GTinSoCal wrote:
There's really not much, until you start into the pixel based modifications.
A lot of us us ACR (Adobe Camera Raw) for most of our post.
Then hop into PS for elbow deep operations :-)
I don't know how ViewNX 2 is, but Canon's DPP (IMHO) doesn't do a great job and is more limited that ACR.
GT
Thanks. I've been thinking of ACR, although ViewNX 2 is quite good for the basics.
minniev wrote:
Pixel level editing. Removing objects, pushing shadows/highlights/contrast more severely, serious noise removal, layered editing, selective sharpening are some examples. Some editing programs do not read raws. Raws must pass through a raw converter first, then you choose the format you want to work further with them in. For instance, if I have a raw file that I want to turn to a black and white photo to post on UHH, I send the file from Lightroom (which does read raws) to NIK silver efex plug in, where I am then working in TIFF, which preserves all the information, and the TIFF goes back to LR for cataloguing and/or export to JPEG so I can post it. Turning it to JPEG is my last action since it is then compressed, once and for all. Files moving from Lightroom into Photoshop or On One may become PSD's, which also keep all information, before returning to Lightroom. Most programs give you some choices but PSD and TIFF are common options to use.
Pixel level editing. Removing objects, pushing sha... (
show quote)
Thanks for the information. In some of my initial testing, I can see the need for some additional software.
I've been dabbling in digital lately, NEF 14 bit, compressed lossless, open in ViewNX 2, tweak colour, contrast, sharpness, &c., as needed, export as TIFF and print. In reading through these threads I see that many of you also make basic adjustments in RAW, then convert to a readable file and perform additional processing in a separate program. Here is my question: What operations can be done in these other programs that cannot be done in RAW? I thank everyone in advance. Cheers!
RWR wrote:
Right. I was thinking "stray", but inadvertently wrote "direct."
In fact you wrote "indirect," which would be correct. Non-imaging light, which is indirect or, as you say, stray, light striking the lens can degrade the image and this a proper hood can prevent.