Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > best RAW converter to recover blown / overexposed highlights

Reply
Thread Tools

best RAW converter to recover blown / overexposed highlights

 
 
Mark M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-03-2004

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)...
> In message <h7M7d.12871$Hz.4901@fed1read04>,
> "Mark M" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >
> >"digiboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >news:(E-Mail Removed). com...
> >> Hi All
> >>
> >> As above really! What the best RAW converter to recover blown /
> >> overexposed highlights.
> >>
> >> Cheers

> >
> >C1 (Capture One) and Photoshop CS both do a great job at this.
> >It really is amazing what poorly metered shots you can rescue.

>
> It is also nice that if you know this headroom is there, you can use it
> to your advantage. The noise in the 10D due to amplification and
> readout is low up until ISO 400, so if you are in a situation where you
> have a very low contrast subject, and were going to shoot at ISO 100,
> you might shoot at ISO 400 instead and "overexpose" by two stops, to get
> two extra bits of precision in the image, with almost no extra noise.


Yes.
Sort of like pushing and pulling film...


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-04-2004
Mark M wrote:
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>In message <h7M7d.12871$Hz.4901@fed1read04>,
>>"Mark M" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"digiboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>news:(E-Mail Removed) e.com...
>>>
>>>>Hi All
>>>>
>>>>As above really! What the best RAW converter to recover blown /
>>>>overexposed highlights.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers
>>>
>>>C1 (Capture One) and Photoshop CS both do a great job at this.
>>>It really is amazing what poorly metered shots you can rescue.

>>
>>It is also nice that if you know this headroom is there, you can use it
>>to your advantage. The noise in the 10D due to amplification and
>>readout is low up until ISO 400, so if you are in a situation where you
>>have a very low contrast subject, and were going to shoot at ISO 100,
>>you might shoot at ISO 400 instead and "overexpose" by two stops, to get
>>two extra bits of precision in the image, with almost no extra noise.

>
>
> Yes.
> Sort of like pushing and pulling film...



Just sitting here with my current level of swag, that sounds exactly
like what one would do for film. And is exactly the reason why I
sometimes demand processing be done "straight up". If I'm going to
spend thousands of dollars and risk my life to capture an image, they
don't want to know what will happen if they dink around with it.

--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
MB
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-04-2004

"Mark M" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:eKN7d.12881$Hz.11213@fed1read04...
>
> "MB" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > The best RAW converter by a long way is Compact One by Phase One. It's

not
> > freeware but it does a far better job than anything else currently
> > available.
> > Regards

>
>
> Don't you mean "Capture One"??
>

Sorry! Yes I mean Capture One, I was typing in a hurry.


 
Reply With Quote
 
MB
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-04-2004

"John McWilliams" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:nOU7d.102946$wV.17254@attbi_s54...
> Mark M wrote:
> > "MB" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> >>The best RAW converter by a long way is Compact One by Phase One. It's

not
> >>freeware but it does a far better job than anything else currently
> >>available.

> >
> >
> > Don't you mean "Capture One"??
> >

> Could you define "best" a bit? And by what measures does it do anything
> "far better"?
>

Capture One's workflow is very logical and productive. It works in realtime
so you see your results onscreen. It is far more flexible when it comes to
adjusting colour temperatures, exposure etc. It also has very good file
management (although this is a feature I rarely use because I manage using
ACDSEE). To sum up - it takes a lot of the guesswork out of RAW processing,
put you in control and produces very good pictures.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-04-2004

"MB" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
>
> "John McWilliams" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:nOU7d.102946$wV.17254@attbi_s54...
> > Mark M wrote:
> > > "MB" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > >
> > >>The best RAW converter by a long way is Compact One by Phase One. It's

> not
> > >>freeware but it does a far better job than anything else currently
> > >>available.
> > >
> > >
> > > Don't you mean "Capture One"??
> > >

> > Could you define "best" a bit? And by what measures does it do anything
> > "far better"?
> >

> Capture One's workflow is very logical and productive. It works in

realtime
> so you see your results onscreen. It is far more flexible when it comes to
> adjusting colour temperatures, exposure etc. It also has very good file
> management (although this is a feature I rarely use because I manage using
> ACDSEE). To sum up - it takes a lot of the guesswork out of RAW

processing,
> put you in control and produces very good pictures.


Have you figured out a way to open RAW files from ACDSee directly into C1
using the edit button? I use this for phtoshop all the time, but haven't
been able to do this with RAW directly to C1. It would be great to have
this capability...


 
Reply With Quote
 
MB
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-04-2004
>
> Have you figured out a way to open RAW files from ACDSee directly into C1
> using the edit button? I use this for phtoshop all the time, but haven't
> been able to do this with RAW directly to C1. It would be great to have
> this capability...
>

I'm not quite sure if this is what you mean, but try this:

In Acdsee browse mode- click on the Edit tab;

Click on the drop down arrow next to the Editor icon in the new toolbar
(below the main toolbar);

Select Configure Editors;

Choose Add and negotiate to your C1 .exe file and click Open to select it.

Now when you select a RAW file in the Acdsee browser you can open it
directly into C1 by clicking the Edit button in the main Acdsee toolbar,
clicking the Editor dropdown box and choosing the new C1 icon.

Hope this helps - it will depend on your version of Acdsee and how you have
got it configured.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-04-2004

"MB" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
> >
> > Have you figured out a way to open RAW files from ACDSee directly into

C1
> > using the edit button? I use this for phtoshop all the time, but

haven't
> > been able to do this with RAW directly to C1. It would be great to have
> > this capability...
> >

> I'm not quite sure if this is what you mean, but try this:
>
> In Acdsee browse mode- click on the Edit tab;
>
> Click on the drop down arrow next to the Editor icon in the new toolbar
> (below the main toolbar);
>
> Select Configure Editors;
>
> Choose Add and negotiate to your C1 .exe file and click Open to select it.
>
> Now when you select a RAW file in the Acdsee browser you can open it
> directly into C1 by clicking the Edit button in the main Acdsee toolbar,
> clicking the Editor dropdown box and choosing the new C1 icon.
>
> Hope this helps - it will depend on your version of Acdsee and how you

have
> got it configured.


That's what I've done, but C1 seems to be unable to handle this.


 
Reply With Quote
 
digiboy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-04-2004
Capture One is outside my price range , Camera RAW is OK now it
supports my digicam, but I still find that it doesn't give me as much
control as I'd like.

The problem I would like to overcome (maybe like other people?) is
that for some images on cloudy days have a dynamic range well in
excess of what the sensor can capture. So you have a choice: reduce
exposure to capture more highlights and then have to pull up the
midtones, or you can accept some blow-out of the highlights and try to
recover them in software.

Any thoughts?



http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>. ..
> In message <(E-Mail Removed) >,
> (E-Mail Removed) (digiboy) wrote:
>
> >Hi All
> >
> >As above really! What the best RAW converter to recover blown /
> >overexposed highlights.

>
> Capture One and Photoshop CS are the best, in my experience, although
> the latest version of Adobe Camera RAW renders some grey highlight
> levels with a greenish tint.
>
> This probably has to do with a flaw in the way that it interprets
> information from the remaining channel(s) in pixels where one or more
> channels clip in the RAW data. Both programs treat these pixels as
> greyscale, but ACR 2.2 makes certain levels greenish. There really
> should be more user control to guide assumptions on clipped pixels.

 
Reply With Quote
 
JeffS
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-05-2004
On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 20:48:46 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>It is also nice that if you know this headroom is there, you can use it
>to your advantage. The noise in the 10D due to amplification and
>readout is low up until ISO 400, so if you are in a situation where you
>have a very low contrast subject, and were going to shoot at ISO 100,
>you might shoot at ISO 400 instead and "overexpose" by two stops, to get
>two extra bits of precision in the image, with almost no extra noise.


Hi,
I'm sorry but I have no idea what this means. I R Stoopid. Could someone
please elaborate on this concept a bit? I'm at a complete loss as to the
part about "2 extra bits of precision".

Thank You,

Jeff
-----
My Humble Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/jkseidel
 
Reply With Quote
 
JPS@no.komm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-07-2004
In message <(E-Mail Removed) >,
(E-Mail Removed) (digiboy) wrote:

>Capture One is outside my price range , Camera RAW is OK now it
>supports my digicam, but I still find that it doesn't give me as much
>control as I'd like.


>The problem I would like to overcome (maybe like other people?) is
>that for some images on cloudy days have a dynamic range well in
>excess of what the sensor can capture. So you have a choice: reduce
>exposure to capture more highlights and then have to pull up the
>midtones, or you can accept some blow-out of the highlights and try to
>recover them in software.


>Any thoughts?


How much headroom you have for the highlights would depend on the
camera. I have the Canon 10D, and if the camera is set to shoot JPEGs,
with daylight white balance, and normal contrast, you get clipping at
2.2 stops above what the camera meters as average grey, in all three
color channels. If you shoot RAW, the RAW data has about 3.7 stops in
the red channel, 3.2 stops in the green, and 3.1 stops in the blue
channel.

Generally speaking, with evaluative metering (averaged for entire frame
with slight weighting for the center), there are very few circumstances
in which the RAW data actually blows out. Exceptions are bright white
objects in the sun against a mostly shady background, highly saturated
flowers, and overcast skies that only compromise a minority fraction of
the frame.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 
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
Lost Windows login Password? 6 Ways to Recover and Recover windows Password jamesstevn General Computer Support 0 03-10-2010 03:18 AM
R1 and blown highlights Rich Digital Photography 10 12-01-2005 11:24 PM
Blown Highlights With Wedding Dress Photo Larry R Harrison Jr Digital Photography 78 10-01-2004 03:29 PM
Blown Out Highlights Question JeffS Digital Photography 19 08-16-2004 08:49 AM
Canon 10D Blown-Out Highlights street shooter Digital Photography 17 05-05-2004 12:10 PM



Advertisments