Garth, That was an explaination I can almost understand, and you are right, I
do shoot a lot of outdoor pics... I cant get enough of being outdoors..
Others here have kindly taken the time to reply to my questions, and if I didnt
respond, it is not because I was being rude, I cant digest all the information
here in one sitting, but you all need to know I appreciate very much your
comments and help. I've learned a great deal since I joined here
I started at http://timrandles.photopic.net. I really liked this pic, but for
some reason it doesnt look as good on the desktop as it does on my laptop, and
the foreground seems darker, not as much definition. I'd love to edit this one,
I think it is big enough to be able to do some work with it at 3264x2448
I'll have to consider what software to use to edit with, I dont like the Oly
supplied stuff very much, and found that Adobe has so many bells and whistles
and names of things I dont know the meaning of, it is an exercise in
frustration..
Cheers.. Tim
Garth <garth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Moose wrote:
> Tim Randles wrote:
>> what is wrong with JPEG format?
Tim:
Moose's overview is short and excellent. To add: there should be an
option in the E-500 to shoot both RAW and JPEG (i.e., the camera creates
two files, one RAW and one JPEG, every time you press the shutter button
-- but this does slow the camera down a bit). Since from your postings
here it sounds like you shoot a lot of outdoor scenes, RAW is a good
option for you because it has a better chance of capturing the wide
dynamic range of "luminance" you normally encounter in a natural scene
outdoors. Subsequent manipulation in various programs (Paint Shop Pro,
Photoshop CS2, Picture Window Pro, etc.) will be easier and will allow
you to retain more of the original image information if you start with a
RAW that's been converted into a 16-bit TIFF (or similar format), before
finally saving the image as a JPEG.
JPEG's a good format for display on most digital/analogue devices (LCD,
LED, Plasma, good old-fashioned CRT) as well as for printing. This is
because the vast majority of output devices, including printers (even
the ones you find at photo shops and your local Costco!) aren't capable
of displaying the wide dynamic range of anything higher than 8-bit, and
*also* can't display the entire "gamut" or range of colours which a
12-bit RAW or 16-bit TIFF can encapsulate.
Digital's not simpler than old silver-based photography, just different.
And when you do the image manipulations, you no longer have to get any
of those smelly toxic chemicals on your hands. ;-)
Garth
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
Cheers.. Tim Randles - Sausage King
Got Elk?
Hometown Meats
http://www.hometownmeats.ca
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|