Canon D10 : Requires post processing for sharpness ?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by n, Jun 19, 2004.

  1. n

    n Guest

    I read a post in dpreview that the D10 needs special processing on the
    pictures taken.

    Is it true?

    More true for RAW than Large Fine?

    Is there a swift and easy way to do this post processing in photoshop?
    I guess the swift and easy way would be pretty good most of the time
    and would take a good deal of experience to beat with a more involved
    n, Jun 19, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. n

    Jimmy Smith Guest

    Before Photoshop, I believe you can go into the "Parameters" setting of your
    camera and change contrast and other items that can dramatically alter your
    results. Have you changed those settings?
    Jimmy Smith, Jun 19, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. n

    Bill Hilton Guest

    From: (n)
    You can do in-camera sharpening if you wish, or you can have more control over
    the process and do it later. Most experienced users seem to prefer doing it
    later in the flow.
    Bill Hilton, Jun 19, 2004
  4. Seeing your other post, I'm wondering if this is another anti-Canon troll?

    The D10 differs little from any other DSLR in its price range as far as
    the need for sharpening goes. Canon DSLR images are very low noise, and
    have a fairly smooth appearance, which can handle a high level of
    unsharp masking when you final get to the point of resizing them to make
    a print. Generally you should not sharpen any digital image until its
    final use is known, and then the sharpening you apply will be specific
    to the scale of the image (cut down to 640 x 480 for web, for example,
    or left full size for an A4 print).

    Most digital camera pictures look a little lacking in bite before
    sharpening, and all need individual processing from RAW for the very
    best results - but for perfectly usable, excellent pictures 99 per cent
    of the time a large fine JPEG with parameters set in-camera will be

    David Kilpatrick, Jun 19, 2004
  5. n

    bagal Guest

    Am I right in thinking most digital images require post-camera processing

    das B
    bagal, Jun 19, 2004
  6. I'd say for most people coming to this NG post processing is a
    "requirement" for them.

    But I'd also say that, depending on the use, most folks don't need,
    want, or understand post processing. For quick outdoor shots (ie.plenty
    of light), posted to the web, little to no post processing is
    "required". YMMV, natch.
    John McWilliams, Jun 19, 2004
  7. n

    Don Guest

    I would have thought that with so many opinions at least one person would
    get the nomenclature correct. Its a 10D!!!

    lol your local pedant.
    Don, Jun 20, 2004
  8. n

    n Guest

    I have heard something about this. Specifically, that we should not
    have any sharpening or whatever carried out on the camera if we are
    going to use sharpening in photoshop or with eg nik sharpener pro.

    What are those parameters on the camera, btw?
    n, Jun 20, 2004
  9. n

    Skip M Guest

    In "Menu." Have you read your manual?
    Skip M, Jun 20, 2004
  10. hehe .. thx for that; even I (also kind of pedant) got it wrong.

    Roland Karlsson, Jun 20, 2004
  11. I agree with you on the name thing, but how exactly does a misnomer of
    alpha-numeric transposition affect the nomenclature?

    Stop pulling five dollar words out of a three dollar dictionary;
    you'll just confuse all of us!

    street shooter, Jun 20, 2004
  12. n

    bagal Guest

    Hi DK

    Somehow I reckon thus:
    if popular digital imagery tekes off as indeed it should then the evolution
    of new standards, software, processing & handling will follow to boot

    It would be interesting to compare snaphots (* intended) of 5 years past
    with 5 years hence and the present. Might make an interesting article to
    refer back to if you know what I mean :)

    das B
    bagal, Jun 20, 2004

  13. Except we won't be able to get any of the snapshots. 'Sorry, I lost that
    CF card...'

    David Kilpatrick, Jun 20, 2004
  14. n

    dylan Guest

    I would say from his comments he doesn't actually have a 10D.
    dylan, Jun 20, 2004
  15. n

    bagal Guest

    heh heh heh

    yup - I know what you mean

    At the mo, I have half filled the hard drfive on this beastie mostly with
    digital images and faffing about

    I think I had better move them to VCD or DVD

    das B

    ps - u selling the sd?
    bagal, Jun 20, 2004
  16. n

    Skip M Guest

    Probably right, he did say he saw it on dpreview...
    Skip M, Jun 21, 2004
  17. Unfortunately it's not a fix in the first place. Digital sharpening
    can only do so much before overall image quality tanks, and the 10D
    consistently turns out images that are too far gone.

    Part of it is the Bayer sensor, which records images that are 4X
    upscaled from their color optical resolution, part of it is a poor AF
    system that doesn't fine tune well at all, part of it is Canon
    outdated CMOS technology which requires aggressive built-in noise
    reduction, and part of it is Canon's soft lens lineup when you get
    into their faster stuff. It all adds up to a great deal of
    frustration if sharpeness is important to you. The other Bayer DSLRs
    are only marginally better, and often worse on noise which puts you
    right back to square one after you noise-reduce.

    The other bad thing about this laborious workflow, is huge bandwidth
    problems or loss of image quality--one or the other. Reasons for
    that: (1) if you shoot RAW you can't save just the RAW file since
    Canon's primitive RAW software can't handle it and many steps are
    required via several layers of processing programs. So you are stuck
    saving everything in 16-bit TIF to retain any benefit from shooting
    RAW. 16-bit TIFFs (48-bit color to hold 36-bits of color information)
    are huge, my SD9's takes a mere 80MB per image but you hardly ever
    need to save them since the RAW software is terrific, unlike Canon's.
    Further, Adobe offers official Foveon support if you'd like to use
    that program instead, but no other brand of DSLR's RAW format is
    supported by Adobe.

    If you shoot JPEG you are stuck with a degraded P&S quality 8-bit
    image, plus every edit degrades the image even more than camera's
    compressed 8-bit output. Or, you can save as a TIF and deal with only
    the intial 4096 to 1 color palette reduction and quality compression,
    but now you are stuck using big TIF bandwiths again and this time it's
    all only for 8-bits. This compounds a lengthy post prosessing work
    flow even more, as your programs choke on interpolatively upscaled TIF
    after TIF. And for what? Only 1.5M RGB triplets, which equates to
    only 1.5MP after color interpolation from only 6M monochrome sensors.

    Multiple bummers. No solutions.
    Georgette Preddy, Jun 21, 2004
  18. Full of crap again, George.
    Randall Ainsworth, Jun 21, 2004
  19. SNIP
    Your biased opinon, but then who cares.
    SNIPped more Preddy weird science

    You are wrong again, as usual.

    Bart van der Wolf, Jun 21, 2004
  20. n

    Phil Wheeler Guest

    Indeed. In my Canon dSLR experience you can set the in-camera
    parameters to get very good results with NO post processing. Many
    choose to post-process as a preference, but I seldom do: Too many
    pictures, too little time.

    Phil Wheeler, Jun 21, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.