I was wondering if there is any benifit of using CS RAW dialogue for
correcting raw images (contrast, exposure, etc.) Would it jus be
better, or at least the same, not to use any of those corrections and
applying the ordinary corrections (curves, levels, etc.) in Photoshop?

thanks

Kibo informs me that jytzel@netscape.net (Jytzel) stated that:

>I was wondering if there is any benifit of using CS RAW dialogue for
>correcting raw images (contrast, exposure, etc.) Would it jus be
>better, or at least the same, not to use any of those corrections and
>applying the ordinary corrections (curves, levels, etc.) in Photoshop?

In general, it's better to do as many of your adjustments as possible in
the RAW dialog. The advantage is that the RAW converter has more data
available to it at that point, & it get stripped out when the image is
transferred to the main program.

--
W
. | ,. w ,   "Some people are alive only because
\|/  \|/     it is illegal to kill them."    Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

Jytzel <jytzel@netscape.net> wrote:
>I was wondering if there is any benifit of using CS RAW dialogue for
>correcting raw images (contrast, exposure, etc.) Would it jus be
>better, or at least the same, not to use any of those corrections and
>applying the ordinary corrections (curves, levels, etc.) in Photoshop?

In my opinion it's best to do all optimisations before JPEG compression.
Besides if you optimise the RAW file all optimisation parameters (WB,
exposusre, shadows, contrast, etc.) are stored in the Exif data and can
be retrieved later - something you cannot do if you optimise with
ordinary corrections.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html

Lionel <nop@alt.net> wrote in message news:<ql40b0pofht029n2muv69r298rf9fflhdc@4ax.com>...[
color=darkred]
> Kibo informs me that jytzel@netscape.net (Jytzel) stated that:
> 
>
> In general, it's better to do as many of your adjustments as possible in
> the RAW dialog. The advantage is that the RAW converter has more data
> available to it at that point, & it get stripped out when the image is
> transferred to the main program.[/color]

But the image is still in RAW format even after it is transfered to
the main program, rigth?

Jytzel wrote:

> Lionel <nop@alt.net> wrote in message news:<ql40b0pofht029n2muv69r298rf9ff
lhdc@4ax.com>...
> 
>
>
> But the image is still in RAW format even after it is transfered to
> the main program, rigth?


no. the moment it opens in the CS main window, it's Photoshop data,
8-bit usually, and all the information you had access to in the raw file
is no longer there. You can't make further exposure adjustments, white
balance changes etc, without losing data.

Do all this in the raw conversion stage.

David

David Kilpatrick <iconmags3@btconnect.com> wrote:
 
>
>
> no. the moment it opens in the CS main window, it's Photoshop data,
> 8-bit usually, and all the information you had access to in the raw file
> is no longer there. You can't make further exposure adjustments, white
> balance changes etc, without losing data.

Not neccessarily. You can also output the data in 16 bits format, in
which case you haven't lost anything and you could make your corrections
in Photoshop if you like.


--
Johan W. Elzenga            johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl
Editor / Photographer      http://www.johanfoto.nl/

Johan W. Elzenga <nomail@please.invalid> wrote:

>Not neccessarily. You can also output the data in 16 bits format, in
>which case you haven't lost anything and you could make your corrections
>in Photoshop if you like.

Well, if you choose your black and white points in such a way to clip
away some of the histogram (you might want to do that to have stronger
colours and/or a more vibrant image) you cannot go back without losses.
The best idea is to do all image processing at the RAW stage.

If you want to make some changes to the image later, you can again start
with the RAW image, because the JPEG file contains all information about
the paramaters you used for the RAW conversion (in File Info).
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html

Alfred Molon <alfred_molon@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:

> Johan W. Elzenga <nomail@please.invalid> wrote:
> 
>
> Well, if you choose your black and white points in such a way to clip
> away some of the histogram (you might want to do that to have stronger
> colours and/or a more vibrant image) you cannot go back without losses.

That's obvious, but not very realistic. If you plan to do your
corrections in Photoshop, it's obvious that you will *NOT* clip anything
while opening the RAW file. Choosing black and white points will *ALSO*
be done in Photoshop in that case.

--
Johan W. Elzenga            johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl
Editor / Photographer      http://www.johanfoto.nl/

>> In general, it's better to do as many of your adjustments as possible in 

That's the way I prefer to work too.

>From: jytzel@netscape.net  (Jytzel)
>
>But the image is still in RAW format even after it is transfered to
>the main program, rigth?

No, typically it's converted from camera specific RAW format to TIFF or
something similar.  Maybe you're thinking of the Photoshop RAW format but
that's different from the camera RAW (or NEF or whatever).

Bill

Johan W. Elzenga <nomail@please.invalid> wrote:
 
>
>That's obvious, but not very realistic. If you plan to do your
>corrections in Photoshop, it's obvious that you will *NOT* clip anything
>while opening the RAW file. Choosing black and white points will *ALSO*
>be done in Photoshop in that case.

It is possible to do all optimisations at the RAW stage - white balance,
white and black points, saturation, sharpness, contrast, noise and CA
reduction etc. That's the beauty of RAW - further processing after the
RAW converter stage is not necessary.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html