RAW images

[Big Mike]

Either way, I just put the camera in RAW and shot a few shots. Then when
I changed the WB and shot 3 more shots, they were completely different.

Are you just comparing them on the camera's LCD?

As I said, even RAW files have an 'As-shot' WB...and when you look at the file on the camera...you are seeing the image with the 'as shot' setting. Actually, when you look at a shot on the camera from a RAW file...you are looking at a small JPEG image that it embedded into the RAW file. The way I understand it...RAW is not really an image at all...just digital data 1100111000011 etc. This is why you need a RAW converting software (like A.C.R.) before you can open/import the 'image' into any image software like photoshop.

 

[castrol]

Are you just comparing them on the camera's LCD?

As I said, even RAW files have an 'As-shot' WB...and when you look at the file on the camera...you are seeing the image with the 'as shot' setting. Actually, when you look at a shot on the camera from a RAW file...you are looking at a small JPEG image that it embedded into the RAW file. The way I understand it...RAW is not really an image at all...just digital data 1100111000011 etc. This is why you need a RAW converting software (like A.C.R.) before you can open/import the 'image' into any image software like photoshop.

BAM. And there it is. Just like usual... hits like a ton of bricks. Yes, I was using
the LCD. No one prior had ever made mention of anything about that.
Okay, things are making more sense now. Thanks for your time.

 

[bazza]

You need the right program to get the raw photos using a USB cable.

Thats good news, i was under the impression i couldn't use my usb cable.. I'll look at all the programs that came with my camera..

Thanks again..

 

[markc]

The way I understand it...RAW is not really an image at all...just digital data 1100111000011 etc.

To be picky, that's all any digital file is. The reason RAW is funky is that it stores it a bit differently than the common file formats, but even JPG and GIF are rather different from each other. RAW is just more so. It's more obvious because you often have to add RAW compatibility with either a plug-in or use dedicated software for it; the manufacturers haven't decided on a single format for RAW.

 

[Alex_B]

BAM. And there it is. Just like usual... hits like a ton of bricks. Yes, I was using
the LCD. No one prior had ever made mention of anything about that.
Okay, things are making more sense now. Thanks for your time.

and even if you do not use your camera LCD, when you look at a raw image through a RAW converter, then the data is already interpreted by the converter based on the settings (as WB and all that) which are saved alongside the pure pixel/sensor-data.

so file-wise RAW is RAW, but visualisation-wise it is never raw but interpreted. but since in the file you have the RAW data, you can RE-interpret it (such as in setting a new white balance)
.

you would not want to look at a linear raw visualisation, it looks very flat, almost zero contrast, and everything is off. but once calibrated/interpreted according to the sensor cahracteristics and the settings made, it becomes the nice image you like to look at

 

[TwoOlives]

Also what program is the best for altering the photo..

Just another suggestion on that end - look at Adobe Lightroom. Its free from Adobe while in beta (http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom/) and supports RAW. I've had pretty good luck using it with my 400D (at least in my limited experience and expectations). Probably more importantly, I've read on other forums that it does pretty good RAW sharpening - closer to what you'll get in-camera.

 

[Chili]

TwoOlives, I have no editing software on my computer now. If I download the free Adobe Lightroom will it work or does it need a program to work with? What is it? Seeing that I don't have anything now I cant shoot RAW and would like to.