jason_tanner

A friend of mine recently purchased the 40D and liked the preview of his jpeg preview of his RAW file more than

his Photoshop Camera RAW processed version of the jpeg. So he was wondering what software tools people use to

process their RAW files. He used Digital Photo Professional 3.1, which came with his new camera, and was pleased

with his results. Anyone else using the same? If not what do you use? Thanks!

 

Jason

Yes that is correct. Someone knows better than me, but the monitor one that you were using is the bias that your monitor has. So if your monitor has a blue shift using the monitor would show you double the blue shift (the shift it has naturally plus you are displaying an additional shift) which is why it looks so bad. Hopefully that makes sense.

 

But make it your default in Windows and Photoshop will use it whether you are in sRGB or Adobe RGB or any of the other color spaces.

You want to switch your color space to either sRGB or Adobe RGB. Don't use the Monitor RGB.

So I did a search and couldn't find what someone was talking about, but I read

someone mentioning turning down the contrast for the Dell Ultrasharps. I have

the 2007 and I calibrate with the Spyder and it says to set to factory

defaults, so I was wondering if people do different and why...

Thanks!

Jason

The 18-70 is better quality than the 18-55. Not that price tells the whole story, but that is why the older 18-70 sells for more (~$300). But just do a google search and you can find lots of searches to compare the images from both and more of a discussion. The 18-55 is a cheap kit lens and not great quality from what I've seen which is limited.

Google around. There are a bunch of scripts that can allow similar batch processing, but they are mostly command line based. Like dcraw lets you batch process RAW files. There are others that are similar for other operations. I don't know what gimp can do either. Someone might know if it can do batch processing.

Just a thought, but I'd double check they are both in teh same color space. If they aren't I could see it possibly misinterpreting something, but I've never seen this or had an issue. I'm just throwing out an idea.

You're welcome David. Best o' luck

I'm pretty sure all TN panels are six bit. When it says 16.7 million color that's marketing reports not an official standard. If you read my earlier post there is a link from my webpage that has a two links on it and one takes you to a dutch page where you can look up monitor type. I'd definitely recommend the Dell 2007 wfp and do it right rather than get a piece of junk and be down $200 with regrets. You get what you pay for....

That HP is also TN from what I've read.

David,

All three of those are six bit TN panels. If you don't care about your monitor than by all means go ahead, but I assume you asked because you wanted a better monitor.

I believe all the widescreen (talking about the Dell 2007) are the S-IPS from LG. And yeah some of the fullscreen are not S_IPS, but are instead S-PVA which is still lots better than TN from what I've read.

The 2007 is eight bit, the 207 is six bit.

I did a little write up a little bit ago on the six bit issue. But more interesting to you are the two links at the bottom that are helpful to find a good monitor:

 

http://www.tannerphotography.net/lots_oths.php?year=My%20Hidden%20Files&sub=Monitor%20Selection

Agree on the above, except I think its worth it for protection, but I do pay more for a high quality filter. If your lenses are cheap, I might not bother. I have nicked a filter that showed up in every image that didn't affect my lens so I was glad to swap out a filter instead of a lens.

 

Good price on filters here.

http://2filter.com/

What is your white balance set to? An example file is always helpful...

But I think she wants to show part of one photo on top of another. I'd have to play around with it myself, but I think you want to create a layer mask that is the difference between the photos and use that as a way to select the player. Having an initial photo of just the background would have made this easy because you'll have to do some manual selecting to remove the background and player overlap.

I'd get the Canon SD700IS or 800IS, but I'm not looking for full controls since most shots I don't want my D200 for I use as a real point and shoot.

Agreed on picassa. I still use it to email multiple photos.

How can no one mention the Gimp. Its freeware version of Photoshop essentially and a lot of it is basically identical. I've never used the gimp, but tell my gimp friends what Photoshop can do. Personally, that is what I would use if I weren't using Photoshop. Next would be Photoshop Elements possibly, but I haven't looked into it much. But free versus $70 is an easy decision to me.

Anthony,

That's quite a broad question, but I'll give it a shot...

 

So your image sensor is a certain number of pixels down and across (say 2100 by 3000 just picking random numbers). Now as far as screen resolution goes, your screen is also a certain number of pixels across. I'd say usually your screen is smaller by a certain factor in most scenarios unless you have a huge monitor and a tiny sensor (like a one megapixel). So to see individual pixels you need to zoom in on an image quite a bit.

 

Now dpi comes in when you want to print. You print to a given size like 4x6. Now a typical figure for dpi is 300 dpi (but you can go as low as 100 dpi for different sizes and there is a good bit to learn here). So 4x6 at 300dpi means your image size will be 1200 x 1800. So given our earlier sensor of 2100 x 3000, there is quite a bit of information to throw away.

 

I hope that makes sense...

Jason

Carolyn,

That does include the D80. My wife uses the D70s and the D80 wouldn't be any different. You control the flash +/- the same way you would the on camera flash.

Greg,

It depends on what you want. If you want a high quality black and white do the post processing yourself and make it look nice. If you want an automated decent to mediocre black and white you can have the camera do it by itself. The color to black and white conversion is an art in its own right (one I have not mastered myself yet)... But if you don't care too much about your results sure do it the easy way.

wow thanks Joseph. You know quite a bit about it. My front lens is actually a broken. I loaned it to someone and it broke the AF on it. I took it apart for fun before I knew about reversing and all I have is the skeleton of the lens. Sounds like I need another 50mm to really play around with it. But this is great information. Thanks so much!

Yes that does control the exposure compensation on the flash. My wife uses the SB400 and it is great for bounce flash indoors. It doesn't have the exposure compensation range my SB600 does, but it costs a lot less. Great little flash for the price.