Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > RAW Image Files - please explain

Reply
Thread Tools

RAW Image Files - please explain

 
 
Nostrobino
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2004

"Drifter" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
[ . . . ]
>
> read here
> http://www.photo.net/learn/raw/
>
> or even better
>

http://luminous-landscape.com/tutori...aw-files.shtml

Great stuff, Drifter! Hugely informative.

Many thanks!

N.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
eawckyegcy@yahoo.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2004
"PeterH" <reply to http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)> top-posted:

>>[search google]

>
> Of course I have already done this


Impossible, since if you had done what I suggested, or a reasonable
facsimile, your question would have been answered before you posted
it.

> but I always get far better replies from
> NGs like this because I figure I am "talking" to people who know what they
> are talking about and I can reply to if I don't understand.


You can read USENET (latencies on the order of hours or days) or you
can read the results from a google search (seconds, or less).

Why be deliberately inefficient?

> I'm amazed you even go to NGs yourself if your only reply to NGers is to
> search Google.


It must seem incredible to you, but it is nonetheless true: there are
issues mentioned here that are not yet present on the web, in
libraries, etc. I am here to read the responses of Martindale, JPS,
Karlsson, Browne, and others.

If you actually sit down and think about this, you'll realize I've
done you a favour. Of course, it is always possible that "you can
lead a nitwit to a library, but you can't make it think."(*)

Thankfully, I've seen no evidence of your nitwitness. Yet. Hopefully
your next question will be of the form:

"I read at this-and-that website such-and-such about some-stuff and I
just don't get it, and these other sites are no better. What's going
on?"

(*) http://humanities.byu.edu/elc/studen...setowater.html
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Drifter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2004
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:11:43 GMT, "Nostrobino" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>"Drifter" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>[ . . . ]
>>
>> read here
>> http://www.photo.net/learn/raw/
>>
>> or even better
>>

>http://luminous-landscape.com/tutori...aw-files.shtml
>
>Great stuff, Drifter! Hugely informative.
>
>Many thanks!
>
>N.


Not a problem.


Drifter
"I've been here, I've been there..."
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterH
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2004
Thanks for your insight - I very much look forward to you next posting to
see if I can guide you to a website that already has the answer.


<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> "PeterH" <reply to (E-Mail Removed)> top-posted:
>
> >>[search google]

> >
> > Of course I have already done this

>
> Impossible, since if you had done what I suggested, or a reasonable
> facsimile, your question would have been answered before you posted
> it.
>
> > but I always get far better replies from
> > NGs like this because I figure I am "talking" to people who know what

they
> > are talking about and I can reply to if I don't understand.

>
> You can read USENET (latencies on the order of hours or days) or you
> can read the results from a google search (seconds, or less).
>
> Why be deliberately inefficient?
>
> > I'm amazed you even go to NGs yourself if your only reply to NGers is to
> > search Google.

>
> It must seem incredible to you, but it is nonetheless true: there are
> issues mentioned here that are not yet present on the web, in
> libraries, etc. I am here to read the responses of Martindale, JPS,
> Karlsson, Browne, and others.
>
> If you actually sit down and think about this, you'll realize I've
> done you a favour. Of course, it is always possible that "you can
> lead a nitwit to a library, but you can't make it think."(*)
>
> Thankfully, I've seen no evidence of your nitwitness. Yet. Hopefully
> your next question will be of the form:
>
> "I read at this-and-that website such-and-such about some-stuff and I
> just don't get it, and these other sites are no better. What's going
> on?"
>
> (*)

http://humanities.byu.edu/elc/studen...setowater.html


 
Reply With Quote
 
Georgette Preddy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-13-2004
"PeterH" <reply to (E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<HYlSc.50153$(E-Mail Removed)>...

> I keep hearing about RAW convertors but I don't understand when the
> convertor is used and why.


A RAW file gives you lots of exposure latitude after the shot is
taken, among many other adjustments like lossless calibrated white
balance, so it is of primary interst to pro shooters. After the
adjustments are made, the RAW software can then output a high quality
image format like 16-bit TIF, but some RAW converters only support
highly compressed JPEG output.

If you think of a RAW file as a negative, a TIF as a print on
professional paper, and a JPEG as a print on drugstore paper, you'll
understand the basic considerations involved.

If you buy a Canon, Nikon, Kodak, or Fuji camera, you'll need to
budget about $500 for usuable pro-level RAW conversion software (think
of this as your digital darkroom). Sigma includes by far the best RAW
software available free with their DSLRs, it hails directly from
Foveon's $50K - $100K Studio Cameras, so it only works with Sigma's
Foveon based cameras. Adobe software also supports the Sigma/Foveon
RAW (.x3f) format exclusively, so if you want to use Photoshop as your
RAW package for another DSLR brand, you'll need to use a reverse
engineered third party Photoshop plugin that does not use your camera
manufacturer's patented RAW conversion routines.

To appreciate the value of RAW, you really have to use it. Since the
Sigma/Foveon software only works with their pro line of cameras, they
allow free downloading and use of the full package here, so you can
give a whirl by also downloading one of their demo RAW images:

http://www.sigma-photo.com/html/cameras_downloads.htm
http://www.sigma-photo.com/Images/sd9samples/Woman.X3F
 
Reply With Quote
 
Helge Olsen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-13-2004

"Georgette Preddy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) m...
[Snip]
> Foveon based cameras. Adobe software also supports the Sigma/Foveon
> RAW (.x3f) format exclusively, so if you want to use Photoshop as your
> RAW package for another DSLR brand, you'll need to use a reverse
> engineered third party Photoshop plugin that does not use your camera
> manufacturer's patented RAW conversion routines.
>


What are you smoking? Adobe Photoshop CS camera raw supports many different
camera RAW formats. Like my Fuji S5000

Ignore Preddy, "it" is not living on the same planet as the rest of us...

/Helge


 
Reply With Quote
 
Gisle Hannemyr
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-13-2004
"Helge Olsen" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> "Georgette Preddy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>> Foveon based cameras. Adobe software also supports the Sigma/Foveon
>> RAW (.x3f) format exclusively, so if you want to use Photoshop as your
>> RAW package for another DSLR brand, you'll need to use a reverse
>> engineered third party Photoshop plugin that does not use your camera
>> manufacturer's patented RAW conversion routines.


> What are you smoking? Adobe Photoshop CS camera raw supports many
> different camera RAW formats. Like my Fuji S5000


Please read again.

Ms. Preddy doesn't say what you think. She says is that for all the
other DSLR brands (except Sigma) that PS CS supports, the software
used in PS CS ACR comes from a third party (i.e. not from the OEM).
I don't know whether that is true for /all/ of them - but it is true
for all those DSLRs I am aware of.

But, contrary to what Preddy would like you to believe, it is not
a problem - it is a bonus.

You already have the OEM raw converter (it comes with the camera),
so having an /alternative/ in PS CS means that you can choose the
alternative that works best. For instance: For the Kodak DSLR I
use, ACR do a much better job than Kodak's original software.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
================================================== ======================
«To live outside the law, you must be honest.» (Bob Dylan)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Helge Olsen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-13-2004

"Gisle Hannemyr" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Helge Olsen" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> > What are you smoking? Adobe Photoshop CS camera raw supports many
> > different camera RAW formats. Like my Fuji S5000

>
> Please read again.
>
> Ms. Preddy doesn't say what you think. She says is that for all the
> other DSLR brands (except Sigma) that PS CS supports, the software
> used in PS CS ACR comes from a third party (i.e. not from the OEM).
> I don't know whether that is true for /all/ of them - but it is true
> for all those DSLRs I am aware of.
>

OK, that makes more sense than what mr/ms Preddy wrote. At first it looked
like "it" (the Preddiot) suggested that the only cameras Adobe supports is
the Sigma line. This is not true. If this was the case, Adobe wouldn't
include support for other cameras in ACR, be it manufacturer or reverse
engineered code.

> But, contrary to what Preddy would like you to believe, it is not
> a problem - it is a bonus.
>

I have to admit I get better results with the Fuji converter than with ACR,
but still, ACR is a nice thing.

> You already have the OEM raw converter (it comes with the camera),
> so having an /alternative/ in PS CS means that you can choose the
> alternative that works best. For instance: For the Kodak DSLR I
> use, ACR do a much better job than Kodak's original software.


I use ACR, Fuji Raw Converter EX, s7raw (freeware) and dcraw (freeware) with
my camera, but most of the time the Fuji converter gives the most pleasing
results. I just wish some of the reviewers who slaughtered the S5000 for
noise would have tried it
My camera has noise issues, but the Fuji converter prooves that a lot can be
done in the conversion process.

/Helge


 
Reply With Quote
 
Georgette Preddy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-14-2004
"Helge Olsen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> "Gisle Hannemyr" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > "Helge Olsen" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> > > What are you smoking? Adobe Photoshop CS camera raw supports many
> > > different camera RAW formats. Like my Fuji S5000

> >
> > Please read again.
> >
> > Ms. Preddy doesn't say what you think. She says is that for all the
> > other DSLR brands (except Sigma) that PS CS supports, the software
> > used in PS CS ACR comes from a third party (i.e. not from the OEM).
> > I don't know whether that is true for /all/ of them - but it is true
> > for all those DSLRs I am aware of.
> >

> OK, that makes more sense than what mr/ms Preddy wrote. At first it looked
> like "it" (the Preddiot) suggested that the only cameras Adobe supports is
> the Sigma line. This is not true. If this was the case, Adobe wouldn't
> include support for other cameras in ACR, be it manufacturer or reverse
> engineered code.


So... please ignore you.

> > But, contrary to what Preddy would like you to believe, it is not
> > a problem - it is a bonus.


If you like to have several RAW options, all truly terrible.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Meta_data from Raw Image files and *.psd files David Southwell Ruby 2 07-10-2008 11:50 AM
Meta_data from Raw Image files and *.psd files David Southwell Ruby 0 07-07-2008 05:12 PM
Please explain TIF And RAW Richard DeLuca Digital Photography 10 10-15-2006 06:48 PM
Please explain why B/W image has blue edges Jerry Digital Photography 1 02-09-2006 05:10 PM
Please explain raw photos to a newbie. Daz_n_Pat Digital Photography 39 04-10-2004 06:27 AM



Advertisments