What camera settings effect raw files?

02/22/2005 12:03:33 AM · #1

Of course your actual exposure shutter speed and aperture and focus have an effect, but:
Does exposure compensation effect the raw files? How about parameter settings? White balance?

Olympus 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 II M.Zuiko ED

02/22/2005 12:11:27 AM · #2

Originally posted by TooCool:

Of course your actual exposure shutter speed and aperture and focus have an effect, but:
Does exposure compensation effect the raw files? How about parameter settings? White balance?

Of course.

Rgarcia

Olympus OM-D E-M1

02/22/2005 12:11:52 AM · #3

As far as I know, raw information is the actual output from the camera sensor with no processing whatsoever.

deapee

Kodak V803

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

02/22/2005 12:12:58 AM · #4

the white balance you shoot at will be stored in the raw file so that when you bring it up, that is what you will see originally. Then, you can set it as you please. But you can always revert back to 'as shot'.

I'm pretty sure that no in camera sharpening is used when shooting raw.

02/22/2005 12:13:52 AM · #5

Originally posted by rgarciah55:

As far as I know, raw information is the actual output from the camera sensor with no processing whatsoever.

Not raw information, raw file.

02/22/2005 12:21:19 AM · #6

Originally posted by deapee:

I'm pretty sure that no in camera sharpening is used when shooting raw.

There are all kinds of sharpness, contrast and curves ajustments you can make in raw on my 1Ds. I know there are parameter settings on the 300D also, but I don't remember how much you can change.

Message edited by author 2005-02-22 00:21:45.

02/22/2005 12:25:46 AM · #7

Originally posted by nsbca7:

Not raw information, raw file.

OK... I'm confused. What camera settings effect the raw information that is saved in the raw files...

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

02/22/2005 12:27:30 AM · #8

I think RAW is unnaffected by settings--it's the raw sensor data after all.

The settings in your camera do affect embedded JPEG that's optionally included with a RAW file.

Natator

Canon EOS-5D

02/22/2005 12:32:36 AM · #9

Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by deapee:

I'm pretty sure that no in camera sharpening is used when shooting raw.

There are all kinds of sharpness, contrast and curves ajustments you can make in raw on my 1Ds. I know there are parameter settings on the 300D also, but I don't remember how much you can change.

I thought the sharpness, contrast etc only applied to the jpg's and didn't affect the RAW files at all. That's with a 20D at least, but I thought would apply to the whole range.

I know I read that somewhere recently, but I may have got that info from a dud source.

Are you absolutely certain those setting apply to the RAW files on the 1Ds and not jpg's (I assume the iDs does them).

02/22/2005 12:33:57 AM · #10

Originally posted by nshapiro:

I think RAW is unnaffected by settings--it's the raw sensor data after all.

The settings in your camera do affect embedded JPEG that's optionally included with a RAW file.

That's the way I assumed it worked... Hence my confusion.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

02/22/2005 12:37:36 AM · #11

Originally posted by nshapiro:

I think RAW is unnaffected by settings--it's the raw sensor data after all.

The settings in your camera do affect embedded JPEG that's optionally included with a RAW file.

Joe, you own a 300D. Re-read the manual. Pages 55, 56.

Mick

Canon EOS-5D

02/22/2005 12:42:57 AM · #12

From Understanding Raw Files, a LuminousLandscape article by Michael Reichmann...

"If you are saving raw files the camera creates a header file which contains all of the camera settings, including (depending on the camera) sharpening level, contrast and saturation settings, colour temperature / white balance, and so on. The image is not changed by these settings, they are simply tagged onto the raw image data.

This raw image data, what the imaging chip recorded along with the so-called meta-data (the camera settings and other technical information) is now saved to the card. Some cameras compress these files, others don't. In any event if they are compressed it is done losslessly so that there is no deterioration of the file due to compression artifacts. (Some companies, Nikon and Kodak specifically, use a slightly lossy compression algorithm when saving raw files)."

02/22/2005 12:43:58 AM · #13

Originally posted by Natator:

Are you absolutely certain those setting apply to the RAW files on the 1Ds and not jpg's (I assume the iDs does them).

Yes. I have it right here in my hands. Parameter settings also effect raw files on the 300D. I just read through the manual.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

02/22/2005 12:48:11 AM · #14

Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by Natator:
Are you absolutely certain those setting apply to the RAW files on the 1Ds and not jpg's (I assume the iDs does them).

Yes. I have it right here in my hands. Parameter settings also effect raw files on the 300D. I just read through the manual.

I'm reading those pages, and it doesn't say that it affects raw files. Read us the sentence.

Natator

Canon EOS-5D

02/22/2005 12:57:07 AM · #15

Originally posted by micknewton:

The image is not changed by these settings, they are simply tagged onto the raw image data.

That is pretty much how I understood it as well, although I never saw it explained quite as well as in that text.

Nice find thanks Mick.

02/22/2005 01:14:48 AM · #16

Originally posted by Natator:

Originally posted by micknewton:
The image is not changed by these settings, they are simply tagged onto the raw image data.

That is pretty much how I understood it as well, although I never saw it explained quite as well as in that text.

Nice find thanks Mick.

If something is tagged on to it then it is effected. It changes the way the computer reads it, the way you see it on your monitor, and the way the image ultimatly turns out.

ISO is just one example of the way a raw file is altered in camera. The Color Matrix settings and the Parameter setting also effect the final image. I only shoot in raw mode and have experimented with all the parameter settings on my 1Ds. The 300D got less use when I had it so I am not as familier with that camera, but I do know I shot raw either in Parameter 1 or in Adobe RGB. Both settings will produce images that are totally different when opened in photoshop.

If it makes it look different then it has been subject to some effect

02/22/2005 01:19:42 AM · #17

Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by Natator:

Originally posted by micknewton:
The image is not changed by these settings, they are simply tagged onto the raw image data.

That is pretty much how I understood it as well, although I never saw it explained quite as well as in that text.

Nice find thanks Mick.

If something is tagged on to it then it is effected. It changes the way the computer reads it, the way you see it on your monitor, and the way the image ultimatly turns out.

ISO is just one example of the way a raw file is altered in camera. The Color Matrix settings and the Parameter setting also effect the final image. I only shoot in raw mode and have experimented with all the parameter settings on my 1Ds. The 300D got less use when I had it so I am not as familier with that camera, but I do know I shot raw either in Parameter 1 or in Adobe RGB. Both settings will produce images that are totally different when opened in photoshop.

If it makes it look different then it has been subject to some effect

But is the data actually changed before writing to file or just interpreted by the computer/photoshop differently... The first is different from the second.

02/22/2005 01:27:05 AM · #18

Originally posted by TooCool:

But is the data actually changed before writing to file or just interpreted by the computer/photoshop differently... The first is different from the second.

Originally posted by Steve's Conclusion:

RAW images provide the raw materials to create photographs that fit your own definition of excellence.
Some will complain that the images look "soft" but this is something we pretty much expect from high-end cameras that employ some type of low-pass filter over the sensor. You can compensate for this with in-camera sharpening but I prefer to do it in software after capture. An over-sharpened image suffers loss of detail much the same as an over-exposed image so avoid the problem whenever possible.

02/22/2005 01:34:17 AM · #19

Originally posted by TooCool:

Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by Natator:

Originally posted by micknewton:
The image is not changed by these settings, they are simply tagged onto the raw image data.

That is pretty much how I understood it as well, although I never saw it explained quite as well as in that text.

Nice find thanks Mick.

If something is tagged on to it then it is effected. It changes the way the computer reads it, the way you see it on your monitor, and the way the image ultimatly turns out.

ISO is just one example of the way a raw file is altered in camera. The Color Matrix settings and the Parameter setting also effect the final image. I only shoot in raw mode and have experimented with all the parameter settings on my 1Ds. The 300D got less use when I had it so I am not as familier with that camera, but I do know I shot raw either in Parameter 1 or in Adobe RGB. Both settings will produce images that are totally different when opened in photoshop.

If it makes it look different then it has been subject to some effect

But is the data actually changed before writing to file or just interpreted by the computer/photoshop differently... The first is different from the second.

The sensor data is in the file unaltered. The articles on Luminous landscape are very good reading and will help you understand why RAW is so advantageous. A JPEG file is part of the RAW file which has a preview, but which can also be extracted if you want to see what the camera would have done if it had processed your RAW data according to the settings and parameters. The JPEG is not full size, but it's decent.

The settings from the camera are part of the metadata that comes with the RAW data, but that's just information, like the date. Most RAW readers -- at least Bibble, PhotoShop, PS Elements, and Breezebrowser, do not use those settings when displaying or loading the image. The RAW importer lets you use your own settings.

What are you using for processing. I suggest you download Bibble and use it to play with your files. It's free for 30 days. It gives you a good interactive feel for working with RAW.

The PS CS RAW plugin has some additional features, like correcting chromatic abberation and other lens properties.

Both Bibble and PS CS will save the settings you make in a file that they move around with the file. PS CS can alternatively store that info in a database. These are the settings they will then use to display your file. You set them once, then you can go back and tweak whenever you want. That was my grudge with breezebrowser.

The most important setting you'll be able to tweak is white balance. That's easy in a RAW file but not in a JPEG file.

(However: Bibbble will let you do many things with your older JPEG files in the same manner you can do them with RAW files, but the results won't be as good.)

02/22/2005 02:02:11 AM · #20

Originally posted by nshapiro:

The sensor data is in the file unaltered.

The information is still there, but the product you end up with is altered, thus effected.

Let's go back to ISO settings again. Shoot a subject at ISO 100 and again 800. Shoot in manual with a set f/stop and shutter speed and use a dedicated flash so that either image is not over or under exposed. Now open both images in PS CS and notice the noise difference. See if you can undue the noise effect that was created in the image shot at the higher ISO. You can never get it back to where it is on the other image. Changeing the ISO setting irreversably alters the raw file.

Now, still in raw, set your camera to Adobe RGB in your Parameters. Shoot a subject with some degree of intricate detail. Now go to Parameters/Set Up and change the settings in Set 1 to max Contrast, Sharpness, Saturation, and Color Tone. Push each of these all the way to the right. Select Set 1 and shoot the same subject under the same circumstances and lighting. Open both images up in PS CS and see if you can get the second image shot in Set 1 back to where the Adobe RGB image is. You might get close, but run it up to 200% on you screen a have a closer look at a section of the detail.

It has always been my understanding that if something is altered or changed then it is effected.

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

02/22/2005 03:07:21 AM · #21

nsbca7, what you initially said was mostly innaccurate, and your subsequent statements asserting you were reading this in the manual, and then playing with semantics to re-justify your statements, are most likely confusing the people here that don't know anything about RAW. I suggest people try to ignore this discussion and refer to the more established sources including the Luminous Landscape articles.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

02/22/2005 03:08:25 AM · #22

For the record. effect is a noun; when you affect something, the visible result is an effect...

Sorry to be pedantic.

Robt.

02/22/2005 03:10:26 AM · #23

Originally posted by nshapiro:

"Hey I read this cool info on this website I found on the internet, so it's gospel dude."

Message edited by author 2005-02-22 03:34:47.