two noob questions

Ronaldo

TPF Noob!
Joined
Aug 28, 2010
Messages
85
Reaction score
13
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
1) Raw

What camera settings impact the raw image. I know it includes shutter speed and f-stop. I would also assume it includes ISO setting. Anything else? For example, noise reduction, active d-lighting, white balance, etc - - I would assume all of these do not affect the raw image. I have read through the manual, but this is still not all that clear to me: which settings affect the raw image?

2) Focusing

If you are shooting a static image (i.e., non-moving), do you need more than one focus point? With a static image, don't you just use the center point, pick what you want to focus on using that center point, hold the shutter down, then frame the shot, and release the shutter. I suppose depending on the distance to the desired object some parallax type problem could occur (when you rotate your body to re-frame the picture). But leaving that aside for the moment, why would you need more than one focus point (again, assuming a static picture).


thanks
 
1) Raw

What camera settings impact the raw image. I know it includes shutter speed and f-stop. I would also assume it includes ISO setting. Anything else? For example, noise reduction, active d-lighting, white balance, etc - - I would assume all of these do not affect the raw image. I have read through the manual, but this is still not all that clear to me: which settings affect the raw image?
Just the exposure triad, but your camera makers Raw converter will also be aware of things like white balance, but software like Photoshop won't.

2) Focusing

If you are shooting a static image (i.e., non-moving), do you need more than one focus point? With a static image, don't you just use the center point, pick what you want to focus on using that center point, hold the shutter down, then frame the shot, and release the shutter. I suppose depending on the distance to the desired object some parallax type problem could occur (when you rotate your body to re-frame the picture). But leaving that aside for the moment, why would you need more than one focus point (again, assuming a static picture).


thanks
With more than one focus point available you don't need to focus and recompose when your desired focal point isn't actually in the middle of the frame. Another consideration though is that there are 2 kinds of focus points: Cross-type and regular.
Cross-type focus points have both vertical and horizontal components and are more sensitive and accurate than regular focus which are only horizontal.
The Nikon D90 has 11 focus points but only the center point is a cross-typr focus point. The Nikon D300/D300s has 51 focus points, of which the central 15 are cross-type focus points.
 
1) Raw

What camera settings impact the raw image. I know it includes shutter speed and f-stop. I would also assume it includes ISO setting. Anything else? For example, noise reduction, active d-lighting, white balance, etc - - I would assume all of these do not affect the raw image. I have read through the manual, but this is still not all that clear to me: which settings affect the raw image?
Just the exposure triad, but your camera makers Raw converter will also be aware of things like white balance, but software like Photoshop won't.

2) Focusing

If you are shooting a static image (i.e., non-moving), do you need more than one focus point? With a static image, don't you just use the center point, pick what you want to focus on using that center point, hold the shutter down, then frame the shot, and release the shutter. I suppose depending on the distance to the desired object some parallax type problem could occur (when you rotate your body to re-frame the picture). But leaving that aside for the moment, why would you need more than one focus point (again, assuming a static picture).


thanks
With more than one focus point available you don't need to focus and recompose when your desired focal point isn't actually in the middle of the frame. Another consideration though is that there are 2 kinds of focus points: Cross-type and regular.
Cross-type focus points have both vertical and horizontal components and are more sensitive and accurate than regular focus which are only horizontal.
The Nikon D90 has 11 focus points but only the center point is a cross-typr focus point. The Nikon D300/D300s has 51 focus points, of which the central 15 are cross-type focus points.

Thanks! Just what I was looking for.

But what do you mean by the "Raw Converter"?? I would assume that this raw converter does not affect the raw image - - but only comes into play afterwards? I'm confused on this, and when this comes into play, and which image/file this raw converter would impact. But the bottom line on what affects the raw image is just the triad, and nothing else whatsoever, right?

I happen to have a D90, and mostly just focus using the center point (until now, anyway) - - so thanks for that explanation. So then experienced photographers can select which focus point to use through the lens (and use the appropriate camera focus-point selection dial) faster and more accurately then just using the center point and re-composing? (This must take a fair amount of practice.)
 
I do not subscribe to the idea that the white balance has no effect on the RAW image...most very hard-core shooters prefer to set what is called a Uni WHite Balance or a near-Uni white balance...these people state that the camera's demosaicing routines NEED a good white balance to convert the image from electrocal impuses into the Bayer array's "predicted" R-G-B values...these experts are people liek Thom Hogan and Illiah Borg...their opinion is that the white balance is actually quite important as a basis for the demosaicing of the electrical impulses INTO the basic RAW data's Red,Green,and Blue values. So...there is another point of view besides leaving the white balance in AUTO and hoping for the best.

Also, another thing that affects the RAW file is the sensor and its actual,specific color sensitivity. For example, Mr. Borg, author of a pretty well-respceted RAW converter, states that adding a CC 30 Magenta gelatin filter to the lens will bring the Nikon D2x's sensor into much better "alignment" (a simplified word for this discussion) with many light sources. Of course, we're talking about people who want critical color management here, for commercial and exacting work.

You can search YouTube for "uni-white balance" and probably still come up with a few video hits.
 
I do not subscribe to the idea that the white balance has no effect on the RAW image...most very hard-core shooters prefer to set what is called a Uni WHite Balance or a near-Uni white balance...these people state that the camera's demosaicing routines NEED a good white balance to convert the image from electrocal impuses into the Bayer array's "predicted" R-G-B values...these experts are people liek Thom Hogan and Illiah Borg...their opinion is that the white balance is actually quite important as a basis for the demosaicing of the electrical impulses INTO the basic RAW data's Red,Green,and Blue values. So...there is another point of view besides leaving the white balance in AUTO and hoping for the best.

Also, another thing that affects the RAW file is the sensor and its actual,specific color sensitivity. For example, Mr. Borg, author of a pretty well-respceted RAW converter, states that adding a CC 30 Magenta gelatin filter to the lens will bring the Nikon D2x's sensor into much better "alignment" (a simplified word for this discussion) with many light sources. Of course, we're talking about people who want critical color management here, for commercial and exacting work.

You can search YouTube for "uni-white balance" and probably still come up with a few video hits.

So to try and net this all out for the layman: You're stating that the WB setting on the camera does effect the Raw image?

Perhaps not to enough of an extent to impact the typical user. But for certain applications the effect can be significant?

I still have this question: Does the raw converter effect the raw image, or only something further down the processing stream from the raw image?
 
I do not subscribe to the idea that the white balance has no effect on the RAW image...most very hard-core shooters prefer to set what is called a Uni WHite Balance or a near-Uni white balance...these people state that the camera's demosaicing routines NEED a good white balance to convert the image from electrocal impuses into the Bayer array's "predicted" R-G-B values...these experts are people liek Thom Hogan and Illiah Borg...their opinion is that the white balance is actually quite important as a basis for the demosaicing of the electrical impulses INTO the basic RAW data's Red,Green,and Blue values. So...there is another point of view besides leaving the white balance in AUTO and hoping for the best.

Also, another thing that affects the RAW file is the sensor and its actual,specific color sensitivity. For example, Mr. Borg, author of a pretty well-respceted RAW converter, states that adding a CC 30 Magenta gelatin filter to the lens will bring the Nikon D2x's sensor into much better "alignment" (a simplified word for this discussion) with many light sources. Of course, we're talking about people who want critical color management here, for commercial and exacting work.

You can search YouTube for "uni-white balance" and probably still come up with a few video hits.


This is a long shot here, Derrel do you have or know of a D5000 Uni-WB file? I would think that a D90 file would be suitable. Did you ever try using Nikon Capture to set the Uni-WB?


I am experimenting with Uni-WB and ETTR if it has any worth to anybody I will post my results and conclusions.
 
Last edited:

Most reactions

Back
Top