Markus Maurer wrote: > I will shoot raw only, after scanning film for years processing > raw is peanuts :-)
No kidding! Especially compared to my CanoScan FS-4000. I love the quality of the scans, but it's *slllloooooowwwwww* at maximum resolution. > As far as my understanding regarding raw processing goes so far, > as much adjustments as possible with the exception of sharpening > and maybe denoising should be made in the converter and not later > in Photoshop to get the least quality loss and best result, is > that right? That's my understanding, and that's the way I work. Get the exposure as close to right as I can in the camera, then handle things like levels and brightness and white balance in the conversion. I generally hit them with a little sharpening during conversion, too. I don't often have occasion to need to denoise a digital capture. These days, Photoshop for me is mainly a very expensive and resource intensive way to resize and do final sharpening for the target medium, and print. I don't really do B&W conversions, either, but that's where I'd probably do them, due to the fancy things you can do with layers and blending modes. But, now that I think about it, IrfanView or the like could handle like 99% of my needs, now. > Is there a difference quality wise between Lightroom, Camera Raw and > Pentax Laboratory or other raw converters? There are, but I'm not expert on describing them. I tried the Lightroom beta and it was just way too slow. I'm not dropping US$300 based on /that/. I'm using an old version of Photoshop, so I haven't played with Camera Raw. I use the last version of Raw Shooter Essentials for shots from the *ist D and the Pentax software for K10D images. I'm not a big fan of the user interface for the Pentax software. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
