New Canon 300D owner... Help!

[scotshot]

Hi, I just received a Canon 300D, i have a few questions i hope people

can help with. I am new to digital cameras but i'm used to EOS film

Bodies. I have installed the software included with the camera, most

things seem to be OK just a few things i'm not sure about. Im running

Windows XP and i'm using Photoshop 5.0 and i'm shooting Raw images.

 

1. Should i save a file as an 8 bit or 16 bit file.

 

2. Why is the default for the tiff file saved in photoshop 72dpi.

Can i change it? If yes how?

 

3. Specified resolution of output file- the default is 96ppi but can

be set between 0-2000 what should i set it to?

 

I am not very comfortable with the computer side of digital

Photography (Yet) I hope to improve, any help is very much welcome.

Regards, Jim.

[micheleberti]

<p>1) keep you files in raw (they are your digital negatives). make most of the editing of your picture with a decent Raw converter</p>

<p>2 e 3) resolution is an issue only when printing... I suggest to send your files to the printer with a resolution at least of 200ppi</p>

[tom_burke3]

You've got a bit of an issue with 16-bit files and Photoshop 5. It's best to stay in 16-bit as

long as possible; there's more information in a 16-bit image file than there is an 8-bit

one. However, your problem is that Photoshop 5 had very limited capabilities for

manipulating 16-bit files. It's been enhanced in subsequent versions of PS.

 

However, I would suggest that you should look at buying a copy of Photoshop Elements 3.

I'm sure this will be cheaper than upgrading your PS5 to Photoshop CS (the current version

of the 'full' Photoshop). Despite the fact that PS Elements is marketed as a cut-down

version of Photoshop, I think you'll find that it has greater capabilities in the areas that you

need (as a digital photographer) than your old PS5 has. It has an updated user interface as

well, that's supposed to be easier to use, and is certainly aimed at people who like you

may not be very comfortable with the computer side of our hobby. You'll also

find many more 'how to' books on Photoshop Elements 3 than you will on Photoshop 5. To

an extent, anyone who owned PS5 when it was the curent release was assumed to be

a graphics professional (or at least very knowledgeable), and a lot of the books were

written for this trained, experienced

audience; you may well find that books about PS5 assume a lot of pre-existing knowledge.

[digitmstr]

1) don't worry about 16 bit - stay at *8* bit.

 

2) for WEB display use 72ppi. For printing use 240-300 ppi.

 

3) Start using JPG as well. You will learn about your *camera* faster since JPG is less forgiving in terms of exposure and color temp. settings BUT much easier/faster to work with (also for the purpose of learning editing on the PC).

 

4) Consider getting C1 DSRL for your RAW conversion. There are several versions at different price levels. It will make a huge difference in your RAW workflow and/or conversion quality.

 

5) for the purpose of learning editing in PS I suggest you re-size the "test/practice" image to 72 dpi and with the longest side at about 640 pixels. This won't tax your PC or your patience as you perform filters, moves, actions, etc...

 

6) have fun with your new camera!

[scott_eaton]

Yeah....I want to know how these guys are shooting 16-bit files with their 300D. Must be that special software hack I keep reading about.

[tom_burke3]

"Yeah....I want to know how these guys are shooting 16-bit files with their 300D. Must be

that special software hack I keep reading about."

 

Aren't RAW files 16-bit? OK, I know that in fact they're 12-bit, but Photoshop sees them

and processes them as 16-bit. Are 300D RAW files only 8-bit?

[andrew_carlson]

The 300D sensor is a 12-bit sensor. When you convert using whatever tool you choose to convert you can decide to convert to an 8 or 16 bit.

 

Raw files aren't 16-bit, they aren't any bit - its a compressed stream of numbers not quite directly from the sensor. Raw is not an image per se'.

 

As for your work flow, give it time to develop it. It took me a year to get where I am today as far as workflow. I shoot entirely in RAW not because jpg is less forgiving but because I may like different aspects. I don't think or see in colorbalance but a different color balance or exposure compensation might look better to me post shot.

 

I don't like how jpg goes through more processing in camera before being written to the card. If I shoot in jpg I have no flexiblity, old school photogs in the dark room had flexibility in where they take a shot. JPG doesn't offer that flexibility and No I don't believe Photoshop gives it too you. If I take a picture with 1000 pixels and I compress it at 20% with jpg I essentially have 800 pixels. If I then edit in photoshop and save again, its too lossy, each successive save/edit looses more info. I don't like jpg. Its too harsh.

 

I transfer all of my images to tiff @ 300dpi, I also use photoshop 5.5 and see no reason to upgrade. The "improved" user interface irritates me, things are no longer where I expect them to be and the tools I use are simple and effective. When I save tiff it retains the 300dpi resolution, I've never had an issue of it downgrading to 72dpi. If it is an issue for you, try saving in PSD which should retain all aspects like layers, resolution, etc.

[lotsawa]

Get the latest software updates from Canon. The new 'Digital Photo Professional' has a good RAW converter, AFAIK. You can get the software from <a href="Digital Photo Professional">this link at Canon's website</a>.

<p>

Its perfectly ok to work in 8 bit mode IMO. I would start to shoot in JPEG mode anyway to make things easier. Once you know the basics of your camera and editing your files in Photoshop, you can still add the RAW path later. If you open/save your files a lot, its a good idea to save them in the TIFF format instead of JPEG, only convert them to JPEG before you send your files to the printing lab or use them for the web.

<p>

You can do a lot of things in PS 5, but there are some real improvements in the later versions. In former PS versions you have to take care you've got the color profile settings right, otherwise the colors of your images will shift if you open them in PS.

<p>

Good luck!<br>

Christof

[KenPapai]

It's all in your workflow.

<p>

I work with JPG of my 6MP images 99.9% of the time; either in Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro (I stay current on their releases too).

<p>

The original is always unmolested. Obvioulsy you should be treating it like a negative. Saving at 20% JPG compression is the height of ridiculousness; it's absurd. It's not worth anything and you are destroying so much information. What is even worse is saving somethign at 20%, reopening that image, doing more edits, then saving again at 20%. After the 2nd save you'll end up with junk.

<p>

Check this out: (JPG Compression Test I did from 4% to 45%)

http://www.kenpapai.com/travels/images/compression2.html

<p>

Bottom line, if you are saving intermediate work in JPG and plan to reprocess it then select just 1 or 2% compression. The quality will still be as close to 100% as anyone can measure.

<p>

-Ken

[KenPapai]

Subject: Response to New Canon 300D owner... Help!

<p>

It's all in your workflow.

<p>

I work with JPG of my 6MP images 99.9% of the time; either in Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro (I stay current on their releases too).

<p>

The original is always unmolested. Obviously you should be treating it like a negative. Saving at 20% JPG compression is the height of ridiculousness; it's absurd. It's not worth anything and you are destroying so much information. What is even worse is saving somethign at 20%, reopening that image, doing more edits, then saving again at 20%. After the 2nd save you'll end up with junk.

<p>

Check this out: (JPG Compression Test I did from 4% to 45%) <a href="http://www.kenpapai.com/travels/images/compression2.html">Copression Test</a>.

<p>

Bottom line, if you are saving intermediate work in JPG and plan to reprocess it then select just 1 or 2% compression. The quality will still be as close to 100% as anyone can measure.

<p>

Image below: original opened, edited, resized to 1000 wide, saved at 20%, reopened, edited and resized down to 450, then saved at 20%.

Not very pretty!<div></div>

[KenPapai]

Here is same image, edited JUST ONCE, and saved at 10 percent. Notice the truer skin tones and lack of JPG artifacts.<div></div>

[wilfred_m_rand]

Think of RAW as a digital negative. It's the format that can be recovered even if the eposure is underexposed, set on the wrong white balance, etc. Not that every shot should be taken in RAW....but when taking important photos in jpeg, it's best to capture on in RAW. Also, 12/16 bit simply has more data which you *might* need on occasion.

 

Today, most printers and viewing devices don't support 12 or 16 bit. They print in 8, and that's OK because their color gamuts are smaller than the 8 bit color gamut. But that won't always be true. When newer devices appear that can resolve a 12 or 16 bit color gamut, you'll be able to go back to the RAW files and re-process them.