RAW processing

[vasilis1]

<p>I am a beginner in RAW provessing and have biginner's questions:<br>

I am using SILKYPIX software and I get both options: JPG and RAW. However, no matter which one I open they look the same. I was under the impression that a raw image is dark and looks weird until you start processing it to your taste. In my case the image looks exactly what it would look like if I let my camera software convert it into JPEG or TIFF and then use Photoshop or other software to make adjustments. Obviously I am missing something or I do something wrong. But what?</p>

[remco-jan.woldhuis]

<p>If your camera doesn't process the image very much before storing it as a JPG file, there's not much difference at first sight. Try setting saturation and sharpening to the max value in your camera, and you should notice the differences. <br>

To see the benefits of RAW simply do the standard processing (curves, sharpening) and then compare the JPG (when zooming in to at least 100%).</p>

[jtk]

<p>Converting to JPG guarantees that each step of subsequent post processing will degrade the file step by step, increasingly, and forever.</p>

<p> RAW and TIFF are both TIFF (versions) and are lossless when you post process. </p>

<p>JPG makes sense if you don't have adequate memory cards, but they've become so cheap that lack of them isn't much of an alibi.</p>

[n-j]

<p>hi vasilis, had a look at this piece of software; seems it can import jpg raw/tif and process them in in "same2 manne ( at least this is what the say ) maybe you apply some preset when importing to your software and therefore all your images look identical;<br>

i would try to get some more "sophisticated" like lightroom or capture one; they are both for special demands; lioghtroom is more postprocession orientated and capture one more production, so I guess you should try lightroom, it's well documented and there are lots of tutorials / how to cheats/workarounds / presets,... on the web;<br>

best regards nj</p>

[vasilis1]

<p>Thanks to all for the replies. In fact I am only using TIFF files (unless I publish on the web). I have also tried Raw Therepee and the results are the same. I wonder whether they both apply preset but in the instructions I read nothing to this effect. Lightroom is part o PS new version, I suppose and capture on a bit pricey. Most of the time I mass convert using Canon EOS bundled software, but I thought I should see what more I can do by doing individual conversion...</p>

[n-j]

<p>lightroom is a standalone progr. ; except they call it <strong>photoshop lightroom</strong> it has nothing to do with <em>photoshop ( what version ever </em> ) and its an affordable piece of software; the funny thing it converts raw to whatever almost twice as fast on my little macbook than on my 8 core dual xeon monster ?! well but in both cases it does its job; just getyourself a trial version and play around some time; the management features are superb too;<br>

capture is something rather for production and especially for their own digibacks, and scene / studio setups, you can shoot thetered ( canon converter can too / theres even a iphone appl. by now that can remote your canon ) and in combination with all the presets you can build in advance you can apply all of them as alternates, ( lightroom can too ) but this really helps you to evaluate and set a scene up correctly, besides this I personally like the gradingtools more than in lightroom;<br>

but in the end its not the software you use "but the more megapixels you have" ;-) ( as we all know ) but postproduction is some time consuming process and so I think its worth trying some diff. systems to find the one you can work with best;<br>

the advantage of adobe will always be the massive range of plugins and there are even some compatible with lightroom; like nik soft. or a free presetbundle from onone;...<br>

cheers</p>

[vasilis1]

<p>Thanks for all the information Nikolai. I will try to get lighgtroom and give it a try.</p>