Holy C&^$ there is a lot to learn-- questions about color space and image quality.
- Thread Starter expat42451
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2006
- Messages
- 18,743
- Reaction score
- 8,049
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic US
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
- Banned
- #32
Set your camera to jpg fine, sRGB, push the big button on the top then take it to Walmart for them to make prints.
clanthar
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2010
- Messages
- 767
- Reaction score
- 86
- Location
- Saint Louis MO
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
"Output dependent meaning--what type of format (i.e.JPEG,TIFF &C) that you plan to save the images in final form after processing or for what purpose they are destined?"
By output dependent I mean both the type and manner of output. I sharpen differently for print output as opposed to screen output and I sharpen differently for X size print versus Y size print. Because of this all of my edited files are saved without sharpening. There's a good book on this subject: Amazon.com: Real World Image Sharpening with Adobe Photoshop, Camera Raw, and Lightroom (2nd Edition) (9780321637550): Bruce Fraser, Jeff Schewe: Books
RAW converters are the software used to take a RAW file into an RGB format image. Photographers like the analogy of developing. A RAW file is a negative and an RGB TIFF or JPEG is a finished photo. RAW converters demosaic the RAW file, convert to an RGB digital color space, white balance the photo and allow operations like tone adjustment and CA removal. They've become increasingly more sophisticated; for example it's common now for the RAW converter to apply corrections for known flaws in specific lenses. Canon's DPP RAW converter automatically adjusts for known distortion in my Canon zoom lenses.
Each camera manufacturer supplies their own RAW converter for their camera. Otherwise we can use commercial RAW converters like Adobe's ACR, Lightroom, Apple's Aperture, Phase One's Capture One, etc. The bad news about this is the experience many of us have had of opening the same RAW file in say four of these at once and expecting each to take us to the same starting point -- alas. And that means some degree of processing variation is taking place behind the scenes. As a result we all have our favorite products. I'm partial to Canon's own DPP, Adobe's ACR, Phase One's C1 and a free option RAW Therapee.
"Observation-- maybe this is not true-- but you are when using JPEG images, actually placing the responsibility for the RAW conversion and a lot of the image post processing with the camera. Agreed that the new cameras are sophisticated as hell....but arent you almost always going to get a lot better results shooting RAW and doing conversion on an editing machine..."
Well there it is; exactly! The data captured by the camera sensor has to be processed into final form. There's a lot to do and a whole lot of sophisticated technology behind that. If you really want to peal back every layer of that technology, Helen here is probably your best bet as the top technologist. She's got the last precise detail straight. However (and I expect Helen will agree), in the end the algorithms built into the cameras are dumb blind. So if you really want the job done right you need a human being with eyes in their head. That human needs to be trained and better have a good grip on the technology, but the last word goes to the eyes. I don't "almost always" produce a result superior to what the camera's image processor yields -- you need to drop that adverb.
There's an 800 pound gorilla in the room now that has to be dealt with. I call it uncle Charlie's curse. Goes like this; Pamela is getting married. She and her mom are looking over bids from the wedding photographers. Dad walks in and takes a peek over their shoulder. Seeing the bottom line, he blurts out, "Hey uncle Charlie has nice camera, I'll bet he'd be happy to take the pictures!"
The consumer market juggernaut has a profound impact on all that we do. My Canon 5D has an auto white balance setting -- that's funny (doesn't apply to RAW). Camera's can't auto white balance. The algorithms don't work. All you have to do is look at the photos. However you can't discuss white balance in the consumer market and expect consumption to take place. As you move up into the pro-end equipment some of that stuff falls off (like built-in flash), but not all of it. Adobe keeps slipping it into their software for example; where are the dollars after all? So part of the effort that falls on all of us here is navigating past the flood of consumer cr*p that can easily drown us. I teach photo. In the classroom I took a broken consumer grade point and shoot camera and nailed it to the wall (pissed off plant operations) with a spike driven through the built-in flash. I tapped up a sign underneath it for my students offering to likewise correct their cameras. Another example: This thread has talked about camera JPEGs. JPEGs? My photos go from camera RAW files to TIFF or PSD files to archived TIFF files that I then print. JPEG has no place in that work flow.
Joe
By output dependent I mean both the type and manner of output. I sharpen differently for print output as opposed to screen output and I sharpen differently for X size print versus Y size print. Because of this all of my edited files are saved without sharpening. There's a good book on this subject: Amazon.com: Real World Image Sharpening with Adobe Photoshop, Camera Raw, and Lightroom (2nd Edition) (9780321637550): Bruce Fraser, Jeff Schewe: Books
RAW converters are the software used to take a RAW file into an RGB format image. Photographers like the analogy of developing. A RAW file is a negative and an RGB TIFF or JPEG is a finished photo. RAW converters demosaic the RAW file, convert to an RGB digital color space, white balance the photo and allow operations like tone adjustment and CA removal. They've become increasingly more sophisticated; for example it's common now for the RAW converter to apply corrections for known flaws in specific lenses. Canon's DPP RAW converter automatically adjusts for known distortion in my Canon zoom lenses.
Each camera manufacturer supplies their own RAW converter for their camera. Otherwise we can use commercial RAW converters like Adobe's ACR, Lightroom, Apple's Aperture, Phase One's Capture One, etc. The bad news about this is the experience many of us have had of opening the same RAW file in say four of these at once and expecting each to take us to the same starting point -- alas. And that means some degree of processing variation is taking place behind the scenes. As a result we all have our favorite products. I'm partial to Canon's own DPP, Adobe's ACR, Phase One's C1 and a free option RAW Therapee.
"Observation-- maybe this is not true-- but you are when using JPEG images, actually placing the responsibility for the RAW conversion and a lot of the image post processing with the camera. Agreed that the new cameras are sophisticated as hell....but arent you almost always going to get a lot better results shooting RAW and doing conversion on an editing machine..."
Well there it is; exactly! The data captured by the camera sensor has to be processed into final form. There's a lot to do and a whole lot of sophisticated technology behind that. If you really want to peal back every layer of that technology, Helen here is probably your best bet as the top technologist. She's got the last precise detail straight. However (and I expect Helen will agree), in the end the algorithms built into the cameras are dumb blind. So if you really want the job done right you need a human being with eyes in their head. That human needs to be trained and better have a good grip on the technology, but the last word goes to the eyes. I don't "almost always" produce a result superior to what the camera's image processor yields -- you need to drop that adverb.
There's an 800 pound gorilla in the room now that has to be dealt with. I call it uncle Charlie's curse. Goes like this; Pamela is getting married. She and her mom are looking over bids from the wedding photographers. Dad walks in and takes a peek over their shoulder. Seeing the bottom line, he blurts out, "Hey uncle Charlie has nice camera, I'll bet he'd be happy to take the pictures!"
The consumer market juggernaut has a profound impact on all that we do. My Canon 5D has an auto white balance setting -- that's funny (doesn't apply to RAW). Camera's can't auto white balance. The algorithms don't work. All you have to do is look at the photos. However you can't discuss white balance in the consumer market and expect consumption to take place. As you move up into the pro-end equipment some of that stuff falls off (like built-in flash), but not all of it. Adobe keeps slipping it into their software for example; where are the dollars after all? So part of the effort that falls on all of us here is navigating past the flood of consumer cr*p that can easily drown us. I teach photo. In the classroom I took a broken consumer grade point and shoot camera and nailed it to the wall (pissed off plant operations) with a spike driven through the built-in flash. I tapped up a sign underneath it for my students offering to likewise correct their cameras. Another example: This thread has talked about camera JPEGs. JPEGs? My photos go from camera RAW files to TIFF or PSD files to archived TIFF files that I then print. JPEG has no place in that work flow.
Joe
expat42451
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 62
- Reaction score
- 2
- Location
- MObile Alabama
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
- Thread Starter 🔹
- #34
Joe
I think part of my ignorance here is in having had no idea of what "workflow" was/is about. There was nothing like any of this in my film days because I never did this commercially, only for a hobby. I know that when I decided to get back into the hobby, the first time in a photo shop here, that I picked up one of the new cameras--I certainly did not have any idea of what was/is involved. That having been said for me the last few weeks have been a delight in that I have been learning a hell of a lot, primarily due to you and Helen The Traveler and a lot of others here on the forum.....
The contrast certainly may be painted by Sabrina O's inquiry and Travelers' very well thought out and tongue in cheek reply. What this in a way covers is that 99% of us do not understand what you as professionals do to create your art. We do not because the result of your art is everywhere --on the internet definitely but it has been "in your face" for a long time-- how many when looking at a photo shoot in a magazine like National Geographic or when looking at a particularly delectable young woman on the cover of a fashion magazine (two vastly different branches of the same art to be sure) will ever stop and really look at the photo and ever wonder what actually went into the creation that one is looking at?? I can remember waiting (I know I am damn old
)with a LOT of anticipation for the monthly National Geographic to arrive. That was before and around the time that my father bought our first teevee (the world in BLACK AND WHITE??) and there simply was not much visual stimulation around then compared to now.
So the technology is changing the accessibility of art into something thats instant gratification...... you do not have to wait for the monthly Geographic or go to a museum to look at paintings or go to a gallery to look at photos. Pick up any hand held device and there is a lot of stimulation at that instant. Another way to put this is that the patron does not have to invest the same amount of effort to see and appreciate the art than he once did. Causes a change in perspective I guarantee it. Plus Uncle Charlie has hands on technology that 20 years ago was unheard of, the niece and future husband ask him to shoot the wedding and then cant figure out why it looks like c*&$. Simple. What you see just because its comparatively easy now to have access to it, does not mean that it is easy to create. The wall that came down by the patron's not having to wait for the next Geographic or put forth the effort to actually get out and spend time to go to a gallery or museum has changed the patrons' view. It has not changed one whit the effort the artist puts forth (albeit with a totally different technology) to create. And Pamela cant understand why her wedding photos have an orange or bluish hue when so much of what she sees around her does not...........she hasnt spoken to Uncle Charlie for years either rest assured....
You and many others here make the case more and more to both shoot and archive in something other than JPEG. As for me, what I would like to do ( and I dont know how this will fit in to some upcoming travel plans that I have) is to either spend time with a pro or at least get in to a course somewhere. I read prolifically and have a pile of books right now, most of them dealing with composition. Thanks very much for the book suggestion-- I also think that in addition to my trying to understand what goes on between the photographers' eye and the subject matter, that I need to learn more about everything after the CCD and what is and is not possible. Being an old geek I can see the possibility of getting immersed in the technology....I also like your approach to correcting students cameras ! You and others have in the past few weeks opened to me a facet of the hobby I did not know existed...I will probably never be remotely close in ability to what so many of you here are capable of --but my knowing what's after pressing the big button on top will make me a lot better at what I do. The camera I bought is so many worlds past my ability to use it to even close to its potential.....well thats another story and subject for another thread LOL.
Expat
I think part of my ignorance here is in having had no idea of what "workflow" was/is about. There was nothing like any of this in my film days because I never did this commercially, only for a hobby. I know that when I decided to get back into the hobby, the first time in a photo shop here, that I picked up one of the new cameras--I certainly did not have any idea of what was/is involved. That having been said for me the last few weeks have been a delight in that I have been learning a hell of a lot, primarily due to you and Helen The Traveler and a lot of others here on the forum.....
The contrast certainly may be painted by Sabrina O's inquiry and Travelers' very well thought out and tongue in cheek reply. What this in a way covers is that 99% of us do not understand what you as professionals do to create your art. We do not because the result of your art is everywhere --on the internet definitely but it has been "in your face" for a long time-- how many when looking at a photo shoot in a magazine like National Geographic or when looking at a particularly delectable young woman on the cover of a fashion magazine (two vastly different branches of the same art to be sure) will ever stop and really look at the photo and ever wonder what actually went into the creation that one is looking at?? I can remember waiting (I know I am damn old
)with a LOT of anticipation for the monthly National Geographic to arrive. That was before and around the time that my father bought our first teevee (the world in BLACK AND WHITE??) and there simply was not much visual stimulation around then compared to now. So the technology is changing the accessibility of art into something thats instant gratification...... you do not have to wait for the monthly Geographic or go to a museum to look at paintings or go to a gallery to look at photos. Pick up any hand held device and there is a lot of stimulation at that instant. Another way to put this is that the patron does not have to invest the same amount of effort to see and appreciate the art than he once did. Causes a change in perspective I guarantee it. Plus Uncle Charlie has hands on technology that 20 years ago was unheard of, the niece and future husband ask him to shoot the wedding and then cant figure out why it looks like c*&$. Simple. What you see just because its comparatively easy now to have access to it, does not mean that it is easy to create. The wall that came down by the patron's not having to wait for the next Geographic or put forth the effort to actually get out and spend time to go to a gallery or museum has changed the patrons' view. It has not changed one whit the effort the artist puts forth (albeit with a totally different technology) to create. And Pamela cant understand why her wedding photos have an orange or bluish hue when so much of what she sees around her does not...........she hasnt spoken to Uncle Charlie for years either rest assured....
You and many others here make the case more and more to both shoot and archive in something other than JPEG. As for me, what I would like to do ( and I dont know how this will fit in to some upcoming travel plans that I have) is to either spend time with a pro or at least get in to a course somewhere. I read prolifically and have a pile of books right now, most of them dealing with composition. Thanks very much for the book suggestion-- I also think that in addition to my trying to understand what goes on between the photographers' eye and the subject matter, that I need to learn more about everything after the CCD and what is and is not possible. Being an old geek I can see the possibility of getting immersed in the technology....I also like your approach to correcting students cameras ! You and others have in the past few weeks opened to me a facet of the hobby I did not know existed...I will probably never be remotely close in ability to what so many of you here are capable of --but my knowing what's after pressing the big button on top will make me a lot better at what I do. The camera I bought is so many worlds past my ability to use it to even close to its potential.....well thats another story and subject for another thread LOL.
Expat
Bitter Jeweler
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Messages
- 12,983
- Reaction score
- 5,003
- Location
- Cleveland, Ohio
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Expat, Reading up on composition is the best thing you are doing right now. We'll see what others say, but I think that is the most important part of the workflow. Interesting subjects, presented in an interesting manner! You are delving far too deeply into the tech right now. Get out there and start shooting, learn your camera, nail your exposures. Develope the artistic side of the process, then as you get better at that, deal with the technical (developing) of your images. Often what you will need to do after the fact depends more on how well you captured it, and your creative intent. In the begining you will be simply boosting saturation, contrast, sharpening, and playing with the exposure (if it was off). Being so concerned with output right now seems to not make sense.
Let's see some images!
Let's see some images!
clanthar
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2010
- Messages
- 767
- Reaction score
- 86
- Location
- Saint Louis MO
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Bitter has a good point. The technology is important but it's also a trap. It's a paradox that recent high-tech has both made the product so much more accessible and at the same time so much further out of reach. I talk to my classes about getting the "photographer's disease" and usually try and find a male member of the class to pick on as an example -- it's typically a "male" problem. What does it say about someone who gets so deeply absorbed in photo's high-tech that they no longer have time to make photographs, or they're not willing to accept a less than perfect photo? I deride P&S camera's built-in flash units and make fun of the horrors they produce, but I have one and I do use it. I'm not going to miss a chance at a photo of my new niece (last month) because I'm a pro who only uses off camera flash and I didn't bring the gear along -- screw that. My P&S with the built-in flash goes everywhere in my pocket and I will use it to make built-in flash, sRGB JPEGs when it's appropriate -- and I will cherish those photos. Never stop making photos, learn the tech as you go.
Joe
Joe
expat42451
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 62
- Reaction score
- 2
- Location
- MObile Alabama
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
- Thread Starter 🔹
- #37
I just realized I ve spent more time on this forum than on any other in my life....LOL.
Bitter Jewler and Clanthar-- I agree. Being a teccie its easy to get lost in it. Whats different here is --- and I may be wrong.... but it is for me SO easy to shoot a lot of photos and then try to make up for crappy technique afterwards and I do NOT want to be a member of that camp.
Since my last post have been downtown on the bicycle with the kit. A bike is a great way to travel (except here, where people try to run over cyclists.....Mobile has the highest cyclist fatality rate of anywhere in the state and I think anywhere in the USA) except I think a bike is too fast. Better to walk and tote the kit. The fanny pack is good but with the addition of the 70-300 its gotten heavier. I think Im going to get a better strap for the camera and a belt pouch for the 70-300 and start walking everywhere I go. I can carry SHDC cards and the spare battery in my pocket and with the long telephoto and the 18-105 I probably dont need anything else. However I say that and....after I got back I noticed one of the Easter Lillies (sp) starting a bloom on the porch. Changed to the 50MM prime and shot that. then a friend comes along with a brand new Root Beer colored Raleigh Flyer so I shot that. I took probably 65 shots today. I will have a few online here later tonight I hope. I still am having trouble getting what I see in my minds' eye on film though. Lets see...press the big button on top right?
Expat
Bitter Jewler and Clanthar-- I agree. Being a teccie its easy to get lost in it. Whats different here is --- and I may be wrong.... but it is for me SO easy to shoot a lot of photos and then try to make up for crappy technique afterwards and I do NOT want to be a member of that camp.
Since my last post have been downtown on the bicycle with the kit. A bike is a great way to travel (except here, where people try to run over cyclists.....Mobile has the highest cyclist fatality rate of anywhere in the state and I think anywhere in the USA) except I think a bike is too fast. Better to walk and tote the kit. The fanny pack is good but with the addition of the 70-300 its gotten heavier. I think Im going to get a better strap for the camera and a belt pouch for the 70-300 and start walking everywhere I go. I can carry SHDC cards and the spare battery in my pocket and with the long telephoto and the 18-105 I probably dont need anything else. However I say that and....after I got back I noticed one of the Easter Lillies (sp) starting a bloom on the porch. Changed to the 50MM prime and shot that. then a friend comes along with a brand new Root Beer colored Raleigh Flyer so I shot that. I took probably 65 shots today. I will have a few online here later tonight I hope. I still am having trouble getting what I see in my minds' eye on film though. Lets see...press the big button on top right?
Expat
expat42451
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 62
- Reaction score
- 2
- Location
- MObile Alabama
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
- Thread Starter 🔹
- #38
"The bad news about this is the experience many of us have had of opening the same RAW file in say four of these at once and expecting each to take us to the same starting point -- alas."
Jesus Clanthar you are right !! I just opened several of the shots I made today in UFRaw (the RAW converter plugin for GIMP). Before they looked pretty good using ViewNX2, the Nikon 'ware. In UFRaw they look like crap! Jesus.
Jesus Clanthar you are right !! I just opened several of the shots I made today in UFRaw (the RAW converter plugin for GIMP). Before they looked pretty good using ViewNX2, the Nikon 'ware. In UFRaw they look like crap! Jesus.
Bitter Jeweler
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Messages
- 12,983
- Reaction score
- 5,003
- Location
- Cleveland, Ohio
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Can't wait to see what you got!
expat42451
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 62
- Reaction score
- 2
- Location
- MObile Alabama
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
- Thread Starter 🔹
- #40
Thanks!!! Its there........what sux is when you chimp and miss a shot like I did today.....huge crow flew in UNDER the porch chased by two sparrows for nest robbing. Im sitting there with the 18-108 on the camera, snout in my lap chimping the bike photos, this damn HUGE crow lands on the vertical chain for one of the hanging basket --he and I stare at each other for 5 seconds, he spreads his wings and booms off the way he came............
clanthar
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2010
- Messages
- 767
- Reaction score
- 86
- Location
- Saint Louis MO
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Yep, better show Bitter some photos before he gets impatient.
I had that very thing (quote above) happen today. I try and take photos every day. Today my wife had me in the garden with a shovel -- took a break and grabbed some snaps of her first rose blooms. The color in her roses is tough as it walks the edge of our color spaces. (Camera image processor didn't stand a chance). I used my walk-around camera (Samsung TL-500) which does save RAW files. When I opened the file in Adobe ACR I ran into trouble as ACR didn't want to make the color space assignment without posterizing the rose. So I opened the file in RAW Therapee -- got a completely different result and was able to process out a nice shot for my better half:
Joe
expat42451
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 62
- Reaction score
- 2
- Location
- MObile Alabama
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
- Thread Starter 🔹
- #42
Jesus that is beautiful !! Just proves its not the camera its the operator !
I was really shocked when I saw my results in UF RAW. Completely different photo. So you actually did the conversion to JPEG from RAW with another engine with completely different results........I have not tried using UF RAW --or for that matter GIMP either. UF Raw decided it was the default RAW process on this machine when I installed it-- and it has some editing tools but I ve not looked at them very close. Again back to workflow--I am finding out both from your picture and my own horror how different RAW converters can be.....
And of course considering the possibility of buying the Nikon sister program to ViewNX2--- but I dont think I am going to do this for a while, rather learn to use what I have --camera first and post processing second.
Expat
I was really shocked when I saw my results in UF RAW. Completely different photo. So you actually did the conversion to JPEG from RAW with another engine with completely different results........I have not tried using UF RAW --or for that matter GIMP either. UF Raw decided it was the default RAW process on this machine when I installed it-- and it has some editing tools but I ve not looked at them very close. Again back to workflow--I am finding out both from your picture and my own horror how different RAW converters can be.....
And of course considering the possibility of buying the Nikon sister program to ViewNX2--- but I dont think I am going to do this for a while, rather learn to use what I have --camera first and post processing second.
Expat
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2006
- Messages
- 18,743
- Reaction score
- 8,049
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic US
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
- Banned
- #43
How about posting that file.
expat42451
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 62
- Reaction score
- 2
- Location
- MObile Alabama
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
- Thread Starter 🔹
- #44
I wouldnt mind trying it in ViewNX and UF RAW either
clanthar
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2010
- Messages
- 767
- Reaction score
- 86
- Location
- Saint Louis MO
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
That's an 11mb RAW file, but sure: here's a direct link: http://photojoes.org/SAM_0417.dng
Take Care,
Joe
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account on our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
Similar threads
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/42/42062-136a63ad7d0bd740e99ca1fc477f214c.jpg?1734176463)
