles. Standard, Faithful, Neutral, Landscape, etc. The outputs are miles apart when pushing a red gamut this hard. sRGB is as good as all the other color spaces when developing for the web.


That's why I'm curious as to which output renders the most true. I'd like to think that SilkyPix does. At least for me, 90% of the time it's really faithful at rendering accurate color output.