couple of old people....

[adam75south]

my grandparents....i found this pic on my computer tonight. i remember being frustrated that i couldn't get them both in focus...haha. it was only a few days into owning the camera...and no prior experience at all....but i found it and i liked it. plus i used it to try out raw editing.

p.s. can someone tell me the main advantages are of shooting raw? i noticed you can adjust white balance after, but what else makes it special????

50mm f/1.4 @ f/2 1/100s ISO800

[cwphoto]

I find WB the most useful as for weddings the lighting is mixed and/or changes very quickly.

Other main advantage is you can change the colour space after the event.

It also offers non-destructive modification of colour saturation, contrast, etc. And captures 12-bits of info instead of 8. Also has a much wider DR and is less temperamental to under/over exposure.

[forno]

Interesting stuff Christian, need bigger CF cards & archive storage:p

[cwphoto]

Interesting stuff Christian, need bigger CF cards & archive storage:p

Yeah, I currently run 13GB in Flash Memory and have around 500GB in image files from the last year or so.

[forno]

DAMN:eek: :eek:

Youll be talking TB soon:D

[cwphoto]

Lucky I don't have a 5D!

[aparmley]

my grandparents....i found this pic on my computer tonight. i remember being frustrated that i couldn't get them both in focus...haha. it was only a few days into owning the camera...and no prior experience at all....but i found it and i liked it. plus i used it to try out raw editing.

p.s. can someone tell me the main advantages are of shooting raw? i noticed you can adjust white balance after, but what else makes it special????

50mm f/1.4 @ f/2 1/100s ISO800

You really want to know the difference and why you should shoot RAW? Go to Amazon.com and buy Bruce Frasier's "Real World Raw" book. I bought, read it and I recommend it - Not that my recommendations mean much - but I think you'll come across a lot of places photography related whose members also recommend the very same book.

By-the-way, thats a very powerful and moving image - I can't say that it shows your GP in a flattering light, but I find myself trying to figure out what news they just received . . . its an emotional image.

[forno]

but I find myself trying to figure out what news they just received . . . its an emotional image.


Agreed, seems to be mile in that kitchen:(

[24Peter]

Yeah, it'a a very powerful shot Adam. Says alot.

On the RAW thing, I don't do it. I adjust the WB (as well as brightness and contrast, etc.) of my .jpegs all the time without issue. To me it's not worth the extra work for any slight benefits you might get.

[JJinStLouis]

You really want to know the difference and why you should shoot RAW? Go to Amazon.com and buy Bruce Frasier's "Real World Raw" book. I bought, read it and I recommend it - Not that my recommendations mean much - but I think you'll come across a lot of places photography related whose members also recommend the very same book.

By-the-way, thats a very powerful and moving image - I can't say that it shows your GP in a flattering light, but I find myself trying to figure out what news they just received . . . its an emotional image.

or you could read it here for free.
http://safari.oreilly.com/0321334094/pref01
Andy, thanks for the recommendation, reading it now.

[JJinStLouis]

or you could read it here for free.
http://safari.oreilly.com/0321334094/pref01
Andy, thanks for the recommendation, reading it now.

Ok so you can only read the preface, but now I really want to buy it.

[aparmley]

Ok so you can only read the preface

LMAO - I had feeling I'd be seeing this post shortly. . .


but now I really want to buy it.

The marketing ploy is doing its work. . . ;)

[adam75south]

ok so what's everyone's raw editor of choice? i tried out lightroom and decided to just convert to .dng and use cs2's raw editor instead. lightroom was way too small to see the changes i was making.

i will definitely shoot in raw from now on at events. i shot one a few months ago and we used a street construction light to take some pictures backstage and they were as warm as it got...of course, at the time i couldn't tell any difference at all, but now they are the worst pictures i've ever seen.

edit....is there a way to bring in the raw files straight to cs2 without converting to .dng?

[sunnythepsychocat]

One advantage of shooting with RAW is that you can adjust your ppi. With RAW you can go up or down, while in JPEG you can only go down.
Why would this be an important condiseration? If you want larger print like 11X17, then you want to have at least of 300ppi. I think JPEG can only go up to 180ppi. Typically, 72 ppi is enough for web posting or photo sharing.

[cwphoto]

ok so what's everyone's raw editor of choice?

Canon's DPP all the way here. I don't even have Photoshop.

[ReF]

ok so what's everyone's raw editor of choice?

mostly use RAW within zoombrowser - usually find images don't need much adjustment so zoombrowser does the job fine for me. i use DPP if the zoombrowser conversions aren't coming out right which is kind of rare. used adobe raw and rse but went back to the canon stuff.

wow cw, no photoshop? you don't get dust blobs and hot pixel problems?

[cwphoto]

DPP and RAW within zoombrowser. used adobe raw and rse but went back to the canon stuff.

wow cw, no photoshop? you don't get dust blobs and hot pixel problems?

Never seen a hot pixel and dust is solved using the 'Stamp' tool in DPP.

The Zoombrowser RAW Converter is called Raw Image Task (RIT) BTW. It is said that it also mimics exactly the effect of in-camera JPEGs too (where DPP is subtlely different) - but I don't use it much so I can't confirm/deny this.

[ReF]

Never seen a hot pixel and dust is solved using the 'Stamp' tool in DPP.

The Zoombrowser RAW Converter is called Raw Image Task (RIT) BTW. It is said that it also mimics exactly the effect of in-camera JPEGs too (where DPP is subtlely different) - but I don't use it much so I can't confirm/deny this.

guess i'm so used to using PS for cloning that i never checked to see if there was a stamp tool in DPP. i never shoot jpeg so i don't really know how close RIT comes. what you said does explain why there are two converters and why the results come out a bit differently though

[adam75south]

well i'm a huge fan of photoshop....but maybe i'll use the DPP for raw. i've used it before as a batch resizer and that was cool, but seemed to want to crash alot.