Discussion
Up to now I have always shot in JPG and been quite happy with my results. However, I recently upgraded from PS7 to CS3 which means that I can now process RAW images from my 40D (plug in wasn't available to handle 40D RAW files in PS7).
Being curious, I thought I would see what extra processing is now available to me on a RAW file.
OH BLIMEY!!
Where do you start? So many tabs and sliders! I thought I was OK at post processing my jpg photos, but this is going to be another learning curve altogether.
I can see now why so many people advocate shooting in RAW.
Being curious, I thought I would see what extra processing is now available to me on a RAW file.
OH BLIMEY!!
Where do you start? So many tabs and sliders! I thought I was OK at post processing my jpg photos, but this is going to be another learning curve altogether.
I can see now why so many people advocate shooting in RAW.
I highly recommend: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/videos/CR_1.shtm...
Firstly set all the sliders to o - so no exp. compensation, don't change the shadows or brightness, and 0 contrast. Also do the other tabs for noise reduction and sharperning (I always do this afterwards at the final resolution). Then I put saturation to 0 (b&w image). Then work from top to bottom, first getting the exposure correct so the histogram is centred acording to what's been shot. Then used the shadows slider to pull the shadows across to the left of the histogram (think it's this control that's inverted), then pull the highlights to the right, as you would using the PS levels command. Then set contrast to suit. Finally I set the saturation back to the middle to give me colour again and set the white balance (either by using the eyedropper on the image or using one of the presets). Go to the lens correction tab and make any Chromatic Abberation corrections, then import into PS, tweak the levels again (still all in 16-bit colour mode), make any minor corrections (dust etc), then remove any noise (I use the noise ninja plug in), resize and sharpen for final target. I tend to import the RAW file in colour into PS even if I'll convert to B&W later as it gives more flexibility in the conversion process (I tend to use the channel mixer which requires the colour information to be retained).
It is a faf, but far more flexible and gives far better results. The first few times I loaded the jpg into PS as well (if you can shoot raw+jpg) and used that as a basis for my raw conversion. First for times weren't as good as the jpg, but now I've got to grips with the RAW converter there's loads more detail.
It is a faf, but far more flexible and gives far better results. The first few times I loaded the jpg into PS as well (if you can shoot raw+jpg) and used that as a basis for my raw conversion. First for times weren't as good as the jpg, but now I've got to grips with the RAW converter there's loads more detail.
Sorry to hijack but I have a quick (silly) question regarding RAW to JPEG conversion.
I currently shoot RAW+JPEG on my 400D.
The JPEG filesize from the camera is approx 2.4M.
If I open the RAW file in CS3 then save to JPEG (Quality 10 - Maximum) without any modification the resulting filesize is approx 1.35M.
Why the big difference ?
Stu.
I currently shoot RAW+JPEG on my 400D.
The JPEG filesize from the camera is approx 2.4M.
If I open the RAW file in CS3 then save to JPEG (Quality 10 - Maximum) without any modification the resulting filesize is approx 1.35M.
Why the big difference ?
Stu.
Stu247 said:
Sorry to hijack but I have a quick (silly) question regarding RAW to JPEG conversion.
I currently shoot RAW+JPEG on my 400D.
The JPEG filesize from the camera is approx 2.4M.
If I open the RAW file in CS3 then save to JPEG (Quality 10 - Maximum) without any modification the resulting filesize is approx 1.35M.
Why the big difference ?
Stu.
Are you sharpening in CS3 before you save? You'll probably find the camera is, so creating bigger files.I currently shoot RAW+JPEG on my 400D.
The JPEG filesize from the camera is approx 2.4M.
If I open the RAW file in CS3 then save to JPEG (Quality 10 - Maximum) without any modification the resulting filesize is approx 1.35M.
Why the big difference ?
Stu.
ThatPhilBrettGuy said:
Stu247 said:
Sorry to hijack but I have a quick (silly) question regarding RAW to JPEG conversion.
I currently shoot RAW+JPEG on my 400D.
The JPEG filesize from the camera is approx 2.4M.
If I open the RAW file in CS3 then save to JPEG (Quality 10 - Maximum) without any modification the resulting filesize is approx 1.35M.
Why the big difference ?
Stu.
Are you sharpening in CS3 before you save? You'll probably find the camera is, so creating bigger files.I currently shoot RAW+JPEG on my 400D.
The JPEG filesize from the camera is approx 2.4M.
If I open the RAW file in CS3 then save to JPEG (Quality 10 - Maximum) without any modification the resulting filesize is approx 1.35M.
Why the big difference ?
Stu.
I changed the WB on a shot then saved it as a JPEG only to discover the difference.
So I did the same again without altering the WB just to see what happened.
Did not realise the camera sharpened on the fly.
Cheers.
I'm running CS2 and I didn't think it was possible to import them either. I got hooked up on finding a Photoshop plugin. The answer was to use the software bundled with the camera (450D). Run Canon Digital Photo Professional and select "Transfer to Photoshop" (Alt+P) which pads out the 14 bit RAW to 16 bit TIF and sends it directly to Photoshop.
I did a quick comparison test of Raw and JPEG for my own interest. Bearing in mind that this is a 200% zoom, hand held in iffy light, and I can't remember what mode the camera was in (probably P). Before compressing to JPEG, it clearly passes a low pass filter over the image. Curiously the noise in the RAW image looks not unlike compression artefacts.
(Click to view unsquished)
I did a quick comparison test of Raw and JPEG for my own interest. Bearing in mind that this is a 200% zoom, hand held in iffy light, and I can't remember what mode the camera was in (probably P). Before compressing to JPEG, it clearly passes a low pass filter over the image. Curiously the noise in the RAW image looks not unlike compression artefacts.
(Click to view unsquished)
Stu247 said:
Nope, just opening and saving as JPEG.
I changed the WB on a shot then saved it as a JPEG only to discover the difference.
So I did the same again without altering the WB just to see what happened.
Did not realise the camera sharpened on the fly.
Cheers.
The camera processes the RAW into a JPG, you have coloursat, contrast and sharpness (amongst other) options in camera to set the amount of processingthat takes place in camera.I changed the WB on a shot then saved it as a JPEG only to discover the difference.
So I did the same again without altering the WB just to see what happened.
Did not realise the camera sharpened on the fly.
Cheers.
RAW have none of that, no sharpening at all etc applied, which is why it NEEDS it afterwards, but the amount of sharpening depends on the intended target which is why having non is a good thing...
BTW everyone with a canon dSLR should have DPP, I dont currently have it installed but realy should do , the new one has options other raw processors dont.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff