«

"George Preddy" <> wrote in message
news:bscp8g$blf$...
>
> "Mark M" <> wrote in message
> news:S5mGb.22126$J77.11953@fed1read07...
>
> > > Greater point: SD9 yellow myth proven completely false. You were
> simply
> > > misinformed and under educated.
> >
> > Your posted cheese-skin pictures prove your statements false, George.
>
> Then you should have no problem producing them.

They're your images, George.
I'm not teh keeper of your images.

Re-post the little girl with the yellow skin and green ears, and then we'll
talk.

"Mark M" <> wrote in message
news:G8mGb.22127$J77.6339@fed1read07...

> > You can't ever get better than P&S quality without using RAW mode, the
> > formats available cannot handle film quality.
>
> False.

False what? How do you get a 36-bit color image out of a non-RAW mode?

You aren't understanding any of this, it's obvious you don't shoot RAW. I
wonder why not? (unusable Canon RAW software)

> When I convert RAW files from my Canon, all I need do is let it convert
> using the white balance I used at the time. If I have to choose a
different
> setting, it is usually only to accomodate an extremely difficult lighting
> situation. There is no need to try and un-do the skin-yellowing and other
> color-related disasters that your Sigma imposes on you.

The above workflow has nothing to do with yellow. It is a proper way to
adjust any camera's RAW images. It works with yellow because it works with
everything.

WB has nothing to do with RAW mode, other than it is never permanently set
in RAW. Kind of like saying a turkey is related to a fish in that a turkey
never swims.

And obviously WB settings can be carried over (or saved) from image to image
with SPP, if you so choose. How else would you be able to shoot a WB
reference image after taking a shot, assuming you missed the chance to set a
custom WB before the shot?

"George Preddy" <> wrote in message
news:bscpt8$bpm$...
>
> "Mark M" <> wrote in message
> news:G8mGb.22127$J77.6339@fed1read07...
>
> > > You can't ever get better than P&S quality without using RAW mode, the
> > > formats available cannot handle film quality.
> >
> > False.
>
> False what? How do you get a 36-bit color image out of a non-RAW mode?
>
> You aren't understanding any of this, it's obvious you don't shoot RAW. I
> wonder why not? (unusable Canon RAW software)
>
> > When I convert RAW files from my Canon, all I need do is let it convert
> > using the white balance I used at the time. If I have to choose a
> different
> > setting, it is usually only to accomodate an extremely difficult
lighting
> > situation. There is no need to try and un-do the skin-yellowing and
other
> > color-related disasters that your Sigma imposes on you.
>
> The above workflow has nothing to do with yellow. It is a proper way to
> adjust any camera's RAW images. It works with yellow because it works
with
> everything.
>
> WB has nothing to do with RAW mode, other than it is never permanently set
> in RAW.

Bingo.
WB adjustments are a key component to why people shoot in RAW, you dolt.
This is only one aspect of RAW's advantages, but it is mot certainly an
important aspect for tricky situation.

>Kind of like saying a turkey is related to a fish in that a turkey
> never swims.
>
> And obviously WB settings can be carried over (or saved) from image to
image
> with SPP, if you so choose. How else would you be able to shoot a WB
> reference image after taking a shot, assuming you missed the chance to set
a
> custom WB before the shot?

Let me know when you're making sense.

On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 15:47:06 +0900, "George Preddy"
<> wrote:


>> There's a much easier way:
>>
>> 1. Get a better DSLR.
>
>No such thing.

Of course there is. Almost any DSLR is better and does not require
post-processing to achieve proper colour rendition. By the way Steve,
does this SPP software run on your precious Amiga?

On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 22:10:22 +0900, "George Preddy"
<> wrote:


>Right, now RAW mode is unprofessional. Enjoy your P&S.

Steve, how come you use the 'professional' raw mode and still turn out
such utterly dire pictures?

"Mark M" <> wrote in message
news:vCmGb.22140$J77.9622@fed1read07...
>
> "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
> news:bscpt8$bpm$...
> >
> > "Mark M" <> wrote in message
> > news:G8mGb.22127$J77.6339@fed1read07...
> >
> > > > You can't ever get better than P&S quality without using RAW mode,
the
> > > > formats available cannot handle film quality.
> > >
> > > False.
> >
> > False what? How do you get a 36-bit color image out of a non-RAW mode?
> >
> > You aren't understanding any of this, it's obvious you don't shoot RAW.
I
> > wonder why not? (unusable Canon RAW software)
> >
> > > When I convert RAW files from my Canon, all I need do is let it
convert
> > > using the white balance I used at the time. If I have to choose a
> > different
> > > setting, it is usually only to accomodate an extremely difficult
> lighting
> > > situation. There is no need to try and un-do the skin-yellowing and
> other
> > > color-related disasters that your Sigma imposes on you.
> >
> > The above workflow has nothing to do with yellow. It is a proper way
to
> > adjust any camera's RAW images. It works with yellow because it works
> with
> > everything.
> >
> > WB has nothing to do with RAW mode, other than it is never permanently
set
> > in RAW.
>
> Bingo.
> WB adjustments are a key component to why people shoot in RAW, you dolt.

I just told you that.

> This is only one aspect of RAW's advantages, but it is mot certainly an
> important aspect for tricky situation.
>
> >Kind of like saying a turkey is related to a fish in that a turkey
> > never swims.
> >
> > And obviously WB settings can be carried over (or saved) from image to
> image
> > with SPP, if you so choose. How else would you be able to shoot a WB
> > reference image after taking a shot, assuming you missed the chance to
set
> a
> > custom WB before the shot?
>
> Let me know when you're making sense.

Obviously you don't shoot RAW or you would know that you can always shoot a
WB reference after the fact. If you don't care about pro quality, you
won't like the SDs.

"Mark M" <> wrote in message
news:4xmGb.22137$J77.1715@fed1read07...

> > > > Greater point: SD9 yellow myth proven completely false. You were
> > > > simply misinformed and under educated.
> > >
> > > Your posted cheese-skin pictures prove your statements false, George.
> >
> > Then you should have no problem producing them.
>
> They're your images, George.
> I'm not teh keeper of your images.
>
> Re-post the little girl with the yellow skin and green ears, and then
we'll
> talk.

You mean these?

http://www.pbase.com/image/24426797/original
http://www.pbase.com/image/24427133/original

Exposure before RAW adjustment here: http://www.pbase.com/image/24427342
which is why you should never, ever, ever, shoot JPEG/TIF. Both images have
sharpness settings of 0.0, and were taken with an $80 lens. I happen to
like her ears that "neon green cheese" color.

"George Preddy" <> wrote in message
news:bsdfn8$lm4$...
>
> "Mark M" <> wrote in message
> news:vCmGb.22140$J77.9622@fed1read07...
> >
> > "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
> > news:bscpt8$bpm$...
> > >
> > > "Mark M" <> wrote in message
> > > news:G8mGb.22127$J77.6339@fed1read07...
> > >
> > > > > You can't ever get better than P&S quality without using RAW mode,
> the
> > > > > formats available cannot handle film quality.
> > > >
> > > > False.
> > >
> > > False what? How do you get a 36-bit color image out of a non-RAW
mode?
> > >
> > > You aren't understanding any of this, it's obvious you don't shoot
RAW.
> I
> > > wonder why not? (unusable Canon RAW software)
> > >
> > > > When I convert RAW files from my Canon, all I need do is let it
> convert
> > > > using the white balance I used at the time. If I have to choose a
> > > different
> > > > setting, it is usually only to accomodate an extremely difficult
> > lighting
> > > > situation. There is no need to try and un-do the skin-yellowing and
> > other
> > > > color-related disasters that your Sigma imposes on you.
> > >
> > > The above workflow has nothing to do with yellow. It is a proper way
> to
> > > adjust any camera's RAW images. It works with yellow because it works
> > with
> > > everything.
> > >
> > > WB has nothing to do with RAW mode, other than it is never permanently
> set
> > > in RAW.
> >
> > Bingo.
> > WB adjustments are a key component to why people shoot in RAW, you dolt.
>
> I just told you that.
>
> > This is only one aspect of RAW's advantages, but it is mot certainly an
> > important aspect for tricky situation.
> >
> > >Kind of like saying a turkey is related to a fish in that a turkey
> > > never swims.
> > >
> > > And obviously WB settings can be carried over (or saved) from image to
> > image
> > > with SPP, if you so choose. How else would you be able to shoot a WB
> > > reference image after taking a shot, assuming you missed the chance to
> set
> > a
> > > custom WB before the shot?
> >
> > Let me know when you're making sense.
>
> Obviously you don't shoot RAW

Hmmm...
That's strange...if I don't shoot in RAW...
....Then what are these 62 gigabytes of files that end in .raw on my various
hard drives, and why is it that when I process them in phootoshop...I get
beautiful image files?
That's strange for someone like me, who (according to you), doesn't shoot
RAW.
or you would know that you can always shoot a

"George Preddy" <> wrote in message
news:bsdn2j$pnp$...
> "Mark M" <> wrote in message
> news:4xmGb.22137$J77.1715@fed1read07...
>
> > > > > Greater point: SD9 yellow myth proven completely false. You were
> > > > > simply misinformed and under educated.
> > > >
> > > > Your posted cheese-skin pictures prove your statements false,
George.
> > >
> > > Then you should have no problem producing them.
> >
> > They're your images, George.
> > I'm not teh keeper of your images.
> >
> > Re-post the little girl with the yellow skin and green ears, and then
> we'll
> > talk.
>
> You mean these?
>
> http://www.pbase.com/image/24426797/original
> http://www.pbase.com/image/24427133/original
>
> Exposure before RAW adjustment here: http://www.pbase.com/image/24427342
> which is why you should never, ever, ever, shoot JPEG/TIF. Both images
have
> sharpness settings of 0.0, and were taken with an $80 lens. I happen to
> like her ears that "neon green cheese" color.

Poor thing. I'm sure she's cute in real life.

"Mark M" <> wrote in message
news:YcuGb.22500$J77.7214@fed1read07...

> > You mean these?
> >
> > http://www.pbase.com/image/24426797/original
> > http://www.pbase.com/image/24427133/original
> >
> > Exposure before RAW adjustment here: http://www.pbase.com/image/24427342
> > which is why you should never, ever, ever, shoot JPEG/TIF. Both images
> have
> > sharpness settings of 0.0, and were taken with an $80 lens. I happen to
> > like her ears that "neon green cheese" color.
>
> Poor thing. I'm sure she's cute in real life.

Her ears really are that "neon green cheese" color.