Re: Why many settings arguments don't matter with RAW
- From: "Ben Brugman" <Ben@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 23:44:50 +0200
The settings for the camera are sometimes used as
a starting point for the Raw software, most software
at least uses the White Balance, but Nikon Capture
uses allmost all (or all) settings.
This means a faster workflow for all pictures which
do not need any postprocessing. Losing this feature,
the 'camera' settings. Would make postprocessing
a need for a larger number of the pictures.
In General the settings should improve the pictures
on average. So Statistically less pictures need
postprocessing with the 'correct' settings. For all
the pictures that need other settings than at the time
of taking the picture Raw can be used.
Most 'Slide' people should be familliar that you can't
postprocess and so should use the right parameters
when taking the pictures. Now you have the best off
both worlds. Use the best parameters and still be able
to postprocess where you have 'goofed' / 'didn't have the time',
'the situation was to difficult to judge in the field'.
But different people use different workflows.
So I can imagine that some people ignore all the settings
and always start to work from scratch with the raw.
(I don't).
ben
"dtype" <drew.streib@xxxxxxxxx> schreef in bericht
news:1143740517.330033.110210@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I often see some religious discussions regarding certain camera
settings, and wonder why they go on at all in a world of RAW pictures.
(None of this post is relevant if you shoot in JPG.)
sRGB vs Adobe RGB: Since this conversion happens after interpretation
of the RAW image data, this is a function of your RAW converter, not
the camera. Does this setting have any implication at all outside of a
recommendation to your converstion software? Photo buffs far and wide
argue the merits of Adobe RGB as a camera settings, but from my
interpretation of the RAW image data, the color space of these images
is unique to each manufacturer, and any conversion to another color
space happens after/during the de-mosaicing step. This means that the
camera setting is useless when shooting in RAW.
Sharpness, Contrast, etc: This setting shouldn't mean anything when
shooting RAW, since this is something that is performed after
de-mosaicing. (I once posted images for comparison on a photo site, and
had people beat me up for not posting what my sharpness setting in the
camera was. They didn't seem to understand that this step wasn't
performed in the camera.)
Whitebalance: Same, no effect on RAW.
In fact, the only real "settings" that matter to a raw image are the
actual exposure (in as much as you can set exposure compenstion for an
image), and ISO/aperature/shutter speed.
I sort of wish that SLRs would simply remove these options when
shooting in RAW, so people stop having some notion that they do
anything.
Am I mistaking any of the features of my Camera, and how they are
applied to images?
-drew
.
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Why many settings arguments don't matter with RAW
- Next by Date: Re: Low end DSLR or High end P&S
- 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
|
