Raw Editing Software Preferences

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by LuvLatins, Nov 30, 2006.

  1. LuvLatins

    LuvLatins Guest

    Hello gang.

    OK, I finally started to shoot in RAW format with my D200. I
    installed Photoshop CS and upgraded to the Raw Adobe 3.6 plugin. I
    opened the file in Photoshop fine but I also have a copy of Bibble and
    after installing this it takes over in photoshop now.

    Now when I open the file the Bibble Plugin for Photoshop opens, which
    one is better in your opinion, Adobes or Bibbles ? Was thinking of
    leaving the plug in out of Adobe that way, I can open files in
    Photoshop with its Raw but still use Bibble if I want. Neither of
    these (Adobe or Bibble) can save in NEF, only Capture from Nikon
    appears to be able to do that. So now three choices, Adobe, Bibble
    and Nikon Capture. What do most of you prefer to use ? Did I miss
    any that I should look at ?

    Thanks
    LuvLatins, Nov 30, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. LuvLatins <> wrote:
    > Hello gang.
    >
    > OK, I finally started to shoot in RAW format with my D200. I
    > installed Photoshop CS and upgraded to the Raw Adobe 3.6 plugin. I
    > opened the file in Photoshop fine but I also have a copy of Bibble and
    > after installing this it takes over in photoshop now.
    >
    > Now when I open the file the Bibble Plugin for Photoshop opens, which
    > one is better in your opinion, Adobes or Bibbles ? Was thinking of
    > leaving the plug in out of Adobe that way, I can open files in
    > Photoshop with its Raw but still use Bibble if I want. Neither of
    > these (Adobe or Bibble) can save in NEF, only Capture from Nikon
    > appears to be able to do that. So now three choices, Adobe, Bibble
    > and Nikon Capture. What do most of you prefer to use ? Did I miss
    > any that I should look at ?


    I have never used Bibble, but ACR works great for me. As for writing to the
    NEF, only metadata information like whitebalance, and exposure selections will
    change anyway, not the raw data itself. In short, you really don't want to be
    writing to your RAW files. If you can't easily manage the XMP sidecar files
    created when you make metadata changes [during RAW conversion], then consider
    converting to DNG format first, as your metadata changes will be stored in the
    DNG file.

    Also note that the D200 uses encrypted white balance metadata, so Adobe ACR
    won't be able to read it. I simply saved WhiteBalance Auto as my defaults in
    ACR and then modify it from there.

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Nov 30, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. LuvLatins

    cjcampbell Guest

    LuvLatins wrote:
    > Hello gang.
    >
    > OK, I finally started to shoot in RAW format with my D200. I
    > installed Photoshop CS and upgraded to the Raw Adobe 3.6 plugin. I
    > opened the file in Photoshop fine but I also have a copy of Bibble and
    > after installing this it takes over in photoshop now.
    >
    > Now when I open the file the Bibble Plugin for Photoshop opens, which
    > one is better in your opinion, Adobes or Bibbles ? Was thinking of
    > leaving the plug in out of Adobe that way, I can open files in
    > Photoshop with its Raw but still use Bibble if I want. Neither of
    > these (Adobe or Bibble) can save in NEF, only Capture from Nikon
    > appears to be able to do that. So now three choices, Adobe, Bibble
    > and Nikon Capture. What do most of you prefer to use ? Did I miss
    > any that I should look at ?


    Now that Aperture 1.5 has addressed all of the issues I had with that
    program, I use it almost exclusively for editing, including processing
    ..NEF files.
    cjcampbell, Nov 30, 2006
    #3
  4. LuvLatins

    LuvLatins Guest

    and ARC = Camera Raw 3.6

    So you guys open the natice file in Adobe, edit it and then save it to
    what format JPG, TIFF ?? Or is the Native Raw file the think I should
    also print from ?

    Thanks for the help


    On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 17:24:31 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    <> wrote:

    >LuvLatins <> wrote:
    >> Hello gang.
    >>
    >> OK, I finally started to shoot in RAW format with my D200. I
    >> installed Photoshop CS and upgraded to the Raw Adobe 3.6 plugin. I
    >> opened the file in Photoshop fine but I also have a copy of Bibble and
    >> after installing this it takes over in photoshop now.
    >>
    >> Now when I open the file the Bibble Plugin for Photoshop opens, which
    >> one is better in your opinion, Adobes or Bibbles ? Was thinking of
    >> leaving the plug in out of Adobe that way, I can open files in
    >> Photoshop with its Raw but still use Bibble if I want. Neither of
    >> these (Adobe or Bibble) can save in NEF, only Capture from Nikon
    >> appears to be able to do that. So now three choices, Adobe, Bibble
    >> and Nikon Capture. What do most of you prefer to use ? Did I miss
    >> any that I should look at ?

    >
    >I have never used Bibble, but ACR works great for me. As for writing to the
    >NEF, only metadata information like whitebalance, and exposure selections will
    >change anyway, not the raw data itself. In short, you really don't want to be
    >writing to your RAW files. If you can't easily manage the XMP sidecar files
    >created when you make metadata changes [during RAW conversion], then consider
    >converting to DNG format first, as your metadata changes will be stored in the
    >DNG file.
    >
    >Also note that the D200 uses encrypted white balance metadata, so Adobe ACR
    >won't be able to read it. I simply saved WhiteBalance Auto as my defaults in
    >ACR and then modify it from there.
    LuvLatins, Nov 30, 2006
    #4
  5. LuvLatins

    bmoag Guest

    There is nothing wrong with Bibble. It is a matter of preference whether to
    use Bibble or the Adobe Converter or anything else. There is no technical
    superiority of one converter over the other for any practical purpose
    regardless of what you may read. The biggest decsion to make is whether to
    work in 16bit or 8bit color. There is alot of misinformation out there about
    the superiority of 16 bit color so this too is a matter of preference.
    Once a raw/nef file is opened it matters not whether you perform further
    operations in the raw converter or in Photoshop itself. That is why most
    people develop a workflow that works for them, which takes a bit of
    experimentation, with regard to what operations to perform on an image using
    what tools.
    Some people prefer Lightroom but in reality its tools are quite limited and
    are intended for exposures made under more or less optimal conditions and
    for batch processing of images made under controlled or similar conditions.
    Lightroom has a "vibrancy" control like Bibble, which the Adobe
    converter/CS2 does not. BFD.
    If you have not tried the free demo of Nikon NX I would recommend you do so.
    It can be habit forming as a converter. The conrol point tools can be very
    useful to do some things that might require masking in Photoshop.
    The nef files should be saved just as you would film negatives. Unless you
    need an image in a specific format, like tif or jpeg, you should save in PSD
    after you have created your image using lossless and reversible layers. The
    only thing psd does not keep track of, alas, is history. It would be a great
    boon if this info could be recorded with the image.
    bmoag, Dec 1, 2006
    #5
  6. LuvLatins <> wrote:
    > and ARC = Camera Raw 3.6
    >


    ACR actually. It means "Adobe Camera Raw".

    > So you guys open the natice file in Adobe, edit it and then save it to
    > what format JPG, TIFF ?? Or is the Native Raw file the think I should
    > also print from ?
    >


    I change all the settings I need in ACR to do as much work there as possible,
    especially with white balance and exposure (I shoot as much to the right as I
    can without blowing highlights as 1/2 of the data in the RAW file is in the
    top stop of exposure). Then I open in Photoshop. If there is anything
    extensive I need to do, I save the file as a PSD and work in layers. Often
    curve layers, masks, whatever you need to do in photoshop [a skill I have a
    long way to go with]. I do everything in Adobe RGB, but choose which
    colorspace works for you. After I am finished, I create the final image. If
    I am going to print at Costco, I convert to their color profile for the
    printer and paper I am aiming for, convert to 8-bit and then save as a JPEG
    (quality 10, 11 or 12). I keep the PSD for future work, should I need a new
    image for a different reason [say printing to a Epson inkjet].

    BTW ... I convert all my NEF files. I often modify camera raw settings before
    I do that and then embed a large preview image in the DNG so that other tools
    can easily and quickly pick them up (Adobe Bridge is really slow generating
    previews of NEF files, but quick with DNG). The drawback is that saving
    setting changes [metadata changes] in DNG requires a complete resave of the
    DNG file; with NEF, it just saves the changes in an XMP sidecar file.

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Dec 1, 2006
    #6
  7. bmoag <> wrote:
    > Once a raw/nef file is opened it matters not whether you perform further
    > operations in the raw converter or in Photoshop itself.


    This is not true. It does make a difference due to the nature of RAW versus
    what is used natively elsewhere. RAW is linear data, which means that 1/2 of
    all the information is in the brightest stop of the image. Thus, it is
    clearly better to shoot to the right in RAW and then pull the data to the left
    during RAW conversion to get the most detail possible in the shadows.

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Dec 1, 2006
    #7
  8. LuvLatins

    LuvLatins Guest

    On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 14:45:29 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    <> wrote:

    >LuvLatins <> wrote:
    >> and ARC = Camera Raw 3.6
    >>

    >
    >ACR actually. It means "Adobe Camera Raw".
    >
    >> So you guys open the natice file in Adobe, edit it and then save it to
    >> what format JPG, TIFF ?? Or is the Native Raw file the think I should
    >> also print from ?
    >>

    >
    >I change all the settings I need in ACR to do as much work there as possible,
    >especially with white balance and exposure (I shoot as much to the right as I
    >can without blowing highlights as 1/2 of the data in the RAW file is in the
    >top stop of exposure). Then I open in Photoshop. If there is anything
    >extensive I need to do, I save the file as a PSD and work in layers. Often
    >curve layers, masks, whatever you need to do in photoshop [a skill I have a
    >long way to go with]. I do everything in Adobe RGB, but choose which
    >colorspace works for you. After I am finished, I create the final image. If
    >I am going to print at Costco, I convert to their color profile for the
    >printer and paper I am aiming for, convert to 8-bit and then save as a JPEG
    >(quality 10, 11 or 12). I keep the PSD for future work, should I need a new
    >image for a different reason [say printing to a Epson inkjet].
    >
    >BTW ... I convert all my NEF files. I often modify camera raw settings before
    >I do that and then embed a large preview image in the DNG so that other tools
    >can easily and quickly pick them up (Adobe Bridge is really slow generating
    >previews of NEF files, but quick with DNG). The drawback is that saving
    >setting changes [metadata changes] in DNG requires a complete resave of the
    >DNG file; with NEF, it just saves the changes in an XMP sidecar file.


    Thanks appreciate your time in this reply. I also found a free
    software package that extracks a full size JPG file from RAW files. No
    more need to shoot taking up space in both inside the camera
    Its called Preview Extractor
    http://drchung.new21.net/previewextractor/

    May only work on Nikon not sure but love it.
    LuvLatins, Dec 1, 2006
    #8
  9. LuvLatins

    LuvLatins Guest

    On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 14:48:48 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    <> wrote:

    >Thus, it is
    >clearly better to shoot to the right in RAW


    What does this mean ?
    LuvLatins, Dec 1, 2006
    #9
  10. LuvLatins <> wrote:
    > On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 14:48:48 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>Thus, it is
    >>clearly better to shoot to the right in RAW

    >
    > What does this mean ?


    It means, if you shoot RAW, you should shoot as brightly exposed as possible
    without blowing the highlights. The point is to capture the most information,
    not to get the best in camera image. Then, when you get into your RAW
    conversion, you pull more data from the highlights into the intended level of
    detail. The reason this works to your advantage is that 50% of all the data
    captured is in the brightest stop of the captured image [due to the fact that
    each stop is double the light of the previous stop]. RAW images store linear
    data, but image processing tools and all final image formats do not use linear
    data [they eye does not see linearly].

    Here is a great book on Amazon that does a pretty good job.

    http://tinyurl.com/ykfhq9

    Also, consider a photography seminar or two on this subject. John Shaw offers
    a pretty good one [$199 weekend]. You might be happy to know that he is also
    a Nikon fan, so his presentation reflects this to some degree.

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Dec 1, 2006
    #10
  11. LuvLatins

    LuvLatins Guest

    On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 15:56:52 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    <> wrote:

    >LuvLatins <> wrote:
    >> On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 14:48:48 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Thus, it is
    >>>clearly better to shoot to the right in RAW

    >>
    >> What does this mean ?

    >
    >It means, if you shoot RAW, you should shoot as brightly exposed as possible
    >without blowing the highlights. The point is to capture the most information,
    >not to get the best in camera image. Then, when you get into your RAW
    >conversion, you pull more data from the highlights into the intended level of
    >detail. The reason this works to your advantage is that 50% of all the data
    >captured is in the brightest stop of the captured image [due to the fact that
    >each stop is double the light of the previous stop]. RAW images store linear
    >data, but image processing tools and all final image formats do not use linear
    >data [they eye does not see linearly].
    >
    >Here is a great book on Amazon that does a pretty good job.
    >
    >http://tinyurl.com/ykfhq9
    >
    >Also, consider a photography seminar or two on this subject. John Shaw offers
    >a pretty good one [$199 weekend]. You might be happy to know that he is also
    >a Nikon fan, so his presentation reflects this to some degree.


    Thanks just ordered the book Thanks. I also understand. Kind of like
    push the camera right to the edge to collect data you cant even see
    and then use post processing to perfect the final print. Clever
    LuvLatins, Dec 1, 2006
    #11
  12. LuvLatins <> wrote:
    >
    > Thanks just ordered the book Thanks. I also understand. Kind of like
    > push the camera right to the edge to collect data you cant even see
    > and then use post processing to perfect the final print. Clever


    Sort of, yes. You can see the data ... it will possibly be brighter than you
    want in your final image. It allows you to get the most detail out of your
    RAW image.

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Dec 1, 2006
    #12
  13. LuvLatins

    JC Dill Guest

    On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 10:33:39 -0500, LuvLatins <>
    wrote:

    >On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 14:48:48 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>Thus, it is
    >>clearly better to shoot to the right in RAW

    >
    >What does this mean ?


    It means you want your histogram to show data (peaks) on the right
    side of the histogram. You want it as far to the right as you can get
    without clipping. Adjust the exposure later when you process the RAW
    file into a TIFF or JPEG. You will get more detail in the shadows
    when you expose in this manner.

    <http://rockslidephoto.com/blog/?p=227>

    jc

    --

    "The nice thing about a mare is you get to ride a lot
    of different horses without having to own that many."
    ~ Eileen Morgan of The Mare's Nest, PA
    JC Dill, Dec 1, 2006
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Antti Heiskanen

    Intel P4 or AMD system for image editing and RAW-conversion?

    Antti Heiskanen, Jul 25, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    951
  2. Allan Mayer
    Replies:
    54
    Views:
    1,216
    Lionel
    Aug 13, 2003
  3. Mon11

    New to RAW editing - need help/overview

    Mon11, Nov 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    6,617
    Guest
    Nov 18, 2003
  4. Dave Head
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    36,573
    Paolo Pizzi
    Jan 14, 2004
  5. Kristinmerri

    Question about software preferences

    Kristinmerri, Jan 26, 2005, in forum: A+ Certification
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    256
    John P. Dearing
    Jan 27, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page