No. But thanks for the reminder. I want to do that. But your jpeg does
look quite good. Is it right out of the camera or post-processed in PS?
My comment below is in regard to jpegs that have been processed only by
the camera. Of course their all dependent on photographer's settings,
exposure, etc. But I haven't really seen any I like that haven't been
post processed -- Pentax or Canon. Ironically, some of the jpegs from
P&S cameras look pretty good as shot. My daughter has a 4 megapixel
Canon Elph that produces reasonably nice results as shot.
Paul
On May 29, 2005, at 8:36 AM, Cotty wrote:
On 29/5/05, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
I saw some in-camera processing vs. RAW results from a Canon 20D the
other day. The jpeg results were very poor, probably inferior to those
from a Pentax. With any camera, RAW is the way to go.
Paul
Paul, any news on the 1D files you grabbed last week?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com
_____________________________
