I think your'e right, Joel, and thanks for the explanation about Curves, which
remain a mystery to me unless I just fiddle (tinker).
But what started me on this small experiment, unbeknownst to you, was to
reassure myself that I didn't need to worry myself over the "doodads" because I
don't use JPGs from my E-thingies, only ORFs.
By the way, I forgot to mention that I had a look at these images in Studio.
The only difference that I could see in the ORFs was in the LOW KEY one. But
that was only a slight change and might have been caused by my moving the
camera slightly and causing a different light level. With the JPGs there was
more of a change, of course. I assume that Master and Studio look at these
files in the same way.
I have a feeling that the slight changes caused in, for instance, Gradation,
are enough to please people who use the cameras.
Let's just take some pictures ...
Chris
On 17 Jan 2010, at 15:05, Joel Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Chris Barker <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> http://gallery.me.com/zuiko#100053&view=grid&bgcolor=black&sel=6
>>
>> The settings in sequence are NATURAL/NORMAL, VIVID/NORMAL, NATURAL/LOW KEY.
>> So that is a change in Picture Mode and Gradation while shooting ORF. I
>> then imported them to Aperture, named them and exported them to the MobileMe
>> album above.
>>
>> There seems to be no change with the different settings. I have left the
>> JPG images off to save confusion, but the changes are obvious in the JPGs --
>> as you would have expected.
>
> Thanks Chris. I suppose there must be roughly three concerns in
> building a developer: color, exposure, and then doodads. I would
> consider sharpening, CA correction, gradation, etc. to be doodads.
> Aperture, ACR, etc., pick up some of the more universal doodads, skip
> others, and add their own. Aside from platform considerations, what
> goes in to picking a developer is your confidence in color handling,
> the type of doodads you like and how they work, and your satisfaction
> with the workmanship of the programmers -- roughly speaking, its
> "usability."
>
> So, gradation -- which was the item that kicked off this discussion --
> must be wholly a Studio2 doodad. Also, I would assume that "Gradation
> - Normal" probably means that no alterations have been applied. Those
> alterations, by the way, appear to be curves adjustments. I messed
> with them a little bit last night and the effect is to move pixels
> around in the histogram. Another way to express this is in terms of
> Levels: if it changes the levels adjustment, the effect is more in a
> change in the gamma slider more than to the points. The oblique
> settings in Gradations are sometimes pleasing, but more often not --
> to me. So I just leave it at normal, though occasionally in raw
> development I experiment just to see what the effect might look like.
> The change is usually too great for my taste, but it often gives me a
> notion about what I might do with the image to a lesser degree when I
> have moved it along to Photoshop.
>
> I shall be less judgmental in reading Dpreview reviews as they appear
> to use ACR and PhaseOne to get some independent insight into a
> camera's engine based upon profiled calibration by those third parties
> that would provide some sort of additional information about the
> characteristics of the processor. Whether these processors get the
> best out of the camera I don't know. It reminds me that with just
> about everything there are those who subscribe to a manufacturer's
> recommendations and those who like to tinker. I'm a bit of a
> tinkerer, but I don't think in the case of color that I have the
> equipment, not to mention the brains, to better Olympus' judgment
> about its own cameras. Similarly, those who champion this or that
> developer tell me only about themselves and what they value (nothing
> wrong with that) but nothing about how well their Developer du Jour is
> really doing. As the differences among monitors and/or printers is
> probably so profound as to obscure all comparisons anyway, I can't
> fault anyone for just working with a program he or she enjoys and
> finds useful.
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|