Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] The virtues of RAW (was: Divertimento)

Subject: Re: [OM] The virtues of RAW (was: Divertimento)
From: bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2014 22:30:44 +1200
 

RAW files. I'm not convinced. I've never seen a well-exposed jpeg
from my Oly cameras that was as bad as Tina claims.
My processed jpgs
are fine. I like them a lot. I'm well aware that jpgs are lossy files,
so I minimise the editing to them that I do, and I doubt if anybody can
than tell by looking at them that the image quality shows they are
spoiled / ruined by the lossy process operating.
Yes, I have had
difficulty with badly exposed files but they are not the norm. 

It's
all very well for Nathan to say that this photo, published as a jpg, is
bad.
http://www.frozenlight.eu/nathanfoto/paw/2004/2004_31alt1.jpg
My
response is, "Bad in comparison with what?" He does not provide that.


I did a search on the internet. Web-pages purporting to show that RAW
is distinctly better just didn't make such a point adequately. Check
these out ... In fairness to Rockwell, I see that it was at least a
couple of years ago that he wrote the page ...


http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm


http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/03/ken-tanaka-shooting-jpeg-instead-of-raw.html


http://photographylife.com/raw-vs-jpeg


http://clumsykartik.wordpress.com/2014/05/24/dump-jpeg-choose-raw-reasons-why-you-should-shoot-raw/


What I'd like is to see a jpg straight from a RAW file, that I can
borrow and see what I can achieve with using a jpg editor such as
fastStone, and compare it with a jpg from the same RAW file where the
RAW file has been used by the owner to 'ímprove' it.. 

If the
difference is significant, I'm prepared to be persuaded. If anybody has
in mind to send me a couple of such images, don't send them to 'this'
address as the mailbox has little slack in it. Instead, please use
bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx which is unstoppable. 

Almost the only aspect of
Moose's post processing I am envious of is his ability to selectively
sharpen and blurr different parts of an image; and I have in mind some
of Boris's sister wedding photos where Moose de-emphasised some people
that way. But - I almost never photograph people, so that is not a real
concern for me. 

Having written all that, last night I did open
Sagelight - I have a paid-up copy. But it was late and I didn't get far
with playing with it. I should do that more often. 

One image, as an
example, which I was unable to resolved adequately using a RAW
converter, is the top left one
at
http://www.brianswale.com/zuikoholics/July-2011/July-2011.htm
I think
that result put me right off RAW files. At the time I took that photo
and its companions I was having a huge problem with reflections from the
autumn leaves and was seriously considering using film for such shots,
since it has better dynamic range - especially print film does.. 

And
also, having written all that, I thought it might be useful to be able
to rapidly switch camera recording from JPEG to RAW+JPEG or from
RAW+JPEG to JPEG, and remembered the Function (Fn) button on my E-3,
which I had hitherto never used. The instructions are, in both the paper
manual and the on-live pdf file ...
QUOTE
RAW: Press the Fn button to
switch from JPEG to RAW+JPEG or from RAW+JPEG to JPEG for the record
mode.
You can change the record mode by turning the main dial.sub dial
while holding dowm the Fn button.
UNQUOTE 

Well, i've tried for maybe
20 minutes to get that instruction to work - and no success. If anyone
here knows how to make it work, I'd like to hear it. 

Brian 
 
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz