|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
01-24-2023, 02:35 PM
|
| |
OK thanks to you and sbh for your replies. I have no doubt that you and sbh are seeing what you see on your cameras. But I just took a JPG and a RAW of the same scene and, for the latter, saved from the Browser (w/o processing) and from the Laboratory (with processing). In the Laboratory, the "Camera setting" icon is greyed out, which suggests to me that DCU is using the "in-camera" settings. In both cases, the compression ratio was three stars (that's what it was; I didn't change it). The one with processing is obviously darker than the one saved without processing. I don't think that this is an issue of JPEG quality level; the difference is much more than what could be attributed to that, correct? The JPG saved straight out of the camera looks much more like the one saved from the Browser than the one with processing. So my conclusion would be that, for my camera, and the version of the software that I have on my computer, the Browser save (w/o processing) gives you something at least close to the JPG you would have gotten with JPG capture, whereas the Laboratory save with processing, but presumably in-camera settings, does not necessarily give you that. If I am doing something wrong, and not ensuring in-camera settings, or creating some kind of discrepancy with quality levels, I would be interested to know how, just so that I can become a better informed user of these tools. Thanks!
Mark
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
01-23-2023, 08:20 PM
|
| |
OK, in the meantime I went back to an older discussion and found this written by stevebrot in 2019:
So, if I understand correctly, he is saying that, if you take a picture in RAW, and want to get a JPG that would have resulted if you had selected JPG on the camera, you can do that by saving from the Browser as he specifies.
And, if I understand correctly, what you say implies that, in order to get a JPG that would have resulted if you had selected JPG on the camera, you can do it by opening the RAW file in Laboratory and saving with image processing.
Am I tracking so far?
So a consequence of both of these is that the two operations will give the same results, correct? It's just that what I am seeing so far is telling me that what I think you are saying will give the same result as JPG SOOC does not give the same result. I took a picture of a scene using JPG at the highest setting. Then, a few seconds later, I took a picture with the RAW setting (same exposure). I opened the PEF file in DCU. I changed nothing and saved it with image processing. It is darker than the JPG SOOC and there are lots of other clearly visible differences. Maybe I am misunderstanding! Or maybe I'm doing something wrong. Thank you for your patience.
Mark
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
01-23-2023, 02:04 PM
|
| |
OK thank you! In the example that follows I turned off the Spurious color signal reduction; none of the boxes are checked for Noise Reduction. (Highlight Adjustment is applied, compensation 50.)
Good point about the JPEG quality, but I don't think that's it. I took a JPG with *** quality immediately after (no RAW+ on my camera, as far as I know) and I don't see a difference. I could post it if you want. I think that whatever I am seeing makes a bigger difference than the JPEG quality difference. I didn't know you can get the embedded JPG from DCU, thanks for that!
Ah, thanks!
So here, from a new shot I took today, are the output from DCU and the embedded JPG. (In that order, I think; the DCU is 327.1 KB and extracted is 342.5 KB. Sorry, not sure how to label them. Both attachments are apparently reduced in file size from what they are on my computer.) In the camera, Saturation, Contrast, and Sharpness are all set to 0. When I load the file into Laboratory, DCU tells me it is using in-camera settings (I think; the Camera setting icon is greyed out) and also shows Contrast and Sharpness one tick to the right of center (not exactly sure why they aren't 0, but OK). The other sliders on the Custom Image page are in the center. The Image Tone was set to Bright in the camera, and it looks to me like the setting in DCU for Image Finishing is Bright. White Balance set to camera setting. Everything in Exposure/Tone is 0 or off.
I am not sure whether it is possible to see the relevant difference between the pictures here, but I can definitely see it when I go back and forth between them in Irfanview on my computer. I am wondering, what are they (the camera and DCU) doing differently, what correction?
Thank you!
---------- Post added 01-23-23 at 04:29 PM ----------
Yes indeed, good point; what prompted the question is this. I was reading, in the forum, discussion about the relative merits of sticking with the jpegs that come straight out of the camera vs. working with RAW files. Some say that Pentax does a pretty good job with JPG. So, is there a way to have the camera produce the RAW file, but also to know what it would have produced had it been set on JPG (when there is no RAW+ on the camera)? Some posts on the forum, going back a few years, suggest that one can either look at the embedded JPG or the DCU output when no parameters are changed, and that they would give the same result. But I don't see how they have the same result. So, if I want to know what the JPG would have looked like (while still choosing RAW), would it be the embedded JPG? Is the embedded JPG identical, in all respects, to what the camera would have produced on the JPG (highest quality) setting? Thanks.
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
01-22-2023, 10:28 PM
|
| |
Hi, another beginner's question for you. Today I was comparing the embedded JPG in a PEF file with the one generated by DCU 5 where you just open the file in Laboratory and save, making no changes to the parameters. I would have thought that the images might be close to identical; previous discussion on the forums suggests that they would be (I guess because it's the manufacturer's software either way). But the difference is really not subtle. My question is, should I be surprised? I can post images but if the answer is basically that everybody sees this already, then never mind. This is with my *ist DS2. (I also see a difference between the embedded JPG and the output of PPL.) I got the embedded JPG using exiftool, and it appears identical to the one extracted by irfanview (when I open the PEF in irfanview). I am wondering, is there something I am doing wrong, or some control I have overlooked that is making the difference?
Thanks,
Mark
|
|
Forum: Monthly Photo Contests
01-08-2023, 08:26 AM
|
| |
I would like to nominate this photo
|
|
Forum: Monthly Photo Contests
01-08-2023, 08:26 AM
|
| |
I would like to nominate this photo
|
|
Forum: Monthly Photo Contests
01-08-2023, 08:25 AM
|
| |
I would like to nominate this photo
|
|
Forum: Monthly Photo Contests
01-08-2023, 08:25 AM
|
| |
I would like to nominate this photo
|
|
Forum: Monthly Photo Contests
01-08-2023, 08:24 AM
|
| |
I would like to nominate this photo
|
|
Forum: Winners' Showcase
01-08-2023, 08:22 AM
|
| |
I would like to nominate this photo
|
|
Forum: Monthly Photo Contests
01-08-2023, 08:21 AM
|
| |
I would like to nominate this photo
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-24-2022, 09:17 AM
|
| |
Thank you! I will remember about the green hexagon.
Thank you, great to be here! :)
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-23-2022, 12:47 PM
|
| |
Ah, good to know, thank you!
---------- Post added 12-23-22 at 03:23 PM ----------
Ah thank you for that, good to know. That could be a factor for me too: all but one of my lenses are film-era (I got the DA 21/3.2 for wide angle on the DS2). So I take it that you use manual focusing (K, M, A)? When I got the DS2 I had the three A-series lenses from my film camera, 50, 28, and 100, and wanted to use them with the DS2, so I almost immediately got the KatzEye split-image screen for it. I recently discovered the catch-in-focus feature as well! :)
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-23-2022, 08:20 AM
|
| |
Ah yes! That has been on my radar (at the high end). One thing that I have been reading about very recently is the relation to depth of field. Does this make a difference for you? If you are looking for a shallow depth of field, say, do you find that there are pictures you can take on your full frame that would be difficult or impossible on an APS-C (given the lenses you have)? Thanks.
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-22-2022, 06:01 PM
|
| |
Thank you! I am using the *ist DS2, with Pentax prime lenses of various focal lengths: 21, 28, 50, and 100, from different eras (some manual focus, some autofocus). I also hope to get the Super Program repaired. I am tantalized by the thought of getting a new camera, but so far I am thinking that there is still much to learn from what I have. I may take the plunge but haven't yet. Also, I may dust off my AF 280T and see how it works with the DS2. I always liked it for bounce flash. I also have a Vivitar macro teleconverter, but I've never given it much use with the DS2.
Thanks for your kind greetings! Great to be here!
Thank you! :)
Mark
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-22-2022, 02:35 PM
|
| |
Hi, I see that I joined in 2014 but I don't think I ever introduced myself, so hello! My interest in photography blossomed in 1983 after I read a great review of the Pentax Super Program and got one. I loved it! I became especially interested in B&W and the darkroom. Portriga Rapid, amidol developer, all those papers and films, etc. I frequented B&H when it was on 17th Street.
I got distracted but eventually found my way to digital in 2005, when I got the *ist DS2. I see that I posted questions here some years later. My interest in photography over those years was intermittent, but is now renewed, and you can see that I have posted some "perpetual newbie" questions to which forum members have kindly responded with great patience! It is appreciated. This is a great resource and I've been spending time reading threads to try to bring myself up to speed. To give an idea, I was using my old A lenses with the DS2, but I have taken the plunge and gotten a couple of autofocus lenses. So now I am discovering the world of autofocus. Yes, it is like this Introduction is coming from someone who stepped out of a time warp.
Oh, a couple of other things about me: I have been a music professor and a philosophy professor. It is very nice to meet you all, and I thank you for our interaction already!
Mark
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
12-22-2022, 12:21 PM
|
| |
FWIW: I have had a Super Program since 1983 and remember having had problems with batteries marked 1.5v. When I used batteries marked 1.55v, they worked well. I think they were SR44 silver oxide batteries. You might give them a try.
If I recall correctly, they also make, or did make, a larger, 3v, battery that was supposed to be compatible with my camera, but, again, it did not work as well as the two 1.55v silver oxide batteries. Yes, I just looked now at the instruction manual and I see that it says two 1.5v or one 3V, but I can only report what has worked with my camera. I hope that two 1.55v batteries won't fry yours. Again for what it's worth, I see, on Amazon, Energizer batteries that are marked 303 (and also SR44) that are labeled 1.55v. I have no idea if they are actually any different from the ones marked 1.5v. I purchased two similar Maxell batteries recently on eBay so that might also be a source. Good luck!
Mark
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-15-2022, 08:46 AM
|
| |
Thank you, that is helpful. Thanks to all for your kind replies! The discussion has been enlightening and I appreciate it. Happy holidays!
Mark
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-12-2022, 04:53 PM
|
| |
Thank you. Yes, I am sure that on this shot there was no ev or auto bracketing (I can see 0.0 for Exposure compensation in the Shooting Information).
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-12-2022, 08:59 AM
|
| |
Thank you--I saw some of this but I didn't know about the different batches. Much appreciated.
---------- Post added 12-12-22 at 11:00 AM ----------
That is a great picture!
---------- Post added 12-12-22 at 11:05 AM ----------
That is interesting about the interaction with the focusing screen. Certainly my use of a third-party screen introduces a new variable!
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-11-2022, 09:12 PM
|
| |
Thanks, that's what I thought, like around 120, and this is well below it. The light was daylight coming in through the window. The camera is set to sRGB. I think that the card is an 18% card--I probably got it at a camera store years ago--but it shouldn't matter, right? It can be a 12% card, or a 90% card, and it should come out the same, correct? I turned the card over to the white side, and the histogram was approximately the same.
---------- Post added 12-11-22 at 11:26 PM ----------
OK thanks. Yes, that's what I have read, that the screens can affect metering, but I'm wondering whether this would be normal anyway, or whether we should say that it's off and probably because of the screen. About the vignetting, if there is a light drop-off, then won't the meter compensate for that, and make the whole picture lighter? It doesn't know that there's vignetting, am I understanding this correctly?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-11-2022, 06:34 PM
|
| |
Hi, I am a beginner learning all about histograms. As an experiment, I took a photo of a gray card, pretty much filling the frame, and I got the histogram attached. I am surprised that the spike is so far to the left, but should I be? Is that the way my camera is designed to work? I would have thought that the meter would put the average value closer to the middle. (If I understand correctly, IrfanView is telling me that the midpoint of the spike is around 82 on a scale from 0 to 255.)
I am using a *ist DS2, FA 50 f/1.4 lens (also tried manual A lens, not much difference). Set ISO to 200, white balance to Daylight. Aperture at f/1.4, Av mode. Center-weighted metering. Had camera on MF, manual focusing.
If this is unusual, maybe it's because I'm using a KatzEye focusing screen (not Optibrite).
So, basically, I am wondering whether my camera is metering as intended. Is it normal for a DSLR (or a Pentax DSLR) to meter in such a way that this is the histogram that results, in these circumstances? I realize that this is kind of an elementary question. I did do a search, but I wasn't able to find an answer, so thanks in advance!
Mark
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-24-2022, 07:01 PM
|
| |
Thanks for your thoughts about that. To answer your question, to my eye, the results are pretty much what you would expect with the difference in shutter speeds, like a stop and a half overexposed. In any case, you and all who replied have enlightened me, and I very much appreciate it! Happy Thanksgiving!
Mark
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-24-2022, 11:23 AM
|
| |
Thank you, and, again, thanks to all who replied.
Not sure why, but the stop-down (AE-L) method doesn't give me the same shutter speed as aperture priority (Av), at f/8. I set the lens at A, dial to Av, dial in f/8.0, and point the camera at a fairly solid gray patch, and it gives me 1/180 sec. I turn the dial to M, turn the aperture ring to 8, and press AE-L, and it gives me 1/60. I have the ISO entered as 200 (not AUTO). I am using center weighted metering for both. I do have a KatzEye screen instead of the screen that originally came with the camera. At f/1.4 (wide open), the two procedures give me the same shutter speed. I'm not sure why at f/8 the two shutter speeds aren't the same, unless the KatzEye is messing things up (and does so differentially, stopped down vs. wide open). Any idea? Thanks!
p.s. If readers are wondering why I am doing this when I have an A lens, it's because I'm thinking of buying an M lens and I'm experimenting, to see what's involved.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
11-23-2022, 08:52 PM
|
| |
Thank you, that explains it very well and is very clear! I appreciate it. I see now that it actually adds just one button push to the procedure, not complicated at all. Thank you for those references to the User Manual. I had seen the information contained on p. 182, but there it refers to the DOF preview and it is not explicit about what happens when you do it. Just curious, does DOF preview do the same thing as AE-L (in this context), or something different?
|
