Thanks for your earlier note -- I am quite happy to stand corrected and
your post suggests a basic experiment I can easily do: compare in-camera
processed and post-processed RAW images for the same scene and settings.
I'll have a limited sample to work with: my only camera delivering RAW
images is a Pentax K100D, quite dated now by newer technology. On the
other hand, I can compare UFRaw into GIMP and Photoshop Elements with the
Pentax plug-in into PSE and (if I have a suitable intermediate format)
into GIMP. At the very least I'll learn something.
If I see anything surprising or interesting I may share it and hopefully
get useful feedback. Anyway, there's no substitute for knowing what one's
own equipment does.
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Ilya Zakharevich wrote:
> On 2009-09-30, Carusoswi <for...@gimpusers.com> wrote:
>> In the spirit of the OP's question, if you make no adjustments in
>> UFRAW, is there any more latitude for adjustment in the resultant JPG
>> file (in Gimp or other editing application) than what you might get
>> straight from the camera?
> 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...
I'm not sure I follow that, unless the sensor's bit-depth and that of the
camera's RAW format are different.
I'm not at the stage of getting full scale from my images: still working
for consistent, decent quality prints from straight-forward subjects.
Gimp-user mailing list