RAW difficulties - DPChallenge Forums

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC for Canon

02/18/2006 05:06:46 PM · #1

I have recently started shooting RAW and while I am happy with the quality of the unprocessed images, I must say it's not so once I process them. It seems that no matter what I do, the pictures just look flat. They lack saturation, contrast, and just overall "kick". Yes, I am adding all those things in PS but I just can't get them to look right. I never had that problem when I shot jpgs. Has this happened to anyone else? Any tips, pointers, or advice? Thankns in advance.

June

Kavey

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

02/18/2006 05:19:02 PM · #2

No, I haven't had this problem, June. All the camera does when you shoot in June is apply a bit of sharpening, saturation boost and contrast so I find it pretty easy when processing the RAW files myself to do the same but with more control.

That said, if this is a set of tools you weren't using much before it's probably just a case of getting used to using them effectively.

What I love about RAW is the ability to recover highlights and shadows details and also the ability to convert an image initially in 16 bit so that any further work I do on it in Photoshop is on that increased colour depth data. Especially if I'm adjusting levels/ contrast and adding in gradients into the sky etc. Then once done I drop down to 8 bit before saving - I just don't need the 16 bit files.

What are you using to convert the RAW files?

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

02/18/2006 05:22:49 PM · #3

I am using PS CS's RAW converter.

front_element

Nikon D700

02/18/2006 05:24:52 PM · #4

The beauty of RAW is that you don't lose anything that was captured by the camera sensor at the time of exposure.

If you're using a RAW converter with a 'histogram' function you can use this to optimise the conversion, then add the 'punch' in Photoshop (or whatever else you're using for PP).

The images will actually end up being more 'punchy' after you've PP'd the image properly and sharpened it.

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC for Canon

02/18/2006 05:39:53 PM · #5

OK, maybe I just haven't been lucky enough to have nice weather when I've been shooting raw. Yesterday I went to Colonial Williamsburg and it was overcast. Maybe that's why the pictures are flat. I'll take a look at the ones I shot once the sky cleared up and sun came out and see if that makes a difference.

June

Kavey

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

02/18/2006 05:41:48 PM · #6

I use the same thing, June, though I'm not in CS2 but there isn't a huge difference.

I do as much as I can in the RAW convertor with the exception of sharpening... so I fix exposure and white balance, boost saturation, sometimes boost contrast just a touch, sometimes adjust for chromatic abberation, very occasionally play with saturation in one or more colour channels and then send into PS. Once in PS I do any spot editing and adjustments that will apply only to some areas of the image, I sharpen if necessary and then I'm pretty much done.

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

02/18/2006 05:43:48 PM · #7

Originally posted by Kavey:

I'll try that. Right now I am just adjusting white balance and any exposure problems in the converter and doing everything else in PS.

June

Falc

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

02/18/2006 05:55:07 PM · #8

Here's my workflow for RAW:

Copy CRW files straight off the card to a new directory.
Open up iMATCH and register the new images in the database.
Quickly scan through using the slideshow feature, pick out the keepers.
Back in database view, right click and open in Photoshop
In Photoshop Raw Converter:
Adjust colour balance
Adjust exposure, keeping an eye on the histogram so not to lose detail. Sometimes I use the checkboxes at the top which highlight in red/blue when pixel detail is being lost.
Adjust contrast and shadow again keeping an eye on the histogram.
Occasionally boost the colour saturation in Raw Converter

Then in PS:
Sharpen with USM - set to 300/0.2/0 (the recommended canon sharpen settings)
then its playtime ....

Message edited by author 2006-02-18 18:03:51.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

02/18/2006 06:02:38 PM · #9

just shoot jpeg

Canon EOS-20D

02/18/2006 06:11:15 PM · #10

Originally posted by Kavey:

No, I haven't had this problem, June. All the camera does when you shoot in June is apply a bit of sharpening, saturation boost and contrast ...

My camera does that in July and August, too.

Kavey

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC for Canon

02/18/2006 06:12:14 PM · #11

Originally posted by mk:

Originally posted by Kavey:
No, I haven't had this problem, June. All the camera does when you shoot in June is apply a bit of sharpening, saturation boost and contrast ...

My camera does that in July and August, too.

OOPS! That would my fingers working faster than my brain again! LOL

02/18/2006 06:12:18 PM · #12

Originally posted by mk:

ROFL

nards656

Tamron SP AF 24-135mm f/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical IF for Canon

02/18/2006 10:38:30 PM · #13

Originally posted by deapee:

just shoot jpeg

I second the motion. RAW is just too much darn work. Sorry to all the purists out there... :)

TooCool

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

02/18/2006 10:48:43 PM · #14

When you shoot in JPEG, the camera is making choices for you. These include sharpening, tonality, saturation, contrast, etc. With raw format, the data is untouched and you have to make those choices yourself in the processing. That is the whole point of shooting in raw. YOU have the control over the final image.

02/18/2006 11:06:42 PM · #15

Originally posted by TooCool:

I payed a lot of money for my camera body and the processing engines and for Nikon's research and development of those processing engines inside the camera. I think it does a better job than I could do 99% of the time anyway.

When you bought your camera, did you tell them to give you the version of the 300d without the processing software and so on and to give you a discount, all you're going to do is shoot in RAW?

nards656

Tamron SP AF 24-135mm f/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical IF for Canon

02/18/2006 11:22:15 PM · #16

Originally posted by TooCool:

And my point is that for some odd reason, me having all that control is really a bad thing - it makes my photos not be as good. Let's see, here, camera making choices = good photos. Bernard making choices = bad photos. Hmmmm. I suppose that just to appear to be one of the people who are really good at post processing, I should continue to make bad photos???????

Come on, let's face it - me being in control of all those things is not necessarily good. Canon did a doggone good job of programming those algorithms, and I've seen no evidence AT ALL that I can do a better job.

Just because I CAN tweak something doesn't automatically mean the end result is going to be better :)

ace flyman

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

02/18/2006 11:24:15 PM · #17

What I find most useful is ability to correct white balance and exposure, everything else done in ps.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

02/18/2006 11:50:23 PM · #18

Originally posted by ace flyman:

What I find most useful is ability to correct white balance and exposure, everything else done in ps.

If your white balance is so far off that it can't be fixed in photoshop from a JPEG, then you did something severely wrong. A good book should help. The same goes with exposure.

ace flyman

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

02/19/2006 12:01:29 AM · #19

Every shoot in low light gyms, even with gray card its nice to tweak in raw, along with exposure.....Thats ok, I've find your right every post I've seen lately.....so wish I was as talenated as you......

If your white balance is so far off that it can't be fixed in photoshop from a JPEG, then you did something severely wrong. A good book should help. The same goes with exposure. [/quote]text

Message edited by author 2006-02-19 00:02:15.

nards656

Tamron SP AF 24-135mm f/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical IF for Canon

02/19/2006 12:17:49 AM · #20

That's what ya get, Ace, for selling such a good camera to me and trying to make one of them there high-faluting 20D rigs work as well as them thar 300Ds.

Y'all don't go trying to pick on deapee, now, just 'cause he's telling the truth.

I find it extremely humorous to read this thread. We bought Karmat's 300D from Chiqui, who is now having trouble with RAW and a 20D. Then along comes old Ace Flyman, from whom we bought MY 300D, who appears to also be a big RAW fan. And here sits little old Karma and I, just jpegging away. Thanks, deapee, for helping us to not feel quite so "left behind" the techie gooks.

:)

ace flyman

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

02/19/2006 12:30:17 AM · #21

Tooo...funny, Glad to see the camera works for ya! When I'm shooting a tourney I dont have time to process several hundred shots, but any other time always. Guess it comes down to what works for ya.......

02/19/2006 01:08:03 AM · #22

Originally posted by nards656:

Thanks, deapee, for helping us to not feel quite so "left behind" the techie gooks.

:)

No problem.

Prof_Fate

02/19/2006 01:46:30 AM · #23

try - convert to jpg and then import into PS - USM, 300%, .3, and 0 to 6 depending on the subject (faces get a 6, landscapes a 0)
hue/sat - sat +6 or so.
go ahead and print.

if web use is it, resize and try another USM, same settings and play with the amout 150%-200%. Sometimes upping the radius to about 1 helps.

I have found since I started this workflow i like my images more and no curves adj is necessary.

I got these this past week, and the above is all i did. Is this impactful enough or not? To each their own. For landscapes I have a techniqe that mimics velvia film's saturation that works well, but is not right for people. I like crisp images, sharp almost too much at times.
Here are some samples:

For many things JPG works. My recent trip to the Aviary I shot all JPG. For paying work (the above images) I shot only RAW. It's extra comforting to know you have teh latitude of exposure and WB 'recovery', and that you have a 'digital negative' - a file you can't screw up that you can always go back to as your needs, wants or skills dictate.

TooCool

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

02/19/2006 01:47:55 AM · #24

Originally posted by nards656:

Then sell your camera and get a P/S type... If you don't like having control then you have the wrong equipment...

TooCool