unaltered shots
Jan 17, 2024 02:41:44 #
Jan 17, 2024 03:07:28 #
Delderby wrote:
A RAW file is like a new paint by numbers canvas with the numbers missing.
That makes no sense at all.
Jan 17, 2024 04:43:29 #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
That makes no sense at all.
Think on it - isn't a RAW file recognizable only as a pic that needs completing with the imagination and/or to the satisfaction of the artist?
Jan 17, 2024 06:20:22 #
A raw file would be an image if the missing data were supplied.
The missing data are the parameters needed to tell the demosaicing algorithm how to deal with brightness, contrast, white balance, etc.
It's not JUST the application of software that makes it an image.
The missing data are the parameters needed to tell the demosaicing algorithm how to deal with brightness, contrast, white balance, etc.
It's not JUST the application of software that makes it an image.
Jan 17, 2024 07:38:45 #
R.G. wrote:
Why? Because br br a) Cameras don't record thin... (show quote)
And this is why AI is SOOO wonderful. Right??
Jan 17, 2024 07:45:50 #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
All of those are altering your photos.
I guess but I did almost exactly the same thing when I shoot color negative film. I adjust to color balance, the exposure, do a bit of dodging or burning in. I wouldn't know how to do it unaltered? I can't just print all my negs with the same filter setting?
Jan 17, 2024 08:14:48 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
Delderby wrote:
A RAW file is like a new paint by numbers canvas with the numbers missing.
I have used your same analogy, except that I didn't remove the numbers. There's probably a spectrum of analogies that can be used, ranging from a blank coloring book page, to paint-by-numbers, to hand-tinting black & white prints, to restoring old paintings, and maybe beyond that. Of course, Adobe and other tools really don't even require the coloring book lines. They support starting with a blank page.
Jan 17, 2024 09:29:44 #
DirtFarmer wrote:
A raw file would be an image if the missing data were supplied.
The missing data are the parameters needed to tell the demosaicing algorithm how to deal with brightness, contrast, white balance, etc.
It's not JUST the application of software that makes it an image.
The missing data are the parameters needed to tell the demosaicing algorithm how to deal with brightness, contrast, white balance, etc.
It's not JUST the application of software that makes it an image.
No, it’s the application of software that displays an image. Contrary to popular belief you can set a white balance in a raw image. It’s not saved in the raw data, but raw files include metadata. The raw setting is part of the metadata, which is why when I’m processing my images I rarely need to change white balance. The other settings you mention are things you can change but not required to display the image.
Jan 17, 2024 09:32:21 #
dustie wrote:
For some of you long-time shutter clickers who wer... (show quote)
The tribal nature of humanity precludes any hope of relieving the us-v-them conundrum. But hopefully, people will occasionally catch themselves and realize the futility of petty arguments over what their animal ate, and just clean the pet puke off the floor. (Actual story behind that...)
I'm interested in getting results. I'm interested in seeing results. I'm okay with how you got your image, if it moves me or communicates with me, and your methods weren't illegal, unethical, immoral, or fattening.
Jan 17, 2024 09:32:44 #
Delderby wrote:
Think on it - isn't a RAW file recognizable only as a pic that needs completing with the imagination and/or to the satisfaction of the artist?
No, you can certainly display the raw image as is. It just won’t be optimal.
Jan 17, 2024 09:59:34 #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
...you can set a white balance in a raw image. It’s not saved in the raw data, but raw files include metadata. The raw setting is part of the metadata, which is why when I’m processing my images I rarely need to change white balance...
It's possible that the white balance used by the camera is included in the metadata, but I would expect that would depend on the camera. It's possible that your software has an algorithm to estimate the white balance. After all, cameras include 'auto' in the white balance settings so there must be a way to estimate it. But as you say, the white balance is not included in the raw data so it has to be supplied from outside the data somehow. Either from the metadata or the software estimate.
Jan 17, 2024 10:00:24 #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
No, you can certainly display the raw image as is. It just won’t be optimal.
What software do you use to display the raw image as is?
Jan 17, 2024 10:25:41 #
burkphoto wrote:
I'm interested in getting results. I'm interested in seeing results. I'm okay with how you got your image, if it moves me or communicates with me, and your methods weren't illegal, unethical, immoral, or fattening.
I'm perfectly fine with that, also.
Only that I'm curious along this line:
In the all-film days there were probably brand vs brand, filter use disagreements, disagreements over object removal in darkroom workflow, etc, which probably were repeatedly dragged around the arena without benefitting the craft nor the craftsmen, at their various levels of skills and experience.
So I'm wondering if there was anything roughly parallel to RAW vs jpeg -- sooc vs post-camera processing, during those film-only days, that carried over into the digital methods.
Did the digital processes give new "justifications" for contentiousness without benefit, that are not continuations of contentions that began in the film days?
Jan 17, 2024 10:49:13 #
DirtFarmer wrote:
It's possible that the white balance used by the camera is included in the metadata, but I would expect that would depend on the camera. It's possible that your software has an algorithm to estimate the white balance. After all, cameras include 'auto' in the white balance settings so there must be a way to estimate it. But as you say, the white balance is not included in the raw data so it has to be supplied from outside the data somehow. Either from the metadata or the software estimate.
But the metadata is part of the data in the file. The file contains the parameter needed. It is an image file.
Jan 17, 2024 10:57:17 #
DirtFarmer wrote:
What software do you use to display the raw image as is?
We’ll just about any processing software that handles that file type, some file viewers, even in a web browser with the right plug-in.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.