>On 2009-09-30, Carusoswi <for...@gimpusers.com> wrote:
>> In the spirit of the OP's question, if you make no adjustments in UFRAW,
>> there any more latitude for adjustment in the resultant JPG file (in Gimp
>> other editing application) than what you might get straight from the
>This is not a very have-a-clear-answer topic.
>I would guess that with Canon, the answer is straightforward: the
>RAW-converted output would be SIGNIFICANTLY better than in-camera one
>in ALL respects.  Dynamic range, handling of clipping, handling of
>noise, sharpness, etc.
>With cameras which use more advanced versions of the Apical Iridex
>hardware or firmware (starting with Sony, but Nikon is reported to be
>in process of catching up), the situation is not as clear.  I did not
>see any report of RAW processor which can match Apical-style "Dynamic
>Range Optimizations".
>So: there might be one respect (tonal mapping, sometimes called
>"dynamic range") in which RAW-processed-JPEG might be not as good as
>in-camera one...
>> It feels as though I have a lot of latitude in GIMP.
>8-bit is good enough for "minimally postprocessed" images, since noise
>would provide sufficient dithering, both in highlights and in darks.
>However, significant noise reduction and/or substantial tonal mapping
>has a risk to make banding visible.  Which makes GIMP not very
>suitable for such styles of photography.  (Not so with the subjects I
>favor most, so I did not see that.)
>Hope this helps,
Ok,  I want to make sure that I've asked my question clear enough before I
decide that you guys have blown me away with your technological knowledge. I'm
shooting in RAW and so I'm opening up a RAW file with UFRaw because without
opening the file first with UFRaw, I can't get it into into Gimp for Post
Processing. I hope I'm right so far. Well, after opening the RAW file in UFRaw
and whether I perforn any adjustments or not in UFRaw, if I hit OK to send it
to Gimp isn't it still a RAW file when it's in GIMP or has UFRaw converted it
to a jpg automatically and that is why the image looks crappy in GIMP,
particulairly when zoomed in on? Isn't there is only a relatively small amount
of things you can do to an image in UFRaw? Which is why you'd want to get that
RAW file to GIMP to be able to really do some post processing because there is
only so much you can do to a jpg?

Bryan (via www.gimpusers.com)
Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to