CHG_CANON wrote:
When you become a RAW photographer, you become the decision maker for these considerations in post processing, where many had been decided by the camera for the JPEG:
1. Sharpening
2. Noise Reduction
3. Color Saturation
4. Exposure adjustments, general
5. Contrast, general
6. Highlights and shadows
7. White Balance
8. Lens corrections
9. Color space
10. Pixel resolution for target image share platforms
11. Disk storage (for the larger files)
12. Image file back-up strategy (for those larger files)
You don't have to understand all these issues, but when you do, you'll be much more successful as a RAW photographer. A RAW file is God's way of telling us how hard it is to be a camera.
When you become a RAW photographer, you become the... (
show quote)
We should also add that 1, 2, 7, 8 and 9 are irreversible operations which means you can’t go back should you not like the result.
However, modern cameras do and excellent job if you are not up to the task do it yourself processing. Raw is not a magic bullet. You may find that initially it is difficult to beat or even match the camera. But eventually persistence will pay off.
DirtFarmer
Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA
Jack 13088 wrote:
We should also add that 1, 2, 7, 8 and 9 are irreversible operations which means you can’t go back should you not like the result.
However, modern cameras do and excellent job if you are not up to the task do it yourself processing. Raw is not a magic bullet. You may find that initially it is difficult to beat or even match the camera. But eventually persistence will pay off.
If you are using a parametric editor (such as Lightroom) or adjustment layers in Photoshop, 1 (sharpening), 2 (noise reduction), 7 (white balance), and 8 (lens corrections) are fully reversible. 9 (color space) can be changed on re-export.
I should also note that CHG_CANON's #12 (Image file back-up strategy (for those larger files)) should be for all files, not just the larger files.
Excellent advice from CHG_CANON. In looking at various online videos, learning about how to use Lightroom and Photoshop, I've often come away with the feeling that Photoshop is often used to fix photographs that were screwed up in the first place. It's best to try to get things right at the outset, which will minimize the need for adjustments later on (although small adjustments, like spotting, burning and dodging, are inevitable).
I will add one small thing. I've always shot, and printed, full-frame. However, if you're doing architecture of any sort, you'll probably be correcting the verticals in Lightroom. That being the case, it's best to frame your image, then back up and allow little extra at the edges. In other words, for architecture, full-frame plus, so that you can correct the verticals in Lightroom, which will inevitably crop off some of the edges.
julian.gang wrote:
I remember back when I was in college that in film photography you had 2 options when you could correct photos! You could do it in camera or you could do it in the darkroom. I always felt it was better in the darkroom, this is because I'm pretty much a klutz when it comes to fiddling with the controls of the camera. I take it for granted this is also the case with digital photography. I guess what I'm asking is Lightroom the better choice over RAW photography as with Lightroom you have the choice of correcting after the fact along with the ability of creating a digital negative?...Julian
I remember back when I was in college that in film... (
show quote)
There was never an option to correct many of the camera settings in the darkroom. If it's out of focus. mistimed, has too little DOF completely wrong exposure etc no level of skill in the darkroom could make up for that.
Moderate adjustment of tones, dodging/burning, selective blurring, & colour correction could be achieved for prints, the options for slides are very much reduced.
The controls in digital photography are much greater but good results still require the initial capture to be reasonable.
RAW is the digital negative whilst lightroom is one of the options for processing it. (the equivalent of an exposed film & the darkroom)
Lightroom may (I'm not sure I've never used it) be able to process JPEGs but it's designed to handle RAW.
RAW can't be used without some sort of processing unless your limiting yourself to looking at the embedded JPEG thumbnail - much worse than simple shooting JPEG.
billnikon wrote:
I can do much more with photoshop than I could ever do in the darkroom. Plus, it is much safer, I have lost my early shooting buddies to cancer contributed to the chemicals we breathed in.
I now shoot RAW, used to be just a Jpeg shooter, but you can teach an old dog new tricks. And now it's RAW and photoshop. I can do a 100 times more now in Photoshop than I could even hope for in the darkroom.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.
👍👍👍 I've mentioned before on UHH that learning how to do real unsharp masking in the darkroom is probably the main reason I stopped shooting film. You can no longer be satisfied without sharpening once you know how but it doubles or triples the work and time in the darkroom. Then, along came Photoshop...
julian.gang wrote:
I remember back when I was in college that in film photography you had 2 options when you could correct photos! You could do it in camera or you could do it in the darkroom. I always felt it was better in the darkroom, this is because I'm pretty much a klutz when it comes to fiddling with the controls of the camera. I take it for granted this is also the case with digital photography. I guess what I'm asking is Lightroom the better choice over RAW photography as with Lightroom you have the choice of correcting after the fact along with the ability of creating a digital negative?...Julian
I remember back when I was in college that in film... (
show quote)
Since I only shoot film, it is imparative to get the best shot in the camera first. I do not think this changes in digital.
Mundy
I agree with your approach. However, the get it right in camera is quite open to interpretation.
I complement you film only. I shoot both. But, the approach is the same but 180 degrees different.
-Bob
mundy-F2 wrote:
Since I only shoot film, it is imparative to get the best shot in the camera first. I do not think this changes in digital.
Mundy
DirtFarmer wrote:
If you are using a parametric editor (such as Lightroom) or adjustment layers in Photoshop, 1 (sharpening), 2 (noise reduction), 7 (white balance), and 8 (lens corrections) are fully reversible. 9 (color space) can be changed on re-export.
I should also note that CHG_CANON's #12 (Image file back-up strategy (for those larger files)) should be for all files, not just the larger files.
Ok, I didn’t state my point clearly. Not unusual.
If those steps are done by the camera you can not redo them from the resulting camera output. You can go back to the original raw in post only if you have the file.
Just two points. I always shoot jpg and raw. That way I can look at the jpgs and see if the any picture is worth processing in raw. Most of my shots aren't. If I get 10% keepers, I'm doing well. But without film I haven't lost any money when I hit the delete button.
Second point, I have used Photoshop for years to process raw files. There are all the tools on sliders to process any image. I've never had the need to use layers, even though I learned them and then forgot about them. I process every picture I plan to keep. Processing improves anything I can get out of a digital camera with stills or video.
Lucian wrote:
Well if you were taught correctly back in college, about photography, you would have learned that there is only one way to make a correct photo and that is always... in the camera. Post processing is to help finish off what you might not have been able to do in camera, or alter what was available to you when you took the photo. Post processing is never to help correct what you should have done in camera, in the first place.
Please remember that contrary to popular belief, Dodging and Burning in post, are NOT steps to take care of mistakes God made, in establishing good tonal relationships.
Well if you were taught correctly back in college,... (
show quote)
Ansel is rolling over in his grave. Every photo he made was tweaked in the darkroom. Ever hear of the "zone" system?
DirtFarmer
Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA
Jack 13088 wrote:
…If those steps are done by the camera you can not redo them from the resulting camera output. You can go back to the original raw in post only if you have the file.
A good reason to shoot raw and preserve the original files.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.