[adam]

What software do you use for post-processing?

For me, when I do (rarely) do it, it's photoshop.
My friends have just started to use Capture One DSLR and have told me that it's very good. I've yet to try it, has any one used this?

Capture One review on Luminous Landscape

It's used for processing RAW files. I usually shoot in JPG, but reading about the advantages of using RAW makes me want to try it out. Whenever I see a beautiful landscape, I'd take the picture in RAW, but little post-processing after, I would just extract the JPG, which is sort of a waste, and should have taken the picture in JPG in the first place, but since I've got the RAW files, I'll try the program on it when I get it.

Does anyone here always shoot in RAW?

[adam]

Maybe I should have posted this in the post-processing forum
oh well, I guess it's kind of related

[shuttertalk]

Hi adam... i think this is the right forum, as it's to do with software.

I think RAW allows greater flexibility in post-processing, and you can adjust the colour balance, sharpness, levels, etc. instead of leaving it up to your camera.

My Fuji S5000 has a RAW mode, but I find that it takes too much effort to get a pleasing image out of it. The RAW to JPEG converter that comes with the camera does exactly what the camera would do, which sort of defeats the purpose (and it doesn't let you tweak anything).

There are also some third party converters that people have worked on, but I find that there is a lot of work involved in adjusting the settings to get a pleasing image. More often than not, I compare the post-processed RAW and a JPEG, and find that the JPEG just looks better.

But that's just my camera... other people may have different experiences.

p.s. Haven't tried capture one, but hear good feedback from DSLR users.

[lemangoholic]

I tried shooting on raw (only a couple of test shots) with D70, good quality yes... but too cumbersome.

[Rufus]

There is IMHO, no substitute for raw.
I use C1se, and would never shoot anything important with JPG.

Why?
Raws are sharper
Raws are manipulable
Raws are more vibrant
Raws contain more detail in shadows.

Raw will not, however, make a lousy picture into a good one, nor will it allow the correction of serious exposure errors.

HTH

[shuttertalk]

Hi Ruff,

I agree about the manipulable and more detail since there's more dynamic range (12 bit vs 8 bit). I probably wouldn't say that RAW images are sharper or more vibrant, as it's RAW data from the sensor, and hasn't had any sharpening or colour adjustment applied... your post processing with C1 is probably responsible for doing so. Is that correct?


I think with RAW you make a tradeoff between quality and storage space / write times. Yet another decision for photographers to make!

[Rufus]

Well, I do feel raw ends up looking more sharp.... It might be my imagination though.
I also feel that raw is more vibrant than JPG irrespective of processing.... Once again, maybe it's just me.

[peter]

im Using C1 Rebel now ...
its quite nice ...

i think im hooked on using raw now ...
it takes alot of memory up ..but when u use it to post process ... you can get some pretty good effect ... and its much easier to correct levels on a lossless photograph then one at a lower quality... most of the time with good lighting it wont be noticible.. but on the lowe rlight end... quality can count ...

ohh yeah ..but as rufus said .. raws cant save ur pic its over exposed or underexpose... tried it and u just get alot of speckles ...

i played around with some of my latest raw shootings .. and heres an example of what u can sorta do wid C1 post processing ... i took these on a cloudy day...here

[peter]

im Using C1 Rebel now ...
its quite nice ...

i think im hooked on using raw now ...
it takes alot of memory up ..but when u use it to post process ... you can get some pretty good effect ... and its much easier to correct levels on a lossless photograph then one at a lower quality... most of the time with good lighting it wont be noticible.. but on the lowe rlight end... quality can count ...

ohh yeah ..but as rufus said .. raws cant save ur pic its over exposed or underexpose... tried it and u just get alot of speckles ...

i played around with some of my latest raw shootings .. and heres an example of what u can sorta do wid C1 post processing ... i took these on a cloudy day...click here

to see

[dewy]

Can any one elaborate in simple terms what RAW is? All i have noticed is that, the pictures are yucker (using the 'stock' converter) and take up 4 time more space for no reason =\

[shuttertalk]

Hey dewy, RAW mode captures the "raw" data straight from the sensor, before any sharpening, white balance, colour adjustment, and is uncompressed so you don't get JPEG artifacts.

As a result, it doesn't usually look good straight out of the camera and you usually need to post-process they way you want it. The benefits are flexibility and more quality to begin with, but trade-off is storage space and time (to post-process the photos).

[adam]

Recently been trying C1 Rebel, it's nice to use, being able to adjust all the parameters after the picture has been taken, just as long as it is not greatly overexposed or underexposed.

Now I like shooting in RAW, for the pictures I try to make look nice, and just JPEG for the muck-around-happy-snaps..

[dewy]

Thanks for the info shuttertalk, I think I might wait untill I get my new card untill I start fiddling with RAW, I can only fit 2 RAW pics to my card according to the Camera Manual. When I do I'll check out that CaptureONE seems like it can really bring up the quality in the pics from the screenshots in that review =)

[peter]

yeah ... Capture one is wiced ways .. i wasnt a2gb microdrive for my raw shoooting ..
but might wait for solid state to get cheaper ...

yeah .. me n adam n my utha frend love raws now ..
unloaded them onto adams laptop acoule of times las time wer were shooting ..
i onli figured out why people use raw when ifound out the power of post processing ... ^^
its nice..

[dewy]

Hmm If I read properly, you are saying it is a good idea to have a laptop or high storage device to keep whacking them on? With time/qualtiy is it really a good idea?

[adam]

If one card isn't enough to old a day's worth of shooting, then you should either buy more cards, or a portable hard disk (or bring laptop). I think it'll be best to have at least two cards, so you can load while shooting with the other
With time/quality, well, we're only doing this for fun and not professional (collection money for it) so time isn't a worry (in terms of money), but in a way, it takes time to load the pictures on and the time you wait for it could be used to take more pictures (the reason why I suggested having more than one card) Then after it takes more time to go through all the pictures you took and post-process. With a routine workflow, you'd get quite fast at it with practice.

As for quality, shooting in RAW is probably the best your camera can do in terms of quality, but then I think sometimes, why do I need such a big picture? Most of the time I'm only sending them to people and not printing them out

[peter]

uhauha yeah ... but the reason you have such high quality... is because without raw quility .. when u post process.. even when u reduce the size .. the photos dont come out as nicely ...

w00t i love C1.... i shouldgo find rthe pro version .. os i got more features.. ohh well..
yeah .. backup card would be usefull ..
although i stole my frens cam while mine was laoading ...

Dealing with RAWs after using the program for a while is super fast.. once u know what to do .. u can inmplement it quickly unless ur looking to do cooleffects to the photo of sumfin ... C1 rebel also incorporates automatic white balance and auto exposure compensation for those who are lazy .. but i like the colour more when its done manually

[shuttertalk]

... but then I think sometimes, why do I need such a big picture? Most of the time I'm only sending them to people and not printing them out

But then you don't want to be in a situation where you've taken the picture of a lifetime... only to find that you've only got it in 640x480 format ...

[peter]

nicely enuf .. our camera cant go to a resolution that low ^^
butyeah i get what u mean .. always best to be prepared.. u neva know what ull shoot ..

[dewy]

You can always reduce, but not adduce (make larger)

[peter]

nicely put ..
hey adam ..
whats the sitee for the 300D hack to make it like the 10D .. then we can have variable sized raws!

[adam]

... but then I think sometimes, why do I need such a big picture? Most of the time I'm only sending them to people and not printing them out

But then you don't want to be in a situation where you've taken the picture of a lifetime... only to find that you've only got it in 640x480 format ...

I agree with that, the reason why I used to always switch to RAW when shooting something I know will be picture of lifetime, and not satisfied with pictures from mobile phones but now I always shoot RAW, so I don't need to worry hehe

[peter]

RAW ... hrmm .. hey adam .. do u know wher ei can get the firmware hack for enabling me to have vaiable sized raws .. ie . .the 10D firmware hack ? .. i wonder how safe it is tho ..

[adam]

Just search on googe "Russian firmware hack"; I've posted the link to 'tips and tricks' before and its got it in there.
I'm not responsible if anyone tries it
You can always load the old firmware back on, the problem is if you can't...

[peter]

is there cases where u cant ?