Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 20, 2009, 4:54 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,295
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post

See the "Base Curve" section of this user guide page for UFRaw and you'll see an example of an image using a custom curve known as the "White Wedding" curve (you can "mouse over" the image to see the difference it makes in retaining highlight detail). That way, you wouldn't need to tweak curves yourself.
l[/URL]
Sliding the mouse did not make any differences when over the image. Maybe a PC to mac thing I don't know. But it was a nice read for trying to understand things.
lomitamike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2009, 5:05 PM   #12
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I don't know what Aperture is doing (I've never used it). But, chances are, it's ignoring your contrast and saturation settings and applying a set of defaults (tone curve, sharpening, etc.).

If a raw converter supports a linear conversion (where it's not applying any type of default curve), it usually gives you "linear" as a choice.

Many raw converters are going to apply a default curve, sharpening, noise reduction and more, even if you have don't use any curves functions and have sliders for sharpening, contrast, etc., set to zero.

If you want a true linear conversion, it's a good idea to use a converter using dcraw.c code as it's base (and even then, how a raw converter handles the conversion will vary between converters).

If you're using a Mac platform, your options are probably going to be a bit more limited. But, it looks like there is a port of UFRaw available for Mac if you want to give it a try.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2009, 5:10 PM   #13
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lomitamike View Post
Sliding the mouse did not make any differences when over the image. Maybe a PC to mac thing I don't know. But it was a nice read for trying to understand things.
Are you sure you were looking at the image in the Base Curves section (not the one at the top of the page). Without your mouse over it, it shows the "White Wedding" curve (more highlight detail). With the mouse over it, it shows the default curve. There's a pretty big difference in them (look at the white wedding dress detail).

If you're not seeing any difference, it may have something to do with your browser. You may want to try using Firefox to see if it works if it doesn't work with your browser of choice.

If it still doesn't work, your monitor may be set too bright or the contrast may be set too high, blowing the displayed detail in the highlights, regardless of the curve applied.

It works fine for me in either Linux or Windows using Firefox.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2009, 5:49 PM   #14
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Mike:

I just tried Safari and the mouse over works with it, too.

If you still can't see any difference, you may want to check your monitor settings for contrast and brightness to make sure you can see a difference in brighter areas. For example, my wife's laptop display is pretty bad if you leave it set the way it came from the factory (*way* too much contrast with it's defaults), and it can really mislead you on how much highlight detail you have in an image.

Here's a web site that has some test images that may help (you can click on different tests at the top of the page):

http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/white.php
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2009, 6:27 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,295
Default

Yeah Jim. The settings I was using really made a difference. I re-calibrated my monitor with the Imacs display adjustments. I switched to PC calibrated (rather then MAC calibrated) then checked the link you posted. I did notice the highlights clipping in the white dress. I ended up with native gamma setting. That shows the clipping in the dress also. It looks like macs are very bright right out of the box.

Thanks.

Last edited by lomitamike; Jun 20, 2009 at 6:29 PM.
lomitamike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2009, 6:49 PM   #16
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

You'd probably be surprised at how much difference monitor settings can make.

I processed a *bunch* of raw images a while back using my wife's laptop that I intended to post here (including some basketball photos from my A700). But, when I saw them on my PC's display, I went "oops", not realizing that my wife's laptop display was *that* far off.

I never got around to reprocessing them on a better display. I should probably do that at some point (doubling the work, since I've already processed them once). lol

I think many monitors are set to very high contrast and brightness settings by default so that images appear to have more "punch" (which probably looks better to many viewers). But, you don't get a very good idea of how much detail they have (especially where Dynamic Range is concerned) if you leave them set that way.

Most LCDs are very bad for color accuracy, too. But, on the other hand, you have to consider that many viewers of your images are not going to have calibrated displays (so you have to find a good "compromise" on how you process them for web viewing).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2009, 9:05 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,295
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post

I think many monitors are set to very high contrast and brightness settings by default so that images appear to have more "punch" (which probably looks better to many viewers). But, you don't get a very good idea of how much detail they have (especially where Dynamic Range is concerned) if you leave them set that way.
I think this perfectly describes an Imac. Incredible picture to look at but maybe not the best to process photo's.
lomitamike 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 2:38 PM.