>the other image is straight from the camera: Duh
Sorry for the misread. If the jpeg was the only image you had, would you do any post camera processing? White point, dark point, hue/saturation, USM? Kenneth Waller -----Original Message----- From: Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Jul 22, 2005 7:33 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Amazing capability of RAW Rob, is the jpeg straight out of the camera? Kenneth Waller -----Original Message----- From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Amazing capability of RAW On 21 Jul 2005 at 20:07, Kenneth Waller wrote: > Interesting Albano, > but I think the real comparison to be made is with two identical images, one > RAW > and one hi res jpeg and optimize each one. Thanks for posting this. I'd not hesitate to suggest that shooting in RAW virtually always leads to a better image technically. For instance I just stepped outside set my camera up on a tripod, put it in program mode, set my A20/2.8 on infinity and made two shots, one as a jpg and one as RAW. In post processing the RAW image I optimised the exposure and reduced lens CA (I have a library of offsets for my lenses) in the RAW convertor and in PS I sharpened the image, the other image is straight from the camera: http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/IMGP2846.JPG (3.8MB) http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio/temp/IMGP2845.jpg (1.75MB) All the EXIF data should be relatively intact so I won't add any other technical information. Sorry about the subject matter. 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 ________________________________________ PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com ________________________________________ PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
