RAW in a Point and Shoot

[briany]

<p>Sarah, lots of misinformation in your post. Whether a TIFF or JPG, the resulting image will have been demosaiced from the RAW sensor data. That is why a Tiff is larger than a RAW - each pixel has full 3 color data, versus only one color per photo site in the RAW data. In the demosaicing process, tonemapping curves are applied, highlight values can be clipped, white balance is applied, sharpening and noise reduction, etc. etc. Yoshio's results are not unexpected (though his RAW converter looks quite good regarding noise reduction) - a high quality JPG will look a Lot like a TIFF with the same in-camera processing applied. I always shoot RAW, but people make too much of JPG compression (and often perpetuate misinformation). There a many reasons to shoot RAW, but JPG compression is perhaps the least significant (as Yoshio's post clearly demonstrates).</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>"That is why a Tiff is larger than a RAW - each pixel has full 3 color data, versus only one color per photo site in the RAW data."</p>

<p>OK, of course! That makes sense. ;-)</p>

<p>As I said before, though, the most limiting factor (to me) in JPEG files is 8 bit color depth. I just can't do a lot with it in postprocessing. The checkering thing isn't usually a huge issue, at least for smaller snaps. It can get more significant for very large prints.</p>

[manuel barrera houston,]

<p>Brian I have a question on your post above, you mention that Tiff has three colors per pixel, but you use a different terminology for raw, one color per photo site. The question is a pixel the same as a photo site?</p>

[fp_anderson]

<p>Hello Alemar-<br /> <br /> You mentioned three things:<br /> RAW<br /> pocket<br /> night<br /> <br /> and that you presently use an SD model<br /> <br /> <br /> The Canon G series cameras are terrific but do not fit in a pocket.<br /> <br /> I would suggest you try a newer SD model (800, 1100 etc.) and install CHDK as mentioned above.<br /> <br /> When I first used a newer SD I thought I could not use a camera w/o manual exposure - but I have been amazed at the auto capabilities. Plus, when needed, CHDK offers much including auto bracketing and RAW.<br /> <br /> Your friend was right in saying that cameras with small sensors will never compete with APS or larger sensors - however the CHDK does bring them closer.<br /> <br /> Also even w/o the CHDK you can set the SD models to 'M' and then reduce the contrast (check the manual). This greatly improves the images in contrasty situations, albeit not like using RAW.<br /> <br /> In addition to exposure benefits, consider too that RAW images can be manipulated to a greater extent than JPEG's.<br /> <br /> Image on left - SD800 RAW, converted to DNG W/ DNG4PS (MAC) then opened w/ PS8. On right, JPEG w/ max. contrast reduction.</p><div></div>

[alemar_calambro]

<p>I never thought of getting the newer SD and put the CHDK app on. Thanks for the update. Yes the canon G10 is not picket size, went to circut city for hands on kind of slow in the menu but overal its ok. Going to wait for a couple of days till it goes down again.</p>

[fp_anderson]

<p>The CHDK install is easier than the site says.<br>

The card needs to be FAT16, my Canon SD when formatting the card does Fat16.<br>

I simply dragged the downloaded files to the disc and inserted with the camera in the PLAY mode. Then hit your menu button at select upgrade firmware.<br>

Remove the card, lock it, then reinsert and start (in any mode). You are now ready to access the CHDK menu settings.</p>

[alemar_calambro]

<p>Thanks for all the feed back but I have one more question. On the canon G10 or Panasonic P&S or any P&S do any of them have maual focus meaning in live view do you get a white box you can move around the screen and focus on the objesct you are trying to take a picture of. I hate the auto focus on P&S it sometimes focus on other objects than the one you want on the picture.</p>

[bill_tuthill]

<p>Yes, both have manual focus. The LX3 can zoom in and is actually usable that way. The G10 might be also, but I don't remember any reviewer raving about usability of manual focus. I'm fairly certain the Panasonic G1 is even better for manual focus, but it is not a P&S. (Is it?) Several reviewers have said the G1 is more precise than an average DSLR with lousy viewfinder and typical slow lens.</p>