i mean by not powerful enough that the RAW converter's settings are not controllable to the degree that i want without way too much time spent on it. the converter's adjustments are too coarse. what would take me a couple of minutes in the RAW converter takes me about ten seconds with my suite of plugins. i usually don't change saturation from what is captured and my sharpness settings are fixed for nearly everything i do. i spend most of my time working on highlight and shadow details. working in 16-bit mode, unless you do lots of edits, the differences between doing it in the converter and afterwards should be negligible, if you are doing identical adjustments.
Herb... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 11:21 PM Subject: Re: *ist D image quality-_Was -Stupid Question #999 > I find the RAW converter's adjustments to be very effective but very > subtle. Perhaps that's what you're referring too. Changes in contrast, > saturation, or sharpness are incremental. But with good exposures I > find that adjustments made before conversion yield a superior final > image. Yes, there are those images that require careful tweaking of > levelsand curves as well as some clone work. But by and large, my best > shots come out of the RAW converter in near finished condition.
