Shooting RAW

Anvh · 08-11-2012, 12:43 PM

Not with lightroom at least, all edits are being stored inside a library so not in the actual file.

audiobomber · 08-11-2012, 06:52 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

Not with lightroom at least, all edits are being stored inside a library so not in the actual file.

Pentax DCU4 doesn't implement the edits in raw either. All you have to do to go back to the original is select Revert.

Anvh · 08-12-2012, 02:11 AM

Yeah most dump it into a side card with RAW, with jpeg however...

audiobomber · 08-12-2012, 04:43 AM

Originally posted by Anvh

Yeah most dump it into a side card with RAW, with jpeg however...

Picasa lets you undo jpeg edits. even after they've been saved. Nice feature. As you said, common in raw ediitors. unusual in jpeg editors.

tram57 · 08-12-2012, 04:42 PM

Agree with all above. It is well worth the effort to learn lightroom. Julianne Kost has a great set of instrucional videos on the Adobe TV link from Adobe's website. Very straightforward to organize, backup, and adjust your photos.

Anvh · 08-13-2012, 08:56 AM

Learn lightroom?
Has anyone really need to learn it i wonder, most options are quite clear you see?

**jatrax** · 08-13-2012, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by Anvh

Learn lightroom? Has anyone really need to learn it i wonder, most options are quite clear you see?

Maybe to you, I work with it every day for over a year and still learning new things I did not know it did. Us older folks do not pick this new stuff up so easy. For me it takes a lot of study and reading to learn it.

ducdao · 08-13-2012, 09:43 AM

Originally posted by Anvh

Learn lightroom?
Has anyone really need to learn it i wonder, most options are quite clear you see?

I disagree.

LR is very user friendly and can be used easily but to really master it you need to learn it. At least, for me.

Belcik · 08-13-2012, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by ducdao

I disagree.

LR is very user friendly and can be used easily but to really master it you need to learn it. At least, for me.

I would love to read some decent manual (not for dummies), explaining some best practicies for the LR. After reading some workflows for LR, I got stuck with collecting photos in Unprocessed folder.... If you know some good tricks that help managing photos.... please, share it.

Anvh · 08-13-2012, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

Maybe to you, I work with it every day for over a year and still learning new things I did not know it did. Us older folks do not pick this new stuff up so easy. For me it takes a lot of study and reading to learn it.

I already had 6 years of photoshop experience under my belt when i use LR1 for the first time when it came out, maybe that helped a lot but i cant see how the settings can be very confusing.

Sure the way how to implement the settings the best is hard but that's another thing al together.

Anvh · 08-13-2012, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by Belcik

After reading some workflows for LR

Workflow is very easy, you start at the top and work your way to the bottom basically.

**jatrax** · 08-13-2012, 01:14 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

I already had 6 years of photoshop experience under my belt when i use LR1 for the first time when it came out, maybe that helped a lot but i cant see how the settings can be very confusing.

Sure the way how to implement the settings the best is hard but that's another thing all together.

That is because you already understood how Adobe, and this type of program works. If you have no background or experience in the underlying concepts the learning curve is steep. I remember trying to teach my father how to use a computer, he is a smart man but just never could wrap his head around the fact that what was on the screen was stored somewhere in that box. Hard to understand if you just don't have the basic concepts, easy if you have the basics.

Anvh · 08-13-2012, 01:39 PM

The computer example is not that great because it's about understanding how a computer works, a piece of hardware.

I think he knows quite well what brightness, contrast, white, black, shadows, highlights, noise and sharpness means and if he know a bit about photography he also know what white balance, what more options does lightroom have?

Sure quite a bit more but that is the basic, if you know those things you can make a good attempt on editing your photo.

tabl10s · 08-13-2012, 02:21 PM

Where does Picasa rank among the PP crowd? I haven't really done any PP stuff yet, but I might slip to the darkside.

CMG · 08-13-2012, 03:39 PM

Originally posted by tabl10s

Where does Picasa rank among the PP crowd? I haven't really done any PP stuff yet, but I might slip to the darkside.

This presents and interesting opening. This thread is very interesting. I wasn't sure how it would develop when I started it, but I'd like to open up the discussion a bit and hope people will join in a productive manner. Since initiating this thread I have been thinking about the fact that what interests me most about photography continues to be the camera...the fundamental expressive tool of the art and craft of Photography.

Lately, I haven't been thrilled with many of the shots that I've taken with my K-5 (not the camera, but the photographer). They just seem flat much of the time and I don't know why. My immediate fairly uninformed reaction was to say "it's because I'm shooting JPEG and I only use Picasa for tweaking and monochrome conversion. Then I began to look into the debate of RAW vs JPEG raging among all levels of photographers shooting all kinds of digital cameras. At the same time, I've been thinking about my serious interest in learning the nuts and bolts of proper exposure (been reading much and practicing as of late). When my exposures are spot on (which happens infrequently I admit) the photos seem to have a life to them that I cannot achieve when the exposure is off and I post process in Picasa to try to make it better. I'll be upfront, I don't enjoy post processing, I don't like sitting in front of my computer for hours...it's not what photography means to me (this is not a judgement and I'm not implying anything at all). What gets my blood pumping is seeing a great exposure from my camera that needs a nudge here and there.

It seems that the majority of shooters who post on sites like 500px, etc. are shooting RAW and are doing amazing things in PP. In that regard, I think this kind of advanced PP is an art form, albeit one that I'm not particularly interested partaking in other than as a viewer. However,I think it is a continuum. At some point, I think, PP becomes something other than what I consider Photography (I think we each have our own definition of it). I understand that photos cannot be produced without PP, I realize that depending on if you shot 35mm color negative or transparencies, you had greater or less wiggle room when shooting and processing. But in those days (and I'm not from those days), as I understand it you could never do what can be done with RAW data and a computer...you had to make the camera work for you, use it and push it and then make some tweaks in the dark room.

Look, if it were cost effective, I'd be shooting film...but it's not. What is difficult for me is when I'm on 500px and the like, I'm bombarded with amazing feats of PP...things that make me stop in my tracks. But is it fair to compare those works to more traditional, if you will, renderings? This is not intended to raise the RAW vs. JPEG debate, that's not what this post is about.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
No exif when shooting raw	Boker	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	13	08-10-2012 10:25 AM
K5 settings when shooting RAW	Sage97	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	14	05-01-2012 05:15 PM
Best SD card for RAW shooting	cwebsterlusk	Pentax DSLR Discussion	9	11-06-2011 11:39 PM
When shooting RAW (only) what is played back?	timsshots	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	3	07-26-2011 04:30 PM
K-x Continuous Shooting Raw +	DSLRnoob	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	12	04-03-2010 09:48 AM

08-11-2012, 12:43 PM	#16
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Not with lightroom at least, all edits are being stored inside a library so not in the actual file.

08-11-2012, 06:52 PM	#17
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Anvh Not with lightroom at least, all edits are being stored inside a library so not in the actual file. Pentax DCU4 doesn't implement the edits in raw either. All you have to do to go back to the original is select Revert.

08-12-2012, 02:11 AM	#18
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Yeah most dump it into a side card with RAW, with jpeg however...

08-12-2012, 04:43 AM	#19
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Anvh Yeah most dump it into a side card with RAW, with jpeg however... Picasa lets you undo jpeg edits. even after they've been saved. Nice feature. As you said, common in raw ediitors. unusual in jpeg editors.

08-12-2012, 04:42 PM	#20
tram57 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 176	Agree with all above. It is well worth the effort to learn lightroom. Julianne Kost has a great set of instrucional videos on the Adobe TV link from Adobe's website. Very straightforward to organize, backup, and adjust your photos.

08-13-2012, 08:56 AM	#21
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Learn lightroom? Has anyone really need to learn it i wonder, most options are quite clear you see?

08-13-2012, 09:16 AM	#22
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by Anvh Learn lightroom? Has anyone really need to learn it i wonder, most options are quite clear you see? Maybe to you, I work with it every day for over a year and still learning new things I did not know it did. Us older folks do not pick this new stuff up so easy. For me it takes a lot of study and reading to learn it.

08-13-2012, 09:43 AM	#23
ducdao Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Montreal/Vermont Posts: 2,160	Originally posted by Anvh Learn lightroom? Has anyone really need to learn it i wonder, most options are quite clear you see? I disagree. LR is very user friendly and can be used easily but to really master it you need to learn it. At least, for me.

08-13-2012, 10:43 AM	#24
Belcik Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Russia,Moscow Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 377	Originally posted by ducdao I disagree. LR is very user friendly and can be used easily but to really master it you need to learn it. At least, for me. I would love to read some decent manual (not for dummies), explaining some best practicies for the LR. After reading some workflows for LR, I got stuck with collecting photos in Unprocessed folder.... If you know some good tricks that help managing photos.... please, share it.

08-13-2012, 11:58 AM	#25
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by jatrax Maybe to you, I work with it every day for over a year and still learning new things I did not know it did. Us older folks do not pick this new stuff up so easy. For me it takes a lot of study and reading to learn it. I already had 6 years of photoshop experience under my belt when i use LR1 for the first time when it came out, maybe that helped a lot but i cant see how the settings can be very confusing. Sure the way how to implement the settings the best is hard but that's another thing al together.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-13-2012, 12:00 PM	#26
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by Belcik After reading some workflows for LR Workflow is very easy, you start at the top and work your way to the bottom basically.

08-13-2012, 01:14 PM	#27
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by Anvh I already had 6 years of photoshop experience under my belt when i use LR1 for the first time when it came out, maybe that helped a lot but i cant see how the settings can be very confusing. Sure the way how to implement the settings the best is hard but that's another thing all together. That is because you already understood how Adobe, and this type of program works. If you have no background or experience in the underlying concepts the learning curve is steep. I remember trying to teach my father how to use a computer, he is a smart man but just never could wrap his head around the fact that what was on the screen was stored somewhere in that box. Hard to understand if you just don't have the basic concepts, easy if you have the basics.

08-13-2012, 01:39 PM	#28
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	The computer example is not that great because it's about understanding how a computer works, a piece of hardware. I think he knows quite well what brightness, contrast, white, black, shadows, highlights, noise and sharpness means and if he know a bit about photography he also know what white balance, what more options does lightroom have? Sure quite a bit more but that is the basic, if you know those things you can make a good attempt on editing your photo.

08-13-2012, 02:21 PM	#29
tabl10s Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Sacramento(formerly from B'Ham, England). Posts: 1,424	Where does Picasa rank among the PP crowd? I haven't really done any PP stuff yet, but I might slip to the darkside.

08-13-2012, 03:39 PM	#30
CMG Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 138 Original Poster	Originally posted by tabl10s Where does Picasa rank among the PP crowd? I haven't really done any PP stuff yet, but I might slip to the darkside. This presents and interesting opening. This thread is very interesting. I wasn't sure how it would develop when I started it, but I'd like to open up the discussion a bit and hope people will join in a productive manner. Since initiating this thread I have been thinking about the fact that what interests me most about photography continues to be the camera...the fundamental expressive tool of the art and craft of Photography. Lately, I haven't been thrilled with many of the shots that I've taken with my K-5 (not the camera, but the photographer). They just seem flat much of the time and I don't know why. My immediate fairly uninformed reaction was to say "it's because I'm shooting JPEG and I only use Picasa for tweaking and monochrome conversion. Then I began to look into the debate of RAW vs JPEG raging among all levels of photographers shooting all kinds of digital cameras. At the same time, I've been thinking about my serious interest in learning the nuts and bolts of proper exposure (been reading much and practicing as of late). When my exposures are spot on (which happens infrequently I admit) the photos seem to have a life to them that I cannot achieve when the exposure is off and I post process in Picasa to try to make it better. I'll be upfront, I don't enjoy post processing, I don't like sitting in front of my computer for hours...it's not what photography means to me (this is not a judgement and I'm not implying anything at all). What gets my blood pumping is seeing a great exposure from my camera that needs a nudge here and there. It seems that the majority of shooters who post on sites like 500px, etc. are shooting RAW and are doing amazing things in PP. In that regard, I think this kind of advanced PP is an art form, albeit one that I'm not particularly interested partaking in other than as a viewer. However,I think it is a continuum. At some point, I think, PP becomes something other than what I consider Photography (I think we each have our own definition of it). I understand that photos cannot be produced without PP, I realize that depending on if you shot 35mm color negative or transparencies, you had greater or less wiggle room when shooting and processing. But in those days (and I'm not from those days), as I understand it you could never do what can be done with RAW data and a computer...you had to make the camera work for you, use it and push it and then make some tweaks in the dark room. Look, if it were cost effective, I'd be shooting film...but it's not. What is difficult for me is when I'm on 500px and the like, I'm bombarded with amazing feats of PP...things that make me stop in my tracks. But is it fair to compare those works to more traditional, if you will, renderings? This is not intended to raise the RAW vs. JPEG debate, that's not what this post is about.