Re: Why many settings arguments don't matter with RAW
- From: Paul Furman <paul-@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 19:15:33 GMT
dtype wrote:
Whitebalance: Same, no effect on RAW.
I believe WB does effect the RAW capture. It's probably not real critical in most cases but it's like EC for different colors and will reduce or increase the data captured to have WB set correctly. This is why Nikon was trying to encrypt their WB although it's not that important, the RAW converter can guess the intended WB or an operator can chose it manually.
The exposure can also be adjusted in RAW conversion but it's not as good as shooting it correctly in the first place.
The jpeg contrast settings will effect the histogram used for judging exposure in the field, although it's arguably most useful to turn down contrast & saturation so that resembles RAW more closely.
Also, yes I do shoot RAW+jpeg to speed up download & the culling process, then I only download the best RAW files & keep many of the 'seconds' in basic jpeg just in case I come back & want a little different view or something (it happens). Often I won't even bother converting the raw because the jpeg is fine, later if I decide to print large, then it's worth fiddling with RAW.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why many settings arguments don't matter with RAW
- From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
- Re: Why many settings arguments don't matter with RAW
- From: dtype
- Re: Why many settings arguments don't matter with RAW
- References:
- Prev by Date: Today's Content Quality Rating For alt.fan.zygotes.plz.dont.burn.our.village.this.time.m8.we.will.pray.this.time.honest.k.thx
- Next by Date: Re: Why many settings arguments don't matter with RAW
- Previous by thread: Re: Why many settings arguments don't matter with RAW
- Next by thread: Re: Why many settings arguments don't matter with RAW
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|