| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/07/2003 03:35:44 PM · #1 |
Can anyone enlighten me about RAW conversion. I'd like to know what the main difference is between 16-bit linear and non-linear RAW conversion.
Also, what are people's thought on the different RAW converters for Canon RAW files?
A lot of people like Breezebrowser and Capture One software. I use a Mac and can't use Breezebrowser, Capture One only has the Pro edition for Mac (I'm not ready to plunk down $600 yet).
Fred Miranda says that there's a bug when converting files using the linear method in Canon's software and recomends dcRAW-X.
What are your thoughts? |
|
|
|
12/07/2003 03:37:33 PM · #2 |
See this thread for some help.
I use BreezeBrowser and Photoshop.
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=58411
Message edited by author 2003-12-07 15:37:45. |
|
|
|
12/07/2003 03:40:55 PM · #3 |
| Thanks Justine, that was a thread I originally posted and I stared this new thread because I have more questions about RAW conversion. |
|
|
|
12/07/2003 03:43:14 PM · #4 |
|
|
|
12/07/2003 04:11:52 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by mjalvarino:
Can anyone enlighten me about RAW conversion. I'd like to know what the main difference is between 16-bit linear and non-linear RAW conversion.
Also, what are people's thought on the different RAW converters for Canon RAW files?
A lot of people like Breezebrowser and Capture One software. I use a Mac and can't use Breezebrowser, Capture One only has the Pro edition for Mac (I'm not ready to plunk down $600 yet).
Fred Miranda says that there's a bug when converting files using the linear method in Canon's software and recomends dcRAW-X.
What are your thoughts? |
Thumbsplus has raw conversion, and I believe it runs on the Mac too. But I think it's pretty basic, and mainly there to allow the thumbnail generation and viewing.
However, I mention it because their latest beta uses a plugin they based on DCRaw. So far, I have not been impressed with that, but it's still early in the beta cycle. They will be supporting 16 bit conversions. If you are a programmer, you can get the DCRaw code and tweak it to your hearts content.
Interestingly, the DCRaw site lists breezebrowser as software that uses it, but the breeze help says it uses the Canon library. Perhaps it uses both.
Also, what about Photoshop CS? I presume that's got a Mac version, and it has a Canon Raw converter built in.
Trying not to take you off-topic, but provide some new info.
Regards--Neil
|
|
|
|
12/07/2003 07:55:54 PM · #6 |
That's right nshapiro. I forgot about PS CS and the built in RAW converter. I only have the previous version of PS w/o the converter.
What do people think about the PS CS RAW converter?
Also, does anyone know about my first question about linear and non-linear processing? |
|
|
|
12/07/2003 08:07:09 PM · #7 |
linear conversion uses a gamma value of 1.0, and only really does white balance conversion. Nothing else is done to convert the image into a working space. (The linear refers to the gamma curve, which is a flat, straight line from 0 to 255 with a gamma value of 1.0)
Non-linear conversion applies further curves to lighten the highlights and midtones, as well as applying any contrast, exposure and colour adjustments.
As a result, linear can potentially preserve more highlight info, assuming you apply the rest of the processing steps correctly - it gives you interactive control earlier in the conversion process.
The 'combined' mode simply uses a linear and non-linear converted image to extract better highlight detail from the linear file, but better shadow definition from the non-linear file (linear converted images can have potentially more shadow noise due to the very compressed shadow regions). It is nice to have an auto mode to do this, but in general I've just done this step manually, with more control over the luminance mask used to quite good effect, if I have highlights that are in danger of blowing out. |
|
|
|
12/08/2003 05:20:29 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by mjalvarino:
What do people think about the PS CS RAW converter?
|
I quite like the converter in PS CS. I used to use Capture One, in fact I only purchased it a couple of months ago. I would highly reccommend it if you don't have PS CS.
However, I now use PS CS as I end up with the same end result, but it is simply less hassle to stay in the same program.
There may be advantages Capture One has over CS and if so I'd love to hear it. At my limited level of expertise either will do the job.
|
|
|
|
12/31/2003 05:40:41 AM · #9 |
I am new to RAW conversion, and do not have a good understanding of it all, but so far, I don't really care for the Canon software that came with my 10D.
I am trying to decide between these three options:
1. Get the Photoshop/JPEG 200 plugin for PS7.
2. Capture One
3. Upgrade PS 7 to PS CS
I know there are quite a few of you who have been working with RAW, so...which one of these would give the widest range of control over your images?
|
|
|
|
12/31/2003 05:55:35 AM · #10 |
could someone please tell me ,is ther any advantage in taking a photo in raw format opposed to jpeg and editing it in ps?
|
|
|
|
12/31/2003 07:27:26 AM · #11 |
This is a good link for generic advantages/disadvantages of shooting in RAW mode. For me, the killer feature is being able to customize the white balance.
//www.dpreview.com/learn/Glossary/Digital_Imaging/RAW_Image_Format_01.htm
Rich. |
|
|
|
12/31/2003 09:18:19 AM · #12 |
I have the same question....
I always shoot in JPEG and have been told I should shoot RAW for the wedding I'm doing.
My main concern is the amount of pics I can shoot(360 vs. 128).
Are there any other main concerns?
What about speed?
|
|
|
|
12/31/2003 09:35:47 AM · #13 |
| Using RAW is good advice for wedding photography. Getting the right exposure for a bride dressed in white against a dark background is tricky, and RAW allows some leeway in the exposure since it stores more bits/pixel (although bracketing would still be a good idea). You can also adjust the white balance more accurately. Buy or borrow another memory card if you need to. |
|
|
|
12/31/2003 11:16:08 AM · #14 |
| Photoshop CS works great. I was using Breezebrowser before and to me it wasn't worth the hazzle but the raw converter in PS is fast (compared to Breezebrowser) and very easy to use. |
|
|
|
12/31/2003 11:27:22 AM · #15 |
Shooting RAW (as far as Nikon is concerned) makes the files larger than jpegs, thus takes more time to write to the card; it might even be, that, the buffer filling up, you would be unable to shoot for a while, depending on your cameras' and the memorycards' ability to write away the data.
As far as white against dark background is concerned, I would suggest to underexpose a bit, say f1/3 to f1, because even in RAW, a blownout area does not contain any material.
At the other hand, shooting in RAW does allow you to change whitebalance, so it does not matter what your original WB is, one thing less to think about.
Personally again, I would suggest to shoot the Classical poses in RAW, the action shots in jpeg
hope this helps |
|
|
|
12/31/2003 11:42:07 AM · #16 |
| Capture One from Phase One Software is the best Canon RAW converter I've used yet. |
|
|
|
12/31/2003 11:46:10 AM · #17 |
I agree that Capture One is the RAW converter to use.
Although Photoshop CS supports a lot of RAW formats, I find the control in C1 superior, especially the ability to quickly and easily copy image adjustments to other images. I also like that it acts as a "browser" for RAW images. |
|
|
|
12/31/2003 12:10:25 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Hoogie:
could someone please tell me ,is ther any advantage in taking a photo in raw format opposed to jpeg and editing it in ps? |
Des, the 602 only has Tiff or Jpeg am I correct? what advantage is there in using Tiff, they are huge !
Paul. |
|
|
|
12/31/2003 01:09:30 PM · #19 |
I use CaptureOne LE for 10D. Get a PC :) might be cheaper than the pro version of c1 now. It's much better than breezebrowser, instant adjustments instead of having to wait for the result to show up before you "develop" the image. (i.e. you can do exposure adjustments on the fly instead of breezebrowser where every adjustment you do you have to wait for the image to rescan).
C1 can develop "standard" "shadow" (which emphasizes the shadow areas and making it lighter) and "linear" files, as well as adding any curve adjustments, white balance tweaks (which is also instantaneous rather than delayed like Breezebrowser), saturation as well as sharpening all prior to generating TIFs/JPGs. as well as converting the images to a given color space.
As far as shooting for wedding goes -- if you overexpose the white dress, no amount of post processing will help you recover highlights. Meter partial metering on the white dress, then bring it up 1 1/2 to 2 stops (depending on your taste and situation. +1 1/2 will preserve all highlights of the dress but may make the dress a bit darker and could underexpose the groom's wear. +2 stops will preserve some highlights of the dress though might blow some higlights of the dress as well.
Good news for white balance, the bride's dress is usually good enough for most situation as a white point (usually some part of it will be overexposed as pure white).
Originally posted by mjalvarino:
Can anyone enlighten me about RAW conversion. I'd like to know what the main difference is between 16-bit linear and non-linear RAW conversion.
Also, what are people's thought on the different RAW converters for Canon RAW files?
A lot of people like Breezebrowser and Capture One software. I use a Mac and can't use Breezebrowser, Capture One only has the Pro edition for Mac (I'm not ready to plunk down $600 yet).
Fred Miranda says that there's a bug when converting files using the linear method in Canon's software and recomends dcRAW-X.
What are your thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
12/31/2003 05:39:43 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by peecee:
Originally posted by Hoogie:
could someone please tell me ,is ther any advantage in taking a photo in raw format opposed to jpeg and editing it in ps? |
Des, the 602 only has Tiff or Jpeg am I correct? what advantage is there in using Tiff, they are huge !
Paul. |
yes the 602 can only do tiff/jpeg and the tiffs are 17meg a picture,i thought my camera could take raw photos :( |
|
|
|
01/01/2004 05:15:22 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
I agree that Capture One is the RAW converter to use.
Although Photoshop CS supports a lot of RAW formats, I find the control in C1 superior, especially the ability to quickly and easily copy image adjustments to other images. I also like that it acts as a "browser" for RAW images. |
Photoshop CS does this also
|
|
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: 04/23/2024 11:04:16 PM EDT.
