| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/13/2005 11:16:25 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
For sports shooting I use JPEG exclusively. RAW is too slow writing to CF on my camera. They're also larger to store and harder to work with when editing. |
With the 1D II there has NEVER been a time when I ran out of buffer space, even when using a slow Hitachi 4GB microdrive with bursts of 8.5fps RAW shots. |
|
|
|
05/13/2005 11:20:00 AM · #27 |
| I was lucky enough to receive a 4GB microdrive for Christmas from an awesome techie relative of mine. I've taken to shooting in the RAW+JPG format that my D70 provides. For fast and dirty jpgs that I take for other people, I can just resize and send them on their way, but I retain the RAW images if I want to play with them later. As big as RAW images are, the jpgs are negligible in size comparatively. |
|
|
|
05/13/2005 11:22:14 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
RAW is too slow writing to CF on my camera. |
With the 1D II there has NEVER been a time when I ran out of buffer space .. |
Yep, that's what you buy a pro camera for. Unfortunately I'm a little way off getting return on investment for a 1DmkII..
|
|
|
|
05/13/2005 11:24:04 AM · #29 |
I almost always shoot in jpeg, but when I do shoot in raw I love the flexibility of it. The sharpening, wb, expo comp. Lighting effects and more are quite nice for tweaking shots and not losing as much data while doing it. The noise is also slightly lower when shooting in raw.
|
|
|
|
05/13/2005 11:41:47 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
Can I ask you, do you choose to work in the PhotoPro RGB colour space because it offers the largest gamut/ least clipping or do you usually work directly into the colour space you will be using for printing/ your client requires? |
I convert directly to 8-bit/sRGB when creating web-specific images with no editing (this is the I-don't-care situation).
If doing very, very minor edits or providing output to my lab I'll go directly to AdobeRGB (8-bit/16-bit) depending on if editing is required (this is the life-goes-on situation).
For big edits or shots into which I wish to pour my ever-loving soul I convert to 16-bit ProPhotoRGB. I never edit directly in ProPhotoRGB unless I'm feeling really saucy: I convert to BetaRGB first since PPG is much too wide for reasonable editing. (This is the I-used-to-have-a-job-but-now-I-just-convert-and-edit-all-day situation)
In the first two situations, I'll see how much clipping is actually happening and decide if I want the control of a wider space/bit-depth coupled with a conversion later.
But yes, I prefer the initial convert in PPG since it's wider than camera capture space. AdobeRGB is a pretty safe bet but there are situations where it's not wide enough for either input or output spaces. |
|
|
|
05/13/2005 11:54:26 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by ganders:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
It says that it's a trial but that's currently a lie and everything is functional. There's no end date so essentially it's free. |
If I might put on my software developer hat briefly; just because it doesn't actively cut you off doesn't mean that the developer wants you to take his software for free and not give him any money.
We have to eat too know you - the general "well if it doesn't stop me from doing this then it must be alright" is exactly the reason that so many bits of 'trial' software are so crippled; to force you to actually stump up for the product if you choose to use it.
Ok, rant over :-) |
Did you actually go to RSE's website or read their newsletter? Note that the RSE developers (as cpanaioti pointed out) do "want[s] you to take [their] software for free and not give [them] any money" in this particular case. I don't know what cpanaioti's general opinion about trial software is, but you kinda jumped the gun here.
Message edited by author 2005-05-13 11:54:57. |
|
|
|
05/13/2005 12:11:42 PM · #32 |
| The free version of RSE works very well and the workflow is second only to Bibble in my opinion (and better in some ways, like the way you can rank categorize images). One of the key features they are holding out for the paid version is cropping though. Unfortunately, that's a show stopper for me. It's ok if I am going to edit in PS anyway, but as a workflow for converting a number of images into JPEG for the web or whatever, it doesn't work for me. I'd like to say I can shoot 100% of my images with the best possible composition and thus no need for cropping, but then I'd be lying. ;) |
|
|
|
05/13/2005 12:41:46 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by dwoolridge:
Did you actually go to RSE's website or read their newsletter? Note that the RSE developers (as cpanaioti pointed out) do "want[s] you to take [their] software for free and not give [them] any money" in this particular case. I don't know what cpanaioti's general opinion about trial software is, but you kinda jumped the gun here. |
No, I didn't. I read the "the trial doesn't stop you from using it so it's effectively free" and responded to that instead.
If RSE is happy to give their stuff away for free then top marks to them and my apologies to anyone who felt slighted by my post - although that fact doesn't actually affect what I said :-)
|
|
|
|
05/13/2005 12:48:21 PM · #34 |
In my opinion and this is how i see things since i started shooting RAW... I almost shoot raw most of the time... You have much control and it is almost like going to a dark room afterwards... You have to treat the image more and have more control in what you want to achieve... Quality is not loss if you use it more than once...
In JPEG i guess the camera makes most of the things for you.... It gives you less control but images come out almost like there were already treated... This is my 2cents... and this is what i have experienced...
For example in RAW you don't have to be looking at the WB because you can always change it in a RAW program..
And for the software to convert RAW i use Raw Shooter... Now i heard that Photoshop CS2 does a heck of a job with this...
Hope this helps.
Fred
|
|
|
|
05/13/2005 12:49:17 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by ganders[:
...] although that fact doesn't actually affect what I said :-) |
Indeed not. I quite agree with your sentiments. I'm actually looking forward to the pay version of RSE sicne I anticipate some features worth the cost (depending on price). I don't think pixmantec set up their company looking for a faster way to get to the poorhouse, so I expect the pay version to be substantially better. You can see in the free version where there are plenty of hooks for extensibility. |
|
|
|
05/13/2005 02:08:28 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by ganders:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
It says that it's a trial but that's currently a lie and everything is functional. There's no end date so essentially it's free. |
If I might put on my software developer hat briefly; just because it doesn't actively cut you off doesn't mean that the developer wants you to take his software for free and not give him any money.
We have to eat too know you - the general "well if it doesn't stop me from doing this then it must be alright" is exactly the reason that so many bits of 'trial' software are so crippled; to force you to actually stump up for the product if you choose to use it.
Ok, rant over :-) |
BTW, I agree with putting deadlines in software that make it unusable after so many uses or after a certain length of time. I was stating the current situation with RSE - thanks to dwoolridge for pulling up the references, not making a blanket statement as you obviously assumed.
|
|
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: 08/18/2025 12:20:49 PM EDT.
