RAW question.....

dEARlEADER · Apr 24, 2008

Big Mike... I am digging what you are saying... but I think I'm more of a camera fiddler than a P.S. fiddler... I really like having a better relationship with the camera and I try to preserve the integrity of the pictures I take in the moment... I might take pictures after work for a couple hours each night... then download them a few days later... by then I will have forgotton how green the grass was etc... plus I will have hundreds of picture of which groups of them may have been shot at say +1sharpness... but then another group that was shot will flat sharpness and no colour saturation... so a generic setting on import wouldn't work for me...

Say I'm taking a picture of a subject in a field... and the colour of the grass is important to me... I will keep shooting and adjusting white balance until I get that colour right by comparing my display pic with the actual grass... (hobbyists have time for this... we are nerds.... not pro's...lol)

get what I'm saying??

Big Mike · Apr 24, 2008

I get what you are saying.

Maybe your solution is to shoot in JPEG and be happy with that. Or shoot in RAW+JPEG.

dEARlEADER · Apr 24, 2008

ya ... the D60 only allows RAW + Basic JPG (not fine).... I'm not really into making that sacrifice either.... plus storing dupe images is a hassle....

I just need something that imports all camera settings with the RAW file...

Is a completely RAW file just the image as the sensor see's it through the lens without the processing of white balance, sharpness, saturation??

asfixiate · Apr 24, 2008

The RAW image is how the sensor sees it using the settings you used to take the picture.

Once on the camera only difference between the two and the final final result is the JPG achieved from the camera used the camera to process and the JPG achieved from the software used the software.

In the end you'd give your customer a .jpg I'm assuming so that's what I'm referring to.

dEARlEADER · Apr 24, 2008

asfixiate said:
The RAW image is how the sensor sees it using the settings you used to take the picture.

Once on the camera only difference between the two and the final final result is the JPG achieved from the camera used the camera to process and the JPG achieved from the software used the software.

In the end you'd give your customer a .jpg I'm assuming so that's what I'm referring to.

If this is true... then why do some people say only things like w.b. ... not colour saturation, sharpness get imported with RAW file?

Also... let's say i increase my onboard colour saturation... and I shot something red.... and I end up oversaturating and Clip the red... can I not undo that clipping by reverting to the original RAW file?

asfixiate · Apr 24, 2008

The original RAW is what the shot was shot at with whatever camera settings were used. YOu can modify everything still and make it look fine but its a modification and not the same result as if you shot it correctly to begin with.

A shot that was shot correctly to begin will IMO appear better than a shot that was shot incorrectly modified to be shot correct.

dEARlEADER · Apr 24, 2008

asfixiate said:
The original RAW is what the shot was shot at with whatever camera settings were used. YOu can modify everything still and make it look fine but its a modification and not the same result as if you shot it correctly to begin with.

Got it....:thumbup:

Sure seems there's a lot a variation of opinion on the facts of RAW...

asfixiate · Apr 24, 2008

I looked up the actual difference. i wasn't looking for what is better but I looked at the actual Scientific facts. Same reason why at my company we'd scan something in greyscale when black n white does not represent the image correctly.

We could scan something like crap and modify it to be presentable but to my eyes it'd look modified as opposed to if it was scanned correctly to begin with. I'm anal retentive and have a good attention to detail though.

I'm leaving work early today because I can. I'll be back tomorrow. I don't want you to think I'm ignoring.

I could be wrong in my assessments but that's why it helps I'm not the only member here.

JerryPH · Apr 24, 2008

Speaking as a Nikon user using CaptureNX and RAW. By default, settings like sharpness, contrast, saturation are applied to the RAW file but you can both change and turn off the settings as you wish.

WB settings are set as they are in camera as well, however they are easily changed if they are not spot on, unlike the battle one would have to do the same thing in JPG.

I believe Adobe Camera RAW doesn't have the abilities to access this RAW information the same manner, and just leaves them turned on and doesn't offer any direct way like CaptureNX to make specific adjustments, but you can do these changes later as in post process.

So... it depends on the software you use.

Mav · Apr 24, 2008

I never have to battle to correct WB issues on JPEGs, and sometimes I can be off by quite a bit. That's a matter of having good software too.

dEARlEADER · Apr 24, 2008

Jerry...

If you import them using NX you can then open them in P.S. and retain all of the camera characteristics? or you import them using NX and see the picture as the by the camera settings but if you open the file with another editor you lose that ability...

I have capture NX... but use Picasa for import and quick edit... I also have Elements6 and The Gimp....

JerryPH · Apr 24, 2008

I suppose the best way to "set in stone" how you want the settings to be available to other editing programs is to make sure you have the settings as you like in CaptureNX and export to TIFF. Then work with near any good editing app you want that supports it.

CaptureNX is the only application that I am aware of that can access that proprietary info in a Nikon NEF (raw) file directly.

A fast way to get to where you want to be is to create a settings file that corrects all the files to the way I want and then simply batch export them to TIFF... its quite fast.

Then if I want to do anything more fancy, I use PS CS3. The latest iteration of Picasa reads Nikon NEF files, but cannot access the same settings that NX does. I presume it can read and work with TIFF files that are lossless?

Elements6 definately works with TIFF, that I am sure of... I know nothing about Gimp.

dEARlEADER · Apr 25, 2008

JerryPH said:
I suppose the best way to "set in stone" how you want the settings to be available to other editing programs is to make sure you have the settings as you like in CaptureNX and export to TIFF. Then work with near any good editing app you want that supports it.

CaptureNX is the only application that I am aware of that can access that proprietary info in a Nikon NEF (raw) file directly.

A fast way to get to where you want to be is to create a settings file that corrects all the files to the way I want and then simply batch export them to TIFF... its quite fast.

Then if I want to do anything more fancy, I use PS CS3. The latest iteration of Picasa reads Nikon NEF files, but cannot access the same settings that NX does. I presume it can read and work with TIFF files that are lossless?

Elements6 definately works with TIFF, that I am sure of... I know nothing about Gimp.

thank you for your time

NateS · Apr 25, 2008

dEARlEADER said:
thank you for your time

Just to clarify, Gimp works with TIFF files as well. I always use NX to edit the RAW as needed and I also do as Jerry say's about the batch process. I usually open 1 image in a set and make all the adjustments that I want (maybe 5 minutes worth), then I save the settings file and apply that to all of the files of that "bunch". Then, if there is specific files (like with eyes showing), then I'll open that file and make a quick USM on the eyes and then to a batch covert with all of them to JPG or TIFF. Then I can continue with Gimp if needed.

NX does a great job of showing exactly what my camera did for me to start with as a base. That's about 95% of the reason that I use NX over other raw editors.