[outsider]

Is shadow correction and highlight correction not applied to the raw files in the k-5? Similar to when custom settings are not applied to the raw output until converted in camera or with pentax software?

[JohnBee]

To my knowledge yes.
And more importantly... that's the beauty of RAW.

Pure, unadulterated, image data.
Well... up to about ISO2200 that is

[outsider]

To my knowledge yes.
And more importantly... that's the beauty of RAW.

Pure, unadulterated, image data.
Well... up to about ISO2200 that is

Interesting. I'm suprised this isn't mentioned in the 375 page manual And yes, this is a beautiful thing.

[Ash]

RAW is raw data, with the dynamic range that is inherently broader than that of JPEG.
All the image custom and D-range mode options are an attempt to get the 'desired' processing effect in converting this raw data to JPEG images - a quick step rather than having to go to the computer to convert the RAW image yourself to JPEG and then process the JPEG in your image editing software as well.

[rhodopsin]

RAW is raw data, with the dynamic range that is inherently broader than that of JPEG.
All the image custom and D-range mode options are an attempt to get the 'desired' processing effect in converting this raw data to JPEG images - a quick step rather than having to go to the computer to convert the RAW image yourself to JPEG and then process the JPEG in your image editing software as well.

Um, develop the raw to 16-bit TIFF, there are more bits to work with in PP. JPEG has only 8-bit color! JPEG has a lossy compression -- some information gets 'lost' -- the opposite of using full-information raw in the first place.

[Ash]

No argument there rhodopsin.
My response was in the context of the OP, and in the formats that the camera permits for output.

[outsider]

RAW is raw data, with the dynamic range that is inherently broader than that of JPEG.
All the image custom and D-range mode options are an attempt to get the 'desired' processing effect in converting this raw data to JPEG images - a quick step rather than having to go to the computer to convert the RAW image yourself to JPEG and then process the JPEG in your image editing software as well.

So many formats to choose from. Not enough time in the day to learn. What about this PNG format? I've heard good things about it. I've actually been converting some raw to this format, as it seems to have better quality than jpeg. And it's windows friendly.

[testdasi]

Is shadow correction and highlight correction not applied to the raw files in the k-5? Similar to when custom settings are not applied to the raw output until converted in camera or with pentax software?

Shadow correction is not applied to RAW.
Highlight correction affects RAW.
I chose my words carefully.

What HC does is that it underexposes by 1 EV and then push the image up by 1 EV. That is why your minimum ISO becomes 160/200 when you have HC turned on. E.g. correct exposure: 1/60s, f8.0 ISO 80 under HC will be 1/120s f8.0 ISO 80 and then the camera will apply digital sensitivity boost the exposure up 1 stop (and thus ISO is now equivalent to 160).

The effect is the same as if you purposely take all images at -1EV compensation and then push the exposure up in post. So the RAW file is still the RAW file but it is underexposed.

I have HC on all the time (unless I'm taking slow shutter speed landscape) but SC off. Reason: I tend to underexpose to save highlight all the time anyway so why not just try to get correct exposure and let the camera does the highlight saving. SC is does not affect RAW so keep it off.

So many formats to choose from. Not enough time in the day to learn. What about this PNG format? I've heard good things about it. I've actually been converting some raw to this format, as it seems to have better quality than jpeg. And it's windows friendly.

Taking pictures: RAW (either PEF or DNG is fine) to prevent wasting sensor data
Sharing pictures: JPEG (sRGB, not AdobeRGB color profile)
Editing pictures: TIFF or PSD
Don't bother with anything else.

[timsshots]

When the K-5 file format is set to RAW only, (no JPEG), the SHADOW CORRECT box is highlighted and modifiable in the "CAPTURE MODE" screen, P24. Other jpeg only options are greyed out.This suggests that shadow correction is applied to the RAW file.

Also... in HC when the "exposure" of the RAW data is increased by 1 EV, to compensated for the -1 EV at capture, is this applied uniformly? It may make sense to do a little less to the highlights,

Tim

[StefanMikes]

Sorry for bumping the old thread; the matter still looks unanswered and not confirmed by tests unless I missed the right discussion.
I personally believe in what testdasi wrote: Highlight correction is being applied to RAW.
However, I am still unsure about the shadow compensation. It might be that 1 or 2 or 3 bits of the sensor data could be used for Low, Medium and High Shadow Correction and expanding the Dynamic Range in RAW?

The problem is I am not in a position to make any reliable tests. One day I must have gone mad and turned both the HC and SC off then went on a bicycle city tour. The lighting was just clear skies with harsh sunshine. The pictures I brought back (all DNG) were just to be deleted; the contrast was beyond any fix and the pictures were just ugly. The next day (Sunday), I rode back to exactly the same route with HC on and High SC on. I was taking the same subjects under identical lighting. That time my pictures were fully acceptable and well handled during RAW processing.

So I am not sure. What i am sure is the HC affects the RAW in positive manner and I have the feature on all the time. What about Shadow Compensation in RAW? Did anybody make some tests?

[JohnBee]

Sorry for bumping the old thread; the matter still looks unanswered and not confirmed by tests unless I missed the right discussion...

So I am not sure. What i am sure is the HC affects the RAW in positive manner and I have the feature on all the time. What about Shadow Compensation in RAW? Did anybody make some tests?

When you develop RAW files with compatible software such as the software that comes with your camera, you will find that it reads and/or applies some of the corrections made by the camera. HOWEVER... I think it's also worth mentioning that these adjustments are not technically changes in the RAW data, but more along the lines of adjustment data carried over from the camera. Which can be compared to Adobe Camera RAW's sidecar data which is more along the lines auto adjustments rather than changes in the RAW data per say. However, this only work in cases where it is recognized. ie. if you develop your RAW files with software such as; RPP or Raw Therapee, the RAW data will be read in RAW form and without adjustments exclusively.


Hope this helps.

[StefanMikes]

I think it's also worth mentioning that these adjustments are not technically changes in the RAW data, but more along the lines of adjustment data carried over from the camera.

This answer makes me tempted to do some tests... Although your answer makes sense John.

[robgo2]

No argument there rhodopsin.
My response was in the context of the OP, and in the formats that the camera permits for output.

Now wait a second, guys. Don't you think it is preferable to do as much editing as possible in the raw stage prior to converting to TIFF? You have greater latitude, and it is completely non-destructive.

Rob

[SoftwareArtifex]

Don't you think it is preferable to do as much editing as possible in the raw stage prior to converting to TIFF?

It would depend what color-depth you're saving your TIFFs as.

[outsider]

I agree with JohnBee. As I understand, adjustments are read by compatible software. The software must first have the ability to translate the specific raw data. I'm not sure how to be certain of this. It would be of great concern that the software does an accurate job of translating the data, assuming the screen is adjusted properly. Some of the explanations here require multiple reads for me, but the answer is fairly simple I believe. I personally find it easiest to shoot in aperture priority, especially for street shooting, where brightness and metering is constantly changing. I get the shot I want, making sure exposure is not too far off (sometimes it takes a few shots) and if there's any adjustments needed, I do it in post processing with lightroom without ANY camera adjustments applied. This, I find is the easiest way. But getting a shot that is not too washed out is key, everything else is easily managable in post. It would be helpful to mention that I personally don't like what any of my in camera adjustments do to my photos in most cases (unless i'm dealing with a hopefully dark scene), because I can get better exposure, contrast, highlights, etc. in post. Even with under/overexposed scenes with washed out areas. You'd be surprised at what is salvagable using the right sequence of adjustments. This has come from a couple years and many hours of trial and error using adobe product.