Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-01-2015, 05:03 AM   #16
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,621
If you are viewing in camera, you're viewing the file with your settings applied. Open the raw file on the computer with a viewer that lets you view the raw file without camera settings applied.

04-01-2015, 05:51 AM   #17
Veteran Member
sterretje's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Roodepoort, South Africa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,534
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
The crop I provided is from the JPEG, but the RAW file shows the same effect, and most importantly, in-camera (I can zoom into the RAW image on the lcd screen and clearly see the dark edge)
What you see on the camera is the jpg thumbnail that is embedded in the RAW file. Any jpg settings in the camera are applied to this thumbnail. So if you have strong sharpening set in the camera, it will be applied to the thumbnail.

Also, some PP software reads the camera settings from the exif in the RAW and applies those settings to the RAW file when processing. So again, if you have strong sharpening set in the camera, it will be applied if you don't pay attention.

//OOPS: did not see that there was a second page and parallax already mentioned this.
04-01-2015, 10:40 AM   #18
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 6,673
Original Poster
Doh! Ok, thanks for that, fellas.

I've just viewed the RAW file using FastStone Image Viewer 5.3 with no sharpening or other processing, and I can still clearly see those dark outlines. I guess I need to wait for a nice calm sunny day with no wind to try some more experiments taking photos with a few different lenses and no in-camera sharpening or corrections, to see if I get the problem in the RAW files with more than one lens.
04-01-2015, 10:42 AM   #19
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,479
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
I've just viewed the RAW file using FastStone Image Viewer 5.3 with no sharpening or other processing, and I can still clearly see those dark outlines.
FastStone uses the embedded JPEG preview image as well.


Steve

04-01-2015, 10:45 AM - 1 Like   #20
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 6,673
Original Poster
Answered my own question...

So *now* I am looking at the actual-size RAW image and the dark edges are all but invisible (maybe the slightest, slightest bit down the left side of the stem, but looks more like a genuine shadow or possible aberration.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU to all who replied. Much happier now !!!

Guess this seals the deal on my move away from JPEG to RAW

Last edited by BigMackCam; 04-01-2015 at 10:54 AM.
04-01-2015, 11:07 AM   #21
Pentaxian
ScooterMaxi Jim's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,501
That's helpful info.

Yes, that lens is OK in terms of central sharpness, but still pretty flat in terms of contrast and saturation.

Keep in mind that the image you are reviewing on the camera screen is a JPEG - and it will reflect the settings you have put into the menu parameters. Admittedly, default "Bright" parameter is not a great setting; many of us here much prefer "Natural." And, when setting sharpness it appears that "fine sharpness" is much preferred. If the black line is apparent in the RAW (and most likely it is, but not as prominent), the culprit is the lens. You just don't see that sort of thing on this sensor with better optics.
04-01-2015, 11:30 AM   #22
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 6,673
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ScooterMaxi Jim Quote
That's helpful info.

Yes, that lens is OK in terms of central sharpness, but still pretty flat in terms of contrast and saturation.

Keep in mind that the image you are reviewing on the camera screen is a JPEG - and it will reflect the settings you have put into the menu parameters. Admittedly, default "Bright" parameter is not a great setting; many of us here much prefer "Natural." And, when setting sharpness it appears that "fine sharpness" is much preferred. If the black line is apparent in the RAW (and most likely it is, but not as prominent), the culprit is the lens. You just don't see that sort of thing on this sensor with better optics.
I'm embarassed to say that, despite being an amateur photographer for several years, I've never properly got into RAW processing, and this is a real eye-opener for me... Plus, I've learned very valuable lesson about the on-screen preview from the camera.

Can't tell you how happy I am that the RAW file looks so much better. I guess now's the time for me to take the plunge and start working with RAW.

Are JPEGs always created using the same algorithms, or is this manufacturer / developer-specific? I'd be interested to play around with RAW -> JPEG processing out of camera to see if I get the same / better / worse results. I know that a few pro's do use JPEGs from the camera as opposed to RAW, but I suppose they may be the ones who aren't so concerned with outright IQ (press photographers etc.)?

Thanks again to everyone for the assistance!
04-01-2015, 11:35 AM   #23
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,621
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
FastStone uses the embedded JPEG preview image as well.
It uses that as a default, but in the settings you can select to view the image from raw.

QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Can't tell you how happy I am that the RAW file looks so much better. I guess now's the time for me to take the plunge and start working with RAW.
There is no right or wrong answer to Raw v. Jpeg. To me, the closest to a one size fits all solution is to shoot both. Shooting jpeg vs raw is akin to a TV dinner vs cooking from scratch. If you're happy with the recipe of the TV dinner (the firmware) go for it; but if you need more than a little salt, pepper, or a dash of ketchup (minor tweaks) to season it to your taste you need to cook the raw ingredients yourself.
Eat the TV dinner if you like it, but keep the fresh ingredients on hand just in case something goes wrong.

04-01-2015, 11:41 AM   #24
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 6,673
Original Poster
This is what I got from the RAW in FastStone, no enhancements applied, and saved as a JPEG with *some* compression for posting here. Looking closely, the effect is still there - just - but I'm far more comfortable now accepting this as an optical issue from the lens:

---------- Post added 04-01-2015 at 08:04 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
It uses that as a default, but in the settings you can select to view the image from raw.

There is no right or wrong answer to Raw v. Jpeg. To me, the closest to a one size fits all solution is to shoot both. Shooting jpeg vs raw is akin to a TV dinner vs cooking from scratch. If you're happy with the recipe of the TV dinner (the firmware) go for it; but if you need more than a little salt, pepper, or a dash of ketchup (minor tweaks) to season it to your taste you need to cook the raw ingredients yourself.
Eat the TV dinner if you like it, but keep the fresh ingredients on hand just in case something goes wrong.
Ha ha. Good analogy Well, it's about time I learned about RAW processing anyhow...
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3  Photo 

Last edited by BigMackCam; 04-01-2015 at 12:03 PM.
04-01-2015, 06:09 PM   #25
Pentaxian
ScooterMaxi Jim's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,501
A few things to say, BigMackCam. First, you have some fine vintage lenses in your collection. So, you've clearly figured out that most of this is related to the specific optic.

Feel free to experiment with the Pentax RAW developer (based on Silkypix) to see the potential in developing RAW. Don't forget that if you take a great image - the last shot can be saved to RAW even if you are shooting only JPEGs (but not anything before the last shot). Once you find out that you like to play with RAW at least for your best shots, most of the better programs allow you to do a trial - typically 30 days. The leading converters are LightRoom, Capture One and DxO.

You mention the Press Photographers who shoot JPEG. The journalistic standard for most press operations require unaltered out-of-camera JPEGs as a matter of integrity. Even the simple process of RAW conversion is forbidden due to the Photoshop temptation. If I was younger, smarter about program design and ambitious to do so, I would design a program that would go no further than what you can accomplish in a traditional darkroom regarding basic dodging and burning, contrast, and color balance so that photojournalists could get the most out of their images without being accused of digital manipulation.

Photoshop is a graphics program. It is less than ideal as a photo editing program, and you can certainly find programs that handle photo images better than Photoshop. Unfortunately, few pro photographers are aware of that.
04-01-2015, 08:22 PM   #26
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,479
QuoteOriginally posted by ScooterMaxi Jim Quote
Photoshop is a graphics program. It is less than ideal as a photo editing program, and you can certainly find programs that handle photo images better than Photoshop. Unfortunately, few pro photographers are aware of that.
Nice to see that I am not the only person who holds that opinion.


Steve
04-02-2015, 01:49 AM   #27
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 6,673
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ScooterMaxi Jim Quote
A few things to say, BigMackCam. First, you have some fine vintage lenses in your collection. So, you've clearly figured out that most of this is related to the specific optic.

Feel free to experiment with the Pentax RAW developer (based on Silkypix) to see the potential in developing RAW. Don't forget that if you take a great image - the last shot can be saved to RAW even if you are shooting only JPEGs (but not anything before the last shot). Once you find out that you like to play with RAW at least for your best shots, most of the better programs allow you to do a trial - typically 30 days. The leading converters are LightRoom, Capture One and DxO.

You mention the Press Photographers who shoot JPEG. The journalistic standard for most press operations require unaltered out-of-camera JPEGs as a matter of integrity. Even the simple process of RAW conversion is forbidden due to the Photoshop temptation. If I was younger, smarter about program design and ambitious to do so, I would design a program that would go no further than what you can accomplish in a traditional darkroom regarding basic dodging and burning, contrast, and color balance so that photojournalists could get the most out of their images without being accused of digital manipulation.

Photoshop is a graphics program. It is less than ideal as a photo editing program, and you can certainly find programs that handle photo images better than Photoshop. Unfortunately, few pro photographers are aware of that.
Thanks for that, Jim. Re the lenses, it took me a while to progress beyond the kit zooms, and a preference (laziness?) for shooting in Av mode with autofocus. I still use the 18-270mm this way, but more recently have come to appreciate the older primes in full manual. If I could only keep one lens, it'd be the 50mm F1.7...

That makes total sense re press photographers and unedited JPEGs. You should run with that software idea... Maybe a client-side application to create the files, and a server-side validation engine for the press corporations / stock databases?

I've been looking at image processing software for some time and settled on Lightroom. Just waiting for version 6 to appear!

Cheers

Mike
11-18-2015, 01:29 PM   #28
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 6,673
Original Poster
@ScooterMaxiJim - I came across this old thread of mine and thought it was worth revisiting.

This was a really helpful topic of discussion for me back in February in that it resulted in me switching to RAW capture after years of using JPEG and wondering what all the fuss was about OK, I'd dabbled with RAW, but it was sort of the "dark arts" for me previously.

Now, I shoot entirely in RAW+ and have only really used the RAW images which I now process through LR6 (the last post in this thread mentioned I was waiting for it to be released ). I *love* working with RAW files, and I'm a very happy LR6 user - it does 90% of what I want and need. Only recently I find there are some specific things I would like, that Photoshop can offer, but for the most part I get just what I need from LR6.

Ironically, I'm now working out how to get better JPEGs straight out of the camera for those occasions where I need to use an image without having access to LR6. So, I'm back to experimenting with JPEG (albeit with a much better understanding of the JPEG settings based on my use of LR6)!!

Anyway, thanks again to you and others who posted here - "my conversion" to "RAW conversion" was cemented through this forum and left me a happy bunny
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
dinner, dslr, edge / outline, faststone, image, jpeg, k-3, k3, lens, patience, pentax k-3, post, thanks, tv, version, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dark Photos Using Viewfinder kfc333 Pentax K-30 & K-50 5 07-25-2014 02:04 PM
While shooting in manual mode with the EV meter all my photos are slightly too dark. Newtophotos Photographic Technique 8 10-16-2013 09:47 PM
Macro Photos from the edge.... normhead Post Your Photos! 8 06-08-2013 07:14 AM
Photos good in camera LCD but dark/dull in computer pspentax Pentax Q 13 04-23-2013 07:21 PM
K5 possible issue, dark banding in photos skid2964 Pentax K-5 7 09-29-2012 06:34 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:32 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top