RAW Processing

Discussion in 'Photography' started by No_Duff, Sep 13, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I'm just starting to use RAW instead of Jpeg's and I have DPP which came with the Canon 7D camera and Photo Elements 8 which uses Camera Raw (a plug in ?)

    Which program do you use for RAW Processing ?

    Any free programs ?
  2. Photoscape is a free download image editor with many good features, plus it will handle RAW images too.

    I don't have the link handy, but it's easy to search for.

    Also Photoshop Elements is pretty good but you have to buy that one.
  3. GIMP is very good, and free. Some pros I know use it.

    I use Adobe LightRoom, it's the mutt's nuts. Costs a couple of bob, but it organises all your pictures, does the processing, and best of all, all the adjustments are layer masks, so you can just reverse any changes, or click 'reset' and go back to the image as shot.
  4. There is also the gimp which is free and is quite a powerful piece of software. Linky here GIMP - Downloads
  5. Gremlin

    Gremlin LE Good Egg (charities)

    As a basic (free) RAW processor you aren't going to do much better than DPP, in fact it was surpassing ACR with 7D files until Adobe bought ACR 6.3 out. After that just throw it into Elements for completion.

    If you want to take your PP up a level then get Lightroom 3. It's effectively replaced my whole work flow to the point that I hardly ever bother with PS CS5 any more apart from exceptional circumstances;
    bear in mind though that the majority of stuff that I do can only have basic darkroom processing applied with zero cloning or effects.
  6. Thanks for the help.

    This pic was RAW and I used PE 8 with ACR to PP it.

    For any SAA collectors the rds are all part of the pre Nato trials, they are .30 Light Rifle.

    Any comments welcome

    (note for any rozzers, the cartridges are all inert)

  7. I was having some issues with my PP once I started to use Lightroom. I could immediately see the benefits to my photography which involved people. It was quick easy and quite pleasing to use the many sliders and to get instant results that would have taken a lot more knowledge(albeit something I'm familiar with) in photoshop. But my gripe started when I noticed a type of auto correct that was happening when I imported RAW straight from the camera.

    I have a couple of nice presets(I use a 60D and a 7D) which I shoot straight off the camera, a low contrast neutral for portraits being one. Once imported to LR, I would first be shown my image, with my preset(as per the way it was shot on camera) and then a few seconds later after the histogram stopped reading "calculating", it would present a newly calibrated version of that image. With unwanted colours and a shit tonne of noise to boot.

    I did a lot of research on it and it seems that, what you first see before th eimage is done calibrating, is a jpeg that's embedded in every RAW file. Then what it shows you is a representation of what it believes the sensor picked up WITHOUT any preset from the camera being applied. This doesn't make any sense to me, sure you'd just turn off presets if you didn't want them?? So I had to start using the canon eos software "photo professional" as guys have mentioned here. Pretty much not tweaking anything, but just sending it from that to shopshop. Once' in photoshop(it now still retains the desired preset look from the camera) Save it and then open it in Lightroom. This way you keep your preset and all the quality of full size image(OP has an 18mp sensor and nobody wants noise at 100iso)

    I have a quick video here that shows how LR flicks from one image to the other. The first image that you see is what I want it to stay as, but then a couple of seconds later you see it change over. Very annoying, but the work around above is best for retaining RAW quality and also desired preset tones and adjustments.

    Hope that helps if anyone finds they have the same problem.
  8. Gremlin

    Gremlin LE Good Egg (charities)

    I really wish people would stop using the terms nice and pleasing when it comes to photography - it sounds like something Hyacinth Bucket would come up with and makes me want to vomit.

    The simple fact is that neither ACR nor LR will recognise in camera presets when working with RAW because they are put there to control the Jpeg output and have nothing to do with RAW capture at all.
    If you want to use your in camera controls then work with Jpeg output in the first place.

    It takes about 3 minutes to build up a Lightroom import preset to mimic what you'd set in the camera itself; which is hardly onerous.

    If you want to rely on camera settings then what's the point of shooting in RAW in the first place? Set your camera up for Jpeg and shoot the correct exposure.
    The whole point of using RAW is to give yourself flexibility when it comes to image processing - why on earth would you want to use a predesigned template in those cases? You are effectively doing the camera's work for it, except on your computer.

    If you use Lightroom properly it's a brilliant tool - if you can be bothered to learn how it works of course!
    • Like Like x 1
  9. I'm not sure how your process works but even if I pick "standard" on an EOS body, that is still a preset. I can't actually see camera RAW on my previews.
    So I have to wait until I get onto a computer to subtract the default application and to see if my exposure was correct.

    Also you'd have to assume you were looking at a fully calibrated monitor if your going to make lightroom presets to mimic your on camera settings preferences(which according to my spyder 3 I do) But my prints look different and my preview screen when compared to my actual monitor look different.
    Subtle differences but noticeable all the same.Also, shooting in Jpeg wouldn't allow any RAW adjustment in the EOS utility, so it's not an option for me to only shoot in jpeg.

    Your not wrong with what your saying, as above I noted that the preview is an embedded jpeg built into the RAW for preview purposes only. But with the EOS utility you can still retain that data in RAW, still make accurate RAW post-process adjustments in EOS utility.

    Ara sure, it's nothing to get in a flap about, everyone has a different process, there's no right way or wrong way. :) Oh and I've only been using lightroom for 2 weeks or so only finding my way around it oh great one. xD
  10. Gremlin

    Gremlin LE Good Egg (charities)

    I do this for a living. Want to carry on arguing?
  11. Sure do you have a website of your work or anything I can have a look at? I'm not arguing. :)
  12. RAW is the DBs - the newer variants of Adobe's RAW converter allow all sorts of tweaking
    [ND filter, noise reduction, fill, vibrancy etc] before bringing into PS.
    There I just do a few tweaks.
    JPEGs are already cooked and imo not worth the hassle, as changes are so limited.
  13. I only use JPG when I'm shooting a family photo day or event, where the images go straight to the printer to be flogged at £10.00 a pop, or for Ebay stuff. Other than that everything is RAW.

    Perhaps you've got the camera set to save two files, one JPG (which would use the presets) and one RAW (which wouldn't). I use the feature when doing a 'proper' shoot but with clients there nosing at the pictures as they are taken, and are too dense to realise that the dull-looking, unprocessed RAW files aren't the end result. It's nice to have some pretty pics for them to ooh and aah at on the spot.
  14. Gremlin

    Gremlin LE Good Egg (charities)

    Yup, because that's going to happen - not!

    You're right that Jpegs are effectively precooked, but not that the changes are limited.
    In LR3 you can shift the exposure in Jpegs +/- 2 EV as well as alter WB etc, it really does make a huge difference.

    I'd say that the majority of my work is shot in Jpeg, principally because it's either News or Sports, where speed of transmission and the volume of shots preclude full on RAW.
    However it's also worth noting that this style of shooting only allows minor adjustments in PP, but I've yet to find it limiting for full on editing if I get the basics right in camera!