The Photography Thread

anirbandd

Conversation Architect
I am still not convinced to shoot RAW .... I still dont understand how will I PP each and every RAW file if I have 200 of them ...and if I apply a batch conversion to jpeg...how will it be different then in-camera jpeg. You may say that batch conversion settings are done by us, but then each pic need different exposure and different sharpning, how a batch conversion will help me??

in adobe bridge, select the pics that you want to convert, and then open them in Camera RAW. apply whatever PP you need to each image (individually/all at once) and click on Save[Left bottom corner]. select the format and quality and naming, and click on Save.

:)
 

pranav0091

I am not an Owl
@Sujoy: Shooting in RAW is not about batch conversion. In that particular area they are equals.

The argument boils down to the 'amount' of PP that needs to be done. I have seen the 'banding' issue before in Jpegs. Didnt know they were avoided by RAW.

@Amlan : I am not fully convinced. I think the way to compare them would be to see if the two images can be brought to the same visual quality instead of comparing the output after applying the same fixes on them, since each image needs different PP (I am assumeing thats what you did) even if they are from the same RAW-FPEG pair. Thats why I wanted the parent-untouched files.

Also I see that the RAW has clipped white highlights on the pillars while the Jpeg has banding...


@Anirban : Does PS have options like DPP to get the camera-JPEG equivalent of the RAW so that batch processing is a viable option ?
My whole point of not shooting in RAW basically revolves around the number of tools I have to switch between for a single image at this point : Camera -> DPP (get JPEG equivalent RAW) -> PS to do most else (I dont particularly like DPP so :>)
My current setup looks like : Camera -> Picasa or Paint.NET (depending on the level of PP needed)
 

sujoyp

Grand Master
@pranav & anirban ...for me batch conversion will be way more important ...when I used to go for birding my whole morning went in photographing and whole afternoon in post processing and selecting from those 300-400 pics ....now u want me to convert those pics into jpeg first with some equal settings and then crop and pp again ....it seems its increasing my time ...I will see ...and I will surely try in 1-2 day itself :)
 

anirbandd

Conversation Architect
@Sujoy: Shooting in RAW is not about batch conversion. In that particular area they are equals.

The argument boils down to the 'amount' of PP that needs to be done. I have seen the 'banding' issue before in Jpegs. Didnt know they were avoided by RAW.

@Amlan : I am not fully convinced. I think the way to compare them would be to see if the two images can be brought to the same visual quality instead of comparing the output after applying the same fixes on them, since each image needs different PP (I am assumeing thats what you did) even if they are from the same RAW-FPEG pair. Thats why I wanted the parent-untouched files.

Also I see that the RAW has clipped white highlights on the pillars while the Jpeg has banding...


@Anirban : Does PS have options like DPP to get the camera-JPEG equivalent of the RAW so that batch processing is a viable option ?
My whole point of not shooting in RAW basically revolves around the number of tools I have to switch between for a single image at this point : Camera -> DPP (get JPEG equivalent RAW) -> PS to do most else (I dont particularly like DPP so :>)
My current setup looks like : Camera -> Picasa or Paint.NET (depending on the level of PP needed)

Follow the process i gave above and you will be using only PS for the entire process. I mostly use PS.

I use DPP only when i dont need any kind of fine tuning to be done on the RAW apart from adjusting exposure, WB, etc. on the whole image.

in PS Camera RAW, there is an adjustment brush where in you can select a region in the pic and adjust the exposure of that region. there is also selective coloring, grad filters and many more.

for me the process is Camera -> Bridge.

@pranav & anirban ...for me batch conversion will be way more important ...when I used to go for birding my whole morning went in photographing and whole afternoon in post processing and selecting from those 300-400 pics ....now u want me to convert those pics into jpeg first with some equal settings and then crop and pp again ....it seems its increasing my time ...I will see ...and I will surely try in 1-2 day itself :)

for those exact needs i use Bridge+PS.

Both Bridge and PS have Camera RAW, so adjustments can be done anywhere.

and i shoot only in RAW.
 

sujoyp

Grand Master
Thanks...Actually I took it hand held and and made some big blunders in the pic...to cover up I made it soo dark :( but final image is looking fine....and yaah its converted from RAW :D
 

izzikio_rage

Technomancer
Thanks...Actually I took it hand held and and made some big blunders in the pic...to cover up I made it soo dark :( but final image is looking fine....and yaah its converted from RAW :D

that is a good shot, lightening hardly gives you any time to react, much less change settings. BTW could you explain how you took this shot?

Finally on the raw bandwagon :))

@medico, nice moody shot.
 

sujoyp

Grand Master
@amlan I tell you its not possible to take handheld lightning shot....still I tried to attempt one...to capture lightning shot you need at least 5' second shutter speed and f11 to keep it sharp....I got this success in 20second shutter speed and f13...you can check in exif.

now the blunder was I had to hold the cam handheld for 20sec...and other then lightning all the details got blurred/hil gaya ...I had to do lot of PP to remove almost all other details from pic
 

izzikio_rage

Technomancer
That's true, but that is still a pretty cool lightening shot. I've tried this quite a few times, but mostly the strike itself is so faint that it looks more like an image imperfection rather than a lightening strike

Tried again to get a decent bokeh out of my stock lens. It's better but I still need to control iso and focusing

*farm8.staticflickr.com/7333/10072528604_3f1d422dc9_c.jpg
coffee? by Amlan Mathur, on Flickr
 

sujoyp

Grand Master
amlan why the pic is soo grainy...there is no relation between high ISO and creamy bokeh?? just take the shot at ISO 100 and slow down the shutter speed
 

pranav0091

I am not an Owl
@ medico, amlan, sujoy : Nice shots from all :)

@Amlan: Costa coffee sucks here in bangalore. Also try using AF if you dont use it already. The sonys have some of the best AF around.

1/20 @~400ISO would have been very ideal for this shot. Even if it was handheld.
 

Faun

Wahahaha~!
Staff member
*farm6.staticflickr.com/5536/10097653315_4d3d809606_c.jpg

F10 aperture, 3 pics tone mapped, Tokina 11-16mm, D7000
 

Tenida

Gadget Freak
Green all the way :)
(Place where I belong)

famous song by John denver
Almost heaven, West Virginia
Blue Ridge Mountains
Shenandoah River -
Life is old there
Older than the trees
Younger than the mountains
Growin' like a breeze

Country Roads, take me home
To the place I belong
West Virginia, mountain momma
Take me home, country roads

*i.imgur.com/8NvupHV.jpg
*i.imgur.com/F7zDEpe.jpg
 

sunil.001

Broken In
Nice one Faun, a_medico and Amlan.
Here is my pic taken from Canon SX160.

Avatar Style | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Nothing is permanent | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Lappy n Sennheiser | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom