DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Is RAW really that helpful?
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 54 of 54, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/12/2004 07:13:41 PM · #51
I use RAW format when I don't want jpeg artifacts in my image, particularly if I plan to crop and enlarge the image. The Photoshop RAW image conversion utility works well for me, providing lots of exposure correction, temperature correction and even chromatic aberration correction.
For Canon RAW images, the Canon utility produces a higher quality Tiff file than the PS converter, but for Minolta and Kodak the PS converter is superior. I use the camera's jpeg compression only for snapshots that I do not intend to print.
11/12/2004 07:59:10 PM · #52
Originally posted by ElGordo:

For Canon RAW images, the Canon utility produces a higher quality Tiff file than the PS converter[...]

For this comparison, how are you gauging quality? Just curious.
11/12/2004 09:21:03 PM · #53
Originally posted by dwoolridge:

Originally posted by Gordon:

At least this is based on a couple of quick tests to see what is left. While photoshop CS has better 16 bit support, it doesn't yet appear to apply to B&W image generation.


Have you tried Picture Window Pro from Digital Light & Color? My trial died long ago and I haven't been compelled to try again. It might do the trick. Anyone else using PWP?


I looked at it a few times, but never did try it out.
11/12/2004 10:14:58 PM · #54
Originally posted by dwoolridge:

Originally posted by ElGordo:

For Canon RAW images, the Canon utility produces a higher quality Tiff file than the PS converter[...]

For this comparison, how are you gauging quality? Just curious.


Purely subjective evaluation of artifacts in the produced image. The PS (CS) RAW converter left a lot of artifacts (noise?) in the Canon images. Reprocessing the same RAW files using the Canon utility produced very clean images with greater apparent detail.
I do not know why the Canon images came out so poor with the PS converter, the difference was dramatic. It may be that the PS converter does not work well with the CYM+G format of the Canon sensor mask* (most sensors use a bayer RGB mask).

*Canon Pro 90 IS
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 06/24/2025 09:28:53 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 06/24/2025 09:28:53 AM EDT.