Affinity Problem (Help)
Feb 27, 2024 18:39:44 #
srt101fan wrote:
Why are you ignoring the OP's question? All he wanted to know is why Affinity produced a darker JPEG than Windows or the Canon DPP Raw editor.
You enjoy arguing and don't care how much you twist things around.
I've said my piece.
You enjoy arguing and don't care how much you twist things around.
I've said my piece.
Ysarex and I have already explained why that happened.
What everyone else overlooked was that the goal should not to produce a JPEG like the camera's. It should be to properly expose the subjects for the raw file. Then a satisfactory image can be created on the computer, independent of the camera's JPEG.
The bright lights are just a distraction.
Feb 27, 2024 18:42:35 #
Amadeus
Loc: New York
I’m not as proficient and experienced here as many are. I like posting a problem I’m having or a question because I generally get exactly what I need to address the concern. That’s what makes this forum invaluable to people like myself. I’m just hesitant many times because of the arguments that crop up, and honestly, beyond my own knowledge and capabilities.
That said, Ysarex gave me 2 excellent remedies for my question/problem that seems to have worked. So for that 🙏,
Again, thank you. 😊
That said, Ysarex gave me 2 excellent remedies for my question/problem that seems to have worked. So for that 🙏,
Again, thank you. 😊
Feb 27, 2024 18:59:12 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
selmslie wrote:
" i The difference is that this time the ampl... (show quote)
So yes, you were completely wrong. HTP does not adjust the exposure.
Feb 27, 2024 19:09:56 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
selmslie wrote:
Both of them jumped to the conclusion that the software was to blame. They were both wrong.
Again you are wrong.
The OP's question: "I've attached 2 photos. Same pic, one Raw the other jpg out of my Canon 80D. If I open this photo (or view thumbnails) in Widows or the Canon DPP Raw editor (and thumbnails), both files look basically the same. When I open the Raw file in Affinity Photo 2 the Raw image is severely underexposed."
The OP's question notes that viewing the photo in Canon DPP both the JPEG and Raw look the same but opened in AP the raw appears underexposed.
I correctly identified the reason that was happening. AP does not read and process the HTP tag in the EXIF. The OP later verified that was correct: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-800715-1.html#14477878 "I found the setting turned it off and took some test shots around the house. The 2 files now look the same with regards to exposure anyway."
Feb 27, 2024 19:17:49 #
Ysarex wrote:
So yes, you were completely wrong. HTP does not adjust the exposure.
I said it adjusted the exposure/ISO relationship.
Feb 27, 2024 19:18:06 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
selmslie wrote:
Ysarex and I have already explained why that happened.
No, I explained why that happened. You got it wrong and now you're trying to change the subject because your error got corrected and you can't stand being wrong and being corrected.
Feb 27, 2024 19:22:27 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
selmslie wrote:
I said it adjusted the exposure/ISO relationship.
No. First you said this: "Canon's Highlight Tone Priority is similar to Nikon's Highlight Weighted Metering and Sony's Highlight metering mode. They all adjust the exposure to limit the overexposed highlights." [my bold]
After I corrected you THEN you said it adjusted the exposure/ISO relationship. HTP does not adjust the exposure. You were wrong.
Feb 27, 2024 19:24:27 #
Ysarex wrote:
Again you are wrong.
The OP's question: "I've attached 2 photos. ...
The OP's question: "I've attached 2 photos. ...
Any teacher worth his salt would have pointed out that the problem was the actual exposure and [effective] ISO setting. In other words, the problem is what got recorded in the raw file.
All of the subsequent manipulations only served to cover up that problem, including the use of noise reduction.
If the raw file is inferior, manipulating it to achieve an acceptable image can be a waste of time.
It takes some experience to get a proper raw file. You don't seem to understand that.
Feb 27, 2024 19:27:12 #
Ysarex wrote:
No, I explained why that happened. You got it wrong and now you're trying to change the subject because your error got corrected and you can't stand being wrong and being corrected.
You can't stand the fact that I understand raw data. You have frequently referred to it as "sophist BS". That just means it's over your head.
Feb 27, 2024 19:58:39 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
selmslie wrote:
Any teacher worth his salt would have pointed out ... (show quote)
Again you're trying to change the subject to cover up your error.
Let's have a closer look at how wrong your original post was.
First you said this: "Canon's Highlight Tone Priority is similar to Nikon's Highlight Weighted Metering and Sony's Highlight metering mode. They all adjust the exposure to limit the overexposed highlights." Wrong. HTP does not adjust exposure.
But then you went on to say this: "Evaluative metering would have let them blow out more and lightened the raw data by giving less weight to the highlights. This would have called for a lower shutter speed or a wider aperture."
Wow! is that wrong. Evaluative metering is not influenced by HTP. Had he turned HTP off he would have gotten the exact same exposure -- NOT a lower shutter speed or wider aperture.
Feb 27, 2024 21:49:52 #
Amadeus wrote:
I’m not as proficient and experienced here as many... (show quote)
I'm happy you got your issue resolved. Don't worry about the arguments. Most people just tune out when someone drags the discussion off-topic and wanders into irrelevant details that nobody cares about.
Feb 27, 2024 22:34:39 #
Amadeus
Loc: New York
srt101fan wrote:
I'm happy you got your issue resolved. Don't worry about the arguments. Most people just tune out when someone drags the discussion off-topic and wanders into irrelevant details that nobody cares about.
Thanks. I had a Minolta Srt101. Many moons ago of course. 😊
Feb 27, 2024 23:38:02 #
Amadeus wrote:
Thanks. I had a Minolta Srt101. Many moons ago of course. 😊
A fine and fun camera!
Feb 28, 2024 03:07:26 #
Ysarex wrote:
Again you're trying to change the subject to cover up your error.
We can replicate Canon's approach by setting the camera to Evaluative metering and exposure compensation to -1. Anyone who wants to develop the raw information themselves on the computer would know how this works.
What surprised me was that Canon would have come up with such a Rube Goldberg approach. It seems like they (and you) were more interested in the camera's JPEG.
It's no big deal. I'm satisfied that my Sony and Nikon cameras provide more sophisticated metering.
Feb 28, 2024 09:08:15 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
selmslie wrote:
We can replicate Canon's approach by setting the camera to Evaluative metering and exposure compensation to -1.
No. The -1 EC would alter the camera selected exposure whereas engaging the HTP function would not alter the camera selected exposure. Using a minus EC would reduce exposure while engaging HTP would not reduce exposure. You are wrong.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.