I don't understand this fully. It seemed clear that how the converter dealt
with the linear raw file (gamma curve is in part baked into the file
by the manufacturer--metadata?) A tone curve is then applied to further adjust
the image.
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/10/raw-is-not-raw.html
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/1294642686/stark-contrast-how-your-camera-copes-with-dynamic-range-capture
(see footnote)
There was a discussion on an Oly cam review in dpreview and on this list but I
can't put my hands on either with a quick search. No matter what converter is
used Oly had more info in the shadows and
canyon in the highlights--still seems to be the case. The converter did matter
as to the degree of what was recoverable and how the image looked to a degree
but these characteristics and some of the
"look" was baked in. Is that not correct? It still seems to be the case with
more recent Canyon sensors that the shadows get ugly if pulled up too
much----much sooner than with currently Oly sensors. Canyon had more data in
the highlights.
Sony sensors seem to be different beasts and ETTR somewhat less imp't.
Magic Lantern for Canyon cams has enabled raw Zebras and raw histos for a
reason--ETTR seems to be more imp't . Perhaps that is changing? I remain
skeptical for Canyon but could be convinced with some real data. Canyon would
have had to cooperate with Adobe and change things as LR alone could not have
altered the conversion process enough stated or at least implied in the TOP
article.
I do agree that if the midtones go askew on conversion it can be daunting to
fix--if it is tough for AG than no hope here. I certainly abandon ship or if
the image warrants consider a Moose consult.
ETTR really may just be napping, Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|