Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 10, 2006, 3:59 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6
Default

Once I get used to shooting with my new camera and I start to dabble in the Raw format I have a question. When I take a shot and it doesn't look very good I should not be alarmed because it needs more after shot processing correct?

Also, what does a monitor calibrator do?
JGreene is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 11, 2006, 2:10 AM   #2
rey
Senior Member
 
rey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 949
Default

Quote:
Once I get used to shooting with my new camera and I start to dabble in the Raw format I have a question. When I take a shot and it doesn't look very good I should not be alarmed because it needs more after shot processing correct?
That's correct. The picture should not look good, as this is the negative, before camera processing.


Quote:
Also, what does a monitor calibrator do?
Monitor Calibrator makes sure what you see is the actual color that will be printed. Note that to actually get this, you will need a calibrated printer as well. Also, the amount of ambient light will affect the way you see colors.

In my opinion, unless you use your camera for a living, and print your own pics, you don't have to worry about it. I use Costco for my pics, they change the colors anyways, so my calibration is lost. If I'm doing this professionally, then I would definitely calibrate my monitor.

I do make sure I edit my pics with all the lights and windows shielded by dark curtains, otherwise my pics turns out too saturated.

rey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 2006, 11:31 AM   #3
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

JGreene wrote:
Quote:
Once I get used to shooting with my new camera and I start to dabble in the Raw format I have a question. When I take a shot and it doesn't look very good I should not be alarmed because it needs more after shot processing correct?

Also, what does a monitor calibrator do?
Whether RAW or JPEG or any other format, the closer your camera settings are to the proper exposure for that picture, the better off you are, and this includes RAW.

When I need do no additional work in post processing, my cup runneth over. The advantage of RAW is some additional flexibility in correcting for that lack of perfect exposure.

You should calibrate your monitor, at least for your own personal printer, and for the WEB. If your not making money at this, then the calibrating tools available in your computers own built in software should be sufficient.

Essentially, your monitor has color settings. If you pulled out the red, so that everything looked red, how could you adjust your image for any use? So, your computer has some elementary calibrating tools - Use them.

Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 2006, 2:24 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6
Default

You know, I'm wondering why I have to do so much post processing to my pics? Is it just that I need practice? It seems that having a great camera like the D50 should eliminate having to do work to the pics afterward.
JGreene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 2006, 3:14 PM   #5
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

JGreene wrote:
Quote:
You know, I'm wondering why I have to do so much post processing to my pics? Is it just that I need practice? It seems that having a great camera like the D50 should eliminate having to do work to the pics afterward.
Why? A Point and shoot is DESIGNED to cut down on post processing. That's the whole point of them.

The D50 IS a good camera, but that doesn't mean that the only thing to photography is owning a good camera.

If such was the case then my pictures should be better than yours, because I own a D2x!

Lord, I loved my Kodak Brownie... :lol:

Here's a picture from a .25 cents camera. A cardbaord box with a pinhole




Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 12, 2006, 4:29 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 129
Default

As the saying goes: it's not the camera taking great shots, it's the person using the camera.

For most people, shooting JPEGs with the D50's preset White Balance functions will work fine. I tried out RAW on my D50, and I haven't a clue what all the color controls are. So, I decided to go back to JPEG Large-Fine for now.
Webapprentice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 12, 2006, 4:59 PM   #7
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

Webapprentice wrote:
Quote:
As the saying goes: it's not the camera taking great shots, it's the person using the camera.

For most people, shooting JPEGs with the D50's preset White Balance functions will work fine. I tried out RAW on my D50, and I haven't a clue what all the color controls are. So, I decided to go back to JPEG Large-Fine for now.
Processing RAW is both time consuming, but potenially quite useful method of shooting. I always shoot RAW, and I do this because I NEED an edge. I fyou don't need the edge, shooting JPEG in highest quality is probably enough.

But even JPEG can be post processed. A far as I know, there is no law against doing this. RAW simply allows more control. And sometimes this CAN be critical.

Even so, my best shots are the ones that need little or no post processing.

Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2006, 11:04 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 129
Default

DBB wrote:
Quote:
Processing RAW is both time consuming, but potenially quite useful method of shooting. I always shoot RAW, and I do this because I NEED an edge. I fyou don't need the edge, shooting JPEG in highest quality is probably enough.

But even JPEG can be post processed. A far as I know, there is no law against doing this. RAW simply allows more control. And sometimes this CAN be critical.

Even so, my best shots are the ones that need little or no post processing.

Dave
What is this "edge" you speak of? Are you competing with someone? Or is this about your desire to have more control over your photograph?

I won't dispute that RAW offers the most control over the photograph. I just don't think it is abig deal as the camera makers want it to be. After all, they want to sell you the software to convert fully read and convert RAW images.
Webapprentice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2006, 11:21 AM   #9
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

Webapprentice wrote:
Quote:
DBB wrote:
Quote:
Processing RAW is both time consuming, but potenially quite useful method of shooting. I always shoot RAW, and I do this because I NEED an edge. I fyou don't need the edge, shooting JPEG in highest quality is probably enough.

But even JPEG can be post processed. A far as I know, there is no law against doing this. RAW simply allows more control. And sometimes this CAN be critical.

Even so, my best shots are the ones that need little or no post processing.

Dave
I won't dispute that RAW offers the most control over the photograph. I just don't think it is a big deal as the camera makers want it to be. After all, they want to sell you the software to convert fully read and convert RAW images.
I use Adobe's Raw converter, and if I didn't use that, I'd use Bibble.

There have been a number of threads on this and other boards on the "hyping" of Raw. Then there are the on-line sites with experts taking their positions.

Good for all of them. I see what I see. RAW does provide a distinct edge. Raw does provide an advantage.

If your point is, that out of the camera your JPEG looks wonderful, then you are correct. RAW will not improve on perfection. And if I knew in advance that my images would be perfect, I too would not use RAW.

Sadly, I never shoot in controled situations...


Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2006, 5:31 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Ronnie948's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 721
Default

What is nice about my D200 is I can shoot a raw and a fine jpg at the same exact time. It is a great feature of this camera. I can process the jpg's and still be able to save the untouched RAW file and if I need it I will have it. I hardly ever need to go to the RAW file anyway but it is good to have saved for any future use.

Ronnie
Ronnie948 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 10:43 AM.