Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Software > Editors (Photoshop, Vegas, Final Cut Pro, Kdenlive, etc.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 14, 2016, 4:21 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Australia, New South Wales central coast
Posts: 2,885
Default

Thanks Jim

It's all useful info in this info-gathering stage of things

While I have been experimenting with Silkypix these last couple of weeks, I do not know at this stage whether I will continue using JPG for all my imaging [as I have for the last 12yrs or so] of continue playing with RAW stuff

Phil
__________________
Has Fuji & Lumix superzoom cameras and loves their amazing capabilities
Google me at Travelling School of Photography Australia
Recent images at http://www.flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/
Ozzie_Traveller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2016, 5:28 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
VTphotog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Extreme Northeastern Vermont, USA
Posts: 4,212
Default

I sort of started out the other way; processing nearly everything in Raw, and only moving to out-of-camera Jpeg fairly recently.
12 to 14 years or so ago, the combination of fewer megapixels and higher noise levels, even at lower ISO settings, were what pushed me to going with Raw processing. The Raw converters had tools to clean up noise and enhance detail which were a lot better than what was available for Jpeg.
Today, the sensor noise levels are so much lower, and the pixel counts are so much higher, that image quality isn't an issue for me. My current cameras, the Fuji XS-1, and Pentax K-3, haven't missed on white balance in auto, yet, so that is another step I don't have to do in Raw. Both can also internally develop HDR (or at least extended DR) and avoid blown out highlights. The Fuji has distortion correction for its lens, as does the Pentax for some (mostly Pentax branded).
So, I asked myself what Raw processing would do for my photos that the cameras themselves wouldn't, and couldn't come up with an answer which justified the extra steps involved.
Of course, that is just what works for me. Others may need or want things that I don't care about, or just enjoy spending the extra time to get things perfect.
VTphotog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2016, 5:09 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Australia, New South Wales central coast
Posts: 2,885
Default

G'day VT

You sound very similar to me with your operational setup / techniques

1/2-dozen years ago I had some camera club fellas try to convince me that RAW shooting & processing was the way to go, but I could not see a large enough difference between their by-hand results vs the in-camera results when it came down to the final JPG image

I also resisted the time factor involved in sitting at the damn keyboard doing so-called editing when I really wanted to do something else after a day's enjoyable picture taking

Over the years I have had a few images where highlights have blown, &/or shadows have 'gone green' whereby I have wondered whether RAW might have overcome this problem

Now that both cameras are more sophisticated, and software is both less expensive & more featured, I ponder whether to do some 'Sherlock Holmes' investigations of it all

Hope this explains a bit more
Phil
__________________
Has Fuji & Lumix superzoom cameras and loves their amazing capabilities
Google me at Travelling School of Photography Australia
Recent images at http://www.flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/
Ozzie_Traveller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 16, 2016, 7:55 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
musket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,782
Default

Raw Therapee is free and has come a long way, there are stable and experimental versions for Mac and PC to download @ http://rawtherapee.com/downloads


.
musket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2016, 6:57 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,584
Default

Taking the picture is only half the fun for me. The other half is processing it. First off I only shoot Raw. I do all my processing in Photoshop and Photomatix when shooting for HDR. I align with Photoshop, Tonemap with Photomatix and then go back to Photoshop for final tweaking. Sometimes I wish I used Lightroom because it offers a great alternative to Photoshop and best of all it has a great filing system making finding your photos simple. If you arent interested in sitting at the computer to process your images then by all means just shoot Jpegs. When I shoot I like to imagine that each shot is a masterpiece that I can bring out by my processing. Well the reality is that most are for the trash, but I enjoy trying to pull out of each shot the best I can. I would never let the camera make that decision. I would never let my camera throw out so much information that you can never get back. And thats why I shoot Raw.

Last edited by Bynx; Oct 2, 2016 at 7:22 AM.
Bynx is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:51 PM.