I'll try that. Thanks Rob.
Tom C.
From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Best all around RAW converter/manager(s)?? Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:02:12 +1000
On 13 Mar 2005 at 18:31, Tom C wrote:
> So two questions to the masses shooting RAW. Aside from using a RAW
> converter, do you find it that much more laborious to work with RAW as
> opposed to .tif (I almost never ever shoot .jpg BTW)? And how often do you find
> that the RAW capture is satisfactory on it's own, applying only minor
> adjustments and sharpening?
It doesn't take long one you are familiar dealing with RAW files and you have
an appropriately capable machine. I have a bunch of early shots that I made as
JPG due to media and processing speed constraints and now I wish I'd found a
way to have shot many of the images as RAW now that I have access to a good
printer.
It's easy to do some simple experiments to display the differences between in-
camera processing and RAW post processing. If you shoot a scene with a lot of
shadow detail and one point light source in the frame without any compensation
you will likely get an image exposed so as not to reveal very much if any
shadow detail.
So if you have some spare time shoot this scene like this as a TIFF and RAW
file with all other settings remaining the same (set the camera to low contrast
just to give the in-camera processing a fair go). Post process the TIFF to
reveal the shadow detail whilst preserving the highlights and then do the same
thing with the RAW version. I'll give you one guess which method will produce
the most printable image :-)
Cheers,
Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
