| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/19/2007 03:06:37 PM · #226 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by kearock:
It just seems silly to not allow unadjusted RAW files. |
have you ever seen an unadjusted RAW file ?
I'd be surprised if you have. Linear gamma images are not the most interesting to look at, or enter into a contest.
All the images you see in a RAW converter have had a whole host of adjustments done to them, by the 'defaults' as you happened to have them currently set for your particular RAW converter. 'unadjusted RAW' doesn't make much of any sense. |
This file was adjusted to be unadjusted... about as close as I can get to an unadjusted RAW file and be able to display is as a JPEG. As can be seen, it is not good to look at.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 03:07:42 PM · #227 |
| with regard to RAW, after some discussion we came to much the same conclusion that Sander has. Given that different RAW converters will generate different JPEG interpretations from the same RAW data, we felt we had to limit it to the in-camera RAW converter (JPEG output). It's still possible to do a *lot* to influence the output image, but under Minimal Editing, it needs to be done up-front via camera settings. |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 03:08:01 PM · #228 |
Originally posted by Shakalaka:
This file was adjusted to be unadjusted... about as close as I can get to an unadjusted RAW file and be able to display is as a JPEG. As can be seen, it is not good to look at.
|
Dude desat those reds and bump the contrast will ya!
:-P |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 03:45:05 PM · #229 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
with regard to RAW, after some discussion we came to much the same conclusion that Sander has. Given that different RAW converters will generate different JPEG interpretations from the same RAW data, we felt we had to limit it to the in-camera RAW converter (JPEG output). It's still possible to do a *lot* to influence the output image, but under Minimal Editing, it needs to be done up-front via camera settings. |
Ah crap!
My Canon 10D doesn't do RAW+JPEG and I'm still waiting for Canon's sub $1,000 FF digital camera before I buy another camera.
I also don't have the balls to shoot in JPEG, but I guess I'll have to sack up and do it for those challenges. If I could only use the Ctrl-U in PS RAW Converter instead. |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 04:17:58 PM · #230 |
| Sooo... I take it that sometimes there ARE advantages to using a P&S? ;) |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 04:27:00 PM · #231 |
Originally posted by mist:
Originally posted by kearock:
And my main point was that I don't want to have to remember to change modes to shoot for a challenge. |
Truely this is a lame argument. Do you have the same trouble remembering to change the shutter speed, or the white balance? Just click the button and be done with it. |
I forget to change settings all the time. You've never cranked up your ISO and then forgot to fix it? Maybe not but other people do. Challenges aren't always first and foremost on people's minds so it's entirely possible to forget to change your file mode to something else. Or to have taken some shots not specifically for a challenge but decide to enter them later. I'm not at all saying that there's anything wrong with this ruleset or that it should change (I don't really care, clearly missing challenges is not something that bothers me) but I don't think it's necessarily a lame argument. |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 04:28:26 PM · #232 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Sooo... I take it that sometimes there ARE advantages to using a P&S? ;) |
I think P&S cameras will generally deliver a better JPEG pre-editing, if only because the camera does some of the editing for you.
Here's a P&S snapshot sharpened 0, 1, 2 and 3 times.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 04:32:58 PM · #233 |
Don't know if it's been asked here yet or not.
Can we use Bicubic Sharpening when sizing the file down? It's not a filter per se, but an option in the sizing dialog (at least in CS2)
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 04:36:44 PM · #234 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Sooo... I take it that sometimes there ARE advantages to using a P&S? ;) |
Yes, unlike most dSLRs, most P&S cameras can shoot in VGA resolution and have many more "editing" functions.
So, IMO, this will be a place where P&S users can take an advantage.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 04:39:04 PM · #235 |
Originally posted by raish:
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Sooo... I take it that sometimes there ARE advantages to using a P&S? ;) |
I think P&S cameras will generally deliver a better JPEG pre-editing, if only because the camera does some of the editing for you.
Here's a P&S snapshot sharpened 0, 1, 2 and 3 times.
|
I think today's camera do an excellent job at JPEG.
Another dog photo I know, but I think JPEG out of camera works fine.
Though I think there will be a "slight" advantage to new camera models. |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 04:46:40 PM · #236 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Ah crap!
My Canon 10D doesn't do RAW+JPEG and I'm still waiting for Canon's sub $1,000 FF digital camera before I buy another camera.
I also don't have the balls to shoot in JPEG, but I guess I'll have to sack up and do it for those challenges. If I could only use the Ctrl-U in PS RAW Converter instead. |
the 10d does do raw plus jpeg by default although the jpeg is imbedded in the raw and you need to extract it with the software. I never got it to work but that might have been because i was using a much newer version of software than what came with the 10d.
this is from the canon website and you can see that they list the file size for raw plus jpeg
(1) Large/Fine: Approx. 2.4 MB (3072x2048 pixels) (2) Large/Normal: Approx. 1.2 MB (3072x2048 pixels) (3) Medium/Fine: Approx. 1.3 MB (2048x1360 pixels) (4) Medium/Normal: Approx. 0.7 MB (2048x1360 pixels) (5) Small/Fine: Approx. 0.8 MB (1536x1024 pixels) (6) Small/Normal: Approx. 0.4 MB (1536x1024 pixels (7) RAW (3072x2048 pixels) RAW + Small/Normal: Approx. 6.0 MB RAW + Small/Fine: Approx. 6.4 MB RAW + Medium/Normal: Approx. 6.2 MB RAW + Medium/Fine: Approx. 6.8 MB RAW + Large/Normal: Approx. 6.7 MB RAW + Large/Fine: Approx. 8.0 MB * Exact file sizes depend on the subject and ISO speed.
I sold my 10d so i can't check the manual but i know it is in there.
Message edited by author 2007-01-19 16:50:26. |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 04:51:37 PM · #237 |
Having waded through this thread, I think I've hit upon my workflow for this challenge:
1. Take Picture
2. Transfer to computer
3. Sharpen if necessary, then Resize.
4. Upload
5. Update
:>)
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 04:53:15 PM · #238 |
Originally posted by Shakalaka:
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Sooo... I take it that sometimes there ARE advantages to using a P&S? ;) |
Yes, unlike most dSLRs, most P&S cameras can shoot in VGA resolution and have many more "editing" functions.
So, IMO, this will be a place where P&S users can take an advantage. |
A quick test since my last post... possibly acceptable quality?
Hmmm... it still doesn't look the same here as on my computer....
Message edited by author 2007-01-19 16:54:24. |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 04:54:59 PM · #239 |
Originally posted by megapix:
Having waded through this thread, I think I've hit upon my workflow for this challenge:
1. Take Picture
2. Transfer to computer
3. Sharpen if necessary, then Resize.
4. Upload
5. Update
:>) |
Might be better to resize before sharpening?
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 05:01:45 PM · #240 |
Originally posted by Shakalaka:
Not all cameras have in-camera rotation of the outputted Jpegs. |
Yup, you can turn it off on mine too. I'd forgotten I'd already done that! Duh!
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 05:13:58 PM · #241 |
Originally posted by raish:
Might be better to resize before sharpening? |
Probably right, but I resize in Irfanview which automatically sharpens on resize, but it still seems to work better if you sharpen first.
Actually was being a bit tounge in cheek with my workflow post. Probably should have added "Drink" before and after "Update"! |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 05:41:51 PM · #242 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Don't know if it's been asked here yet or not.
Can we use Bicubic Sharpening when sizing the file down? It's not a filter per se, but an option in the sizing dialog (at least in CS2)
Thanks! |
I tried both bicubic and bicubic sharper on the sample I posted and even when I enlarged 500% I couldn't see any difference? |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 05:53:22 PM · #243 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
I tried both bicubic and bicubic sharper on the sample I posted and even when I enlarged 500% I couldn't see any difference? |
What does your gaining a lot of weight have to do with it? ;)
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 06:01:43 PM · #244 |
| I'll be skipping "Minimal" challenges. Don't shoot JPG and ain't waisting the space on my card to shoot RAW + JPG. |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 06:02:38 PM · #245 |
Originally posted by raish:
Originally posted by megapix:
Having waded through this thread, I think I've hit upon my workflow for this challenge:
1. Take Picture
2. Transfer to computer
3. Sharpen if necessary, then Resize.
4. Upload
5. Update
:>) |
Might be better to resize before sharpening? |
Might want to SAVE it before you upload it too :-)
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 06:10:23 PM · #246 |
Originally posted by samhall:
These rules sound good to me. People should learn to use their cameras w/o having to lean on the crutch of PS. Its amazing how much people whine about such a straightforward rule set. |
There are many crutches people will lean on to hide deficiencies. It goes without saying you should learn how to use your camera as well as how to post process as both are integral to photography, which is why having all these different rule sets should be welcomed by all.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 06:12:58 PM · #247 |
1. Take Picture
2. Transfer to computer
3. Sharpen if necessary, then Resize.
4. Upload
5. Update
:>)
Might be better to resize before sharpening?
Might want to SAVE it before you upload it too :-)
1. Take Picture
2. Transfer to computer
3. Sharpen if necessary, then Resize.
3a drink
3b reverse 3.
3c drink
3d save
3e drink
4. Upload
4a drink
5. Update
5a drink
6. Wonder why everything's still blurred after all that sharpening.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 06:13:04 PM · #248 |
Originally posted by tooohip:
I'll be skipping "Minimal" challenges. Don't shoot JPG and ain't waisting the space on my card to shoot RAW + JPG. |
You should so get one of these. I got one for christmas and it's great.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 06:14:48 PM · #249 |
Anyone besides me hate the no crop at all rule?
1) I hate the 4x6 aspect ratio.
2) Most viewfinders don't cover the entire frame.
I'd like to see that rule be changed to include only cropping to standard aspect ratios and at least two sides of the entire frame must be touched by the selection. Or something like that.
To clear what I'm trying to say up:
If I crop a 4x6 portrait to an 8x10 ratio, I can only crop from the top and bottom.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 06:17:00 PM · #250 |
Originally posted by raish:
6. Wonder why everything's still blurred after all that sharpening. |
6a drink
7 Start a rant thread about stupid voters
7a drink
7b reply to stupid voters in thread
7c Read note from SC
7d drink more
7e Pass out before you get suspended
:-)
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/24/2024 02:32:34 PM EDT.
