[danny_falin]

hola!

I'm trying to better understand the k-5 behaviour (why is this word missing from the spell-check)

when I set the camera to raw only (dng if matters), and observe that some in camera processing functions are still able to turn on/off like:

highlights correction
shadows correction
lens distortions correction
lens aberrations correction

after close inspection of raw files I think that the k-5 raw information does not change on lens corrections turned on/off, but the raw information differs when highlights/shadows corrections settings are changed, is it just me doing testing wrong or the camera reads sensor information differently upon changing highlights/shadows settings?

I also noticed that when highlights/shadows corrections is turned on, the iso range is pushed to start from iso 200, that is expected due to needed headroom for underexposed in camera processing

Is there some more detailed information about how exactly these settings work (highlights/shadow correction) when shooting in raw only, and how they affect the raw data?
Is the camera reading the sensor partially(or by other fancy/cleaver way) for under/over exposure, or it is pure iso 100 shot overexposed afterwards by in-camera software?

thanks in advance, and sorry for my bad english, I tried my best

regards!

[Parallax]

First, let me say that you have no reason to apologize for your English, it's better than that I've seen from some who were born and raised here.
Very few settings alter RAW. That's where its advantage lies. All of the information is there so you, not the guy who wrote the jpeg algorithms, get to decide how the final picture looks.
As far as dng vs pef; take your pick. If there is any advantage of one over the other, it's that dng is more universally recognized.

[Docrwm]

Добре дошли.Вашият английски е отличен!

As has been said, one of the main advantages of the RAW format is that it includes all the information with the file so that you have a huge amount of control in post-processing. You can change nearly everything with a good photo processing program like Photoshop. JPEG on the other hand is a format that has already had a lot of what can be done to it done by the camera prior to writing the file to the SD card.

[jatrax]

Is there some more detailed information about how exactly these settings work (highlights/shadow correction) when shooting in raw only, and how they affect the raw data?

I do not think I have seen any such information published. It would be interesting to see but it is not covered in the manual and Pentax does not always explain all of the functions as well as we would like. For other brands there are third party books, such as the Magic Lantern series, that dig into such things but sadly these are not available for new Pentax cameras.

[ChipB]

It's my understanding (and I certainly could be wrong) that the image displayed on the back LCD is actually a JPEG created from the RAW file, so some in camera processing is going on - thats why you still have JPEG processing choices.

[Anvh]

It's my understanding (and I certainly could be wrong) that the image displayed on the back LCD is actually a JPEG created from the RAW file, so some in camera processing is going on - thats why you still have JPEG processing choices.

correct, it use also the jpg settings in the camera for that.
I would set every processing off if you shoot in raw, the cleaner the file the more you can do with it later also it speed up the camera.

Raw is the raw data from the sensor, so you should have the same information as the camera to work with.
Shadow correction you can apply in camera on a raw file so that's surely a post processing effect, highlight seems to expose at a lower iso and the mid tones and shadows are then lift afterwards, still want to test that.
Noise reduction is something also worth doing in post.
For the rest nothing really has effect on raw, so don't turn on lens correction that really slows the camera down for no gain.

[Parallax]

I would set every processing off if you shoot in raw, the cleaner the file the more you can do with it later

The settings have no affect on what you can later to with the raw file. Turning the settings off is still a good idea as the LCD image will give you a better idea of what you are starting with.

[danny_falin]

I'm totally blown away by the amount of shadows and midtones preserved in the raw files! It's almost unreal. I guess this is the advantage of 14bit raw data. It is my first camera with 14bit raw files.

So to sum up, since I prefer to shot dng only all the time, it is better to turn of all these corrections if I understand correctly?

thanks very much for the help!

Добре дошли.Вашият английски е отличен!....

How did you do that? google translate?

---

Last edited by danny_falin; 01-17-2012 at 01:41 PM.

[RioRico]

So to sum up, since I prefer to shot dng only all the time, it is better to turn of all these corrections if I understand correctly?

I disagree there. The JPG settings carry into a RAW processor as defaults, which are readily (if sometimes laboriously) tweaked. Using appropriate JPG settings can speed up your processing workflow. During RAW development, adjusting the WB or contrast or whatever on every shot can get tedious. It's faster to shoot-chimp-adjust-reshoot than it is to tweak every parm of every RAW image.

For example: I usually live at 1050m / 3500ft on the west slope of California's Sierra Nevada range, with excursions down to the near-sea-level Sacramento Valley. I set contrast at mid-range for the too-often-polluted light here. I'll soon be spending a few months at around 1650m / 5500ft in southernmost Arizona, and medium contrast works well there too. Last year I spent a month at 2250m / 7500ft, and weeks over 3 km / 10k ft. Air is crystalline at high elevations in the Rocky Mountain states. I had to crank JPG contrast WAY down to capture details. It was much easier dealing with that up-front, than to tweak each of thousands of pictures.

[Docrwm]

i'm totally blown away by the amount of shadows and midtones preserved in the raw files! It's almost unreal. I guess this is the advantage of 14bit raw data. It is my first camera with 14bit raw files.

So to sum up, since i prefer to shot dng only all the time, it is better to turn of all these corrections if i understand correctly?

Thanks very much for the help!


How did you do that? google translate?

Да. Просто се опитвам да се държа приятелски!

[danny_falin]

I disagree there. The JPG settings carry into a RAW processor as defaults, which are readily (if sometimes laboriously) tweaked. Using appropriate JPG settings can speed up your processing workflow. During RAW development, adjusting the WB or contrast or whatever on every shot can get tedious. It's faster to shoot-chimp-adjust-reshoot than it is to tweak every parm of every RAW image.

For example: I usually live at 1050m / 3500ft on the west slope of California's Sierra Nevada range, with excursions down to the near-sea-level Sacramento Valley. I set contrast at mid-range for the too-often-polluted light here. I'll soon be spending a few months at around 1650m / 5500ft in southernmost Arizona, and medium contrast works well there too. Last year I spent a month at 2250m / 7500ft, and weeks over 3 km / 10k ft. Air is crystalline at high elevations in the Rocky Mountain states. I had to crank JPG contrast WAY down to capture details. It was much easier dealing with that up-front, than to tweak each of thousands of pictures.

That makes sense if you're using the supplied raw converter (I'm just guessing on this, with my previous camera Fujifilm S5pro the supplied converter used the jpg settings for starting point)

I'm using adobe camera raw converter, and it seems that regardless of camera settings, ACR always starts with the same starting point, and once done, these settings can be easily spread trough all raw files or selection.

Да. Просто се опитвам да се държа приятелски!

Well, you're very successful on this

regards!