Starting to use raw (Page 3): I think you have a good point here, Naturepics. I always try to make sure my camera settings are right for the situation. You can correct mistakes in...

Nightski

naturepics43 wrote:

I hope you don't become as confused as I am from reading some of the following posts to your question. I think you might be thinking ALL settings are "redundant" and that is incorrect. WB and exposure do matter. Some menu settings only affect the jpeg image and not the raw image. Menu settings are different for each camera body. You should check your manual for specifics on your camera body.

I think you have a good point here, Naturepics. I always try to make sure my camera settings are right for the situation. You can correct mistakes in Lightroom, but you have a lot more range for corrections if you shoot it right in the first place. You end up with a better result.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

bobbybob wrote:

Thanks rpavich. So just to be sure that I understand - settings such as white balance become redundant as I can adjust later? So what setting would you have that on or does it really not matter. Hope this isn't being pedantic, I just want to be sure that I fully understand.

Thank you.

No you should never "just forget" about setting your camera, even if you shoot in RAW, one should always try, "to get it right in camera". True, minor mistakes are easier fixed if you shoot RAW, and you have a greater leeway in manipulating your images, as raw files offer you a wider dynamic range, so manipulating tone and white balance will be much easier.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

bobbybob wrote:

I do have PSE10 but don't find it particularly intuitive - I can't get my head around layers. My understanding (very limited) is that LR doesn't use layers. I'm not abandoning use of PSE altogether but as I mentioned in my original post I do not do much in the way of photo manipulation - just very occasionally. So what I'm after is software which will enable me to get the most out of raw, without costing an arm and a leg.

Keep PSE10 on your computer because LR and PSE will compliment each other. LR is great for doing everything you need done to improve a photograph but there are things it can't do such as add text, filters, cut out an object and place on a new background etc. But PSE10 can do all those things. So if you edit a photo in LR but need to add text or any of the other things mentioned, just right click on the image in LR and send it over to PSE10. Simple as that.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

bobbybob - I only scanned the now 3-pages of responses. I have PSE10 and LR5, but I perform most of my post processing using Canon's DPP software. You can access the Canon website and download the latest software. If your 50D isn't listed, just use the software for any of their current EOS bodies. Although different than the Adobe products, it's easier to use for basic processing, particularly changes to picture styles and WB settings as the dropdowns from the camera menu are in the DPP software and can be applied to your RAW file.

StephenVL Loc: Los Angeles, USA

PSE vs lightroom is a regular discussion here on UHH. Lightroom will do 90% of what any photographer needs. In Lightroom you can do all of the camera raw adjustments. You can do filters. You can remove unwanted objects.
PSE adds the ability to combine photos, remove backgrounds and do layers. PSE does not do batch processing.
In Lightroom if I have 50 photos shot under the same conditions I can adjust the white balance on one and then duplicate that setting to the other 50. PSE does not do this.
Lightroom does not do layers. Layers allows you to combine photos and or parts of photos. If you are using Lightroom and you have a photo that can benefit from layers you have several options. They are:
Photoshop
Photoshop Elements
Gimp
Paintshop Pro
OnOne software suite.

Big Stopper Loc: London

Thanks to everyone for your ideas. I've been out all evening (here in UK) so I hope you will forgive me for not responding properly right now. Will get back to it tomorrow! Cheers, Bob

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

bobbybob wrote:

I really feel that it's about time to make the move to using raw. My camera is a Canon 50d and I have two questions: firstly, in the user defined settings on my camera I can set preferences for sharpness, contrast etc - do these settings have any effect on the raw image? Second, I have but do not use a lot PE10 - I do very little photo manipulation and wonder whether this is the best software to convert my raw images or is there a better software package?

Many thanks to you all.

Most of your question has been covered. Here is an example I posted as to what RAW is capable of saving when one really screws up. As they say, one picture is worth....

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-133857-1.html

JPG would have been a complete loss.
--Bob

Nightski

rmalarz wrote:

Most of your question has been covered. Here is an example I posted as to what RAW is capable of saving when one really screws up. As they say, one picture is worth....

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-133857-1.html

JPG would have been a complete loss.
--Bob

Now that's a Picture that's worth a 1,000 words! Still, I would err on the safe side and try to always remember to check my settings. The mistakes don't all come out that good.

musickna Loc: St. Louis

bobbybob wrote:

I really feel that it's about time to make the move to using raw. My camera is a Canon 50d and I have two questions: firstly, in the user defined settings on my camera I can set preferences for sharpness, contrast etc - do these settings have any effect on the raw image? Second, I have but do not use a lot PE10 - I do very little photo manipulation and wonder whether this is the best software to convert my raw images or is there a better software package?

Many thanks to you all.

RAW is the way to go. Mostly I use Lightroom 5 for image processing, but not all the time. Although not nearly as user friendly as Lightroom, Canon's own Digital Photo Professional has a few tricks up its sleeve in terms of lens correction that surpass Lightroom - and it's free and comes with the camera.

The main advantage of RAW is that it will give you a lot more dynamic headroom to fix photographs. Areas that appear over-exposed and blown-out from an in-camera jpg are not salvageable. But they are often are recoverable from a RAW file.

OonlyBonly

The software which came with you camera is excellent for photo manipulation - including making adjustments for white balance, etc. Digital Photo Professional. It also includes vignetting correction for many Canon lenses built in.

georgevedwards Loc: Essex, Maryland.

I checked out a lot of trial RAW software but nothing compered to what I had in Photoshop CS3. There are many more ways to manipulate the info than any other, for instance Elements version didn't come close. If Adobe's lightroom has the same RAW developer, go for it. Otherwise, if money is not a problem, pickup the latest Photoshop CS. Of course, maybe you want simple, not complicated, like most people, to get the job done without too much time and thinking. I know I waste umpteen number of hours fooling around with pics just to get them right, but I love it. My problem was my Nikon RAW .nef files were not recognized by photoshop, so I downloaded the free new DNG converter from Adobe, which solved the problem. My Canon RAW files were recognized.

bobbybob wrote:

I really feel that it's about time to make the move to using raw. My camera is a Canon 50d and I have two questions: firstly, in the user defined settings on my camera I can set preferences for sharpness, contrast etc - do these settings have any effect on the raw image? Second, I have but do not use a lot PE10 - I do very little photo manipulation and wonder whether this is the best software to convert my raw images or is there a better software package?

Many thanks to you all.

pnwheeler Loc: Virginia

Happily, Photoshop CC (the creative cloud version of Photoshop 6) recognizes NEF format.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

No--white balance does not matter.

bobagedon Loc: Nebraska

I decided to make the move to RAW a couple yrs ago. I have a 50d also. I started by saving my shots in both raw and jpeg to get the hang of it. (a waste of time and memory, really). Now I use raw for my important shots and jpeg for my snapshots. You pretty much set up your shots the same way, but you have a lot more room for mistakes with raw. You have the necessary software to start, but I found out when I got Lightroom, it's the best way to download your pics. It does take a lot to get used to though. I got Scott Kelby's Lightroom 4 book and did some online video courses and I'm still learning over a year later. I say "just do it" and enjoy.

bobbybob wrote:

I really feel that it's about time to make the move to using raw. My camera is a Canon 50d and I have two questions: firstly, in the user defined settings on my camera I can set preferences for sharpness, contrast etc - do these settings have any effect on the raw image? Second, I have but do not use a lot PE10 - I do very little photo manipulation and wonder whether this is the best software to convert my raw images or is there a better software package?

Many thanks to you all.

Big Stopper Loc: London

kymarto wrote:

Think of raw as a negative and jpg/tiff, etc. as a print from the negative. If you want to print from the negative you have a lot of latitude. If you want to change the print you have to take a picture of the picture and manipulate that. So much information is missing in the print...

Hi kymarto and Man Ray 1, you both mention tiff and this opens up another question: under what circumstances would you use a tiff file? Thanks, Bob