Google| Subject | Re: post processing |
| From | YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle |
| Date | 2014-03-15 13:34 (2014-03-15 13:34) |
| Message-ID | <lg1hbq$jtq$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | PeterN |
| Followups | PeterN (8h & 56m) > YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle |
Le 13/03/14 23:07, PeterN a écrit :
Each one his own way.David Taylor
I very rarely take RAW, preferring to get the exposure right in the camera.
But, I want to say that raw is not only about "getting exposure right" (most modern camera give correct exposure in most situation anyway). It is more about "getting colors and dynanic range right". 14 bits vs 8 bits.
It is about allowing further post traitement ; exposure, dynamic range, tone ajustements.
In low-light + high contrast situation, you add 2 steps to your sensor dynamic by using raw. In mixed light situation, you can ajust the WB to a compromise, or assemble different tiff with masks to give an effet you like.
And if you are digging into the expressive power of color (I am very sensitive to color) raw give you choice. Infinite choices. In any case, if you are about to alter the histogram in any way, better make your image 16 bit deep to avoid "holes" (ie, the dreaded comb histogram) in your color range. Of course you can do jpg 8 bits ->tiff 16 bits before any processing. I recommend this if you have only jpgs. But if you intend to process a bit or more, it makes a lot more sense to start with 12 bits or 14 bits deep image (raw) to make what you want on 16 bits tiffs. And this is true even and more if you want to make BW from your files, because you'll want to ajust each color curve.
Noëlle Adam
2014-03-13-
-
-
