Joined: 24 Jul 2009
Posts: 26
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa PS Version: 7 OS: Windows XP SP2
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 8:05 am Post subject:
I did not have a reply on this post. Perhaps I was not clear enough, the forum not busy, an uninteristic topic...
To repeat: My question is- and I post another picture today- if I edit in RAW, the image looks very well. (See the second picture- this one was captured by a Nikon) When I carry on and open in PS (first picture), some of the detail and sharpness have disappeared and I need to sharpen a bit more.
I post these two pictures. The first one after editing in RAW and the second one just after opening in PS CS5. Especially if one looks at the stainless steel containers in the foreground.
My basic question then is:
1. After I have edited in RAW, should I only save as jpeg and printOR should I keep on tuning the sharpness, etc. This is for printing as photos.
2. And then a second one- for viewing and choosing photos, which programme should I use to get my family to look at a slideshow and decide? Windows, I find not sharp enough; possibly Picasa or Irfanview??
Because I would like to see the photos printed as close as those seen on my laptop. Do I need to make any adjustments on the Canon 450 EOS/RAW/jpeg settings anywhere?
Although Im older, I try to keep up. Some the photos that Ive edited in Picasa came out too sharp and unnatural after printing them.
Regards and I believe that I will get some assistance!!!
Joined: 26 Nov 2010
Posts: 368
Location: Australia
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 3:45 pm Post subject:
Camera Raw will do more than just edit "sharpness". For example, it is amazing how adjusting lighting and colours can make a picture look a lot better.
I may be going out on a limb, but if you aren't going to do some work in camera raw, your pictures might actually look better if you just use the jpeg setting on your camera. This is because your camera does some of its own adjustments in order to create the jpeg. The raw file has no adjustments done to it. You are expected to do them yourself.
Also be awere that what our eyes perceive as an increase in sharpness is sometimes really just an adjustment to the edges of a picture, rather than a genuine increase in overall detail.
What you see on the screen is not going to be exactly what you get when you print. There are some formal technical techniques for adjusting screens and printers (which I'm not very good at). For me, good old trial and error has shown that my pictures print a bit darker than my screen would suggest.
Windows itself is not one of the factors which you should be worried about for your photos. Windows itself depends on drivers for screens, printers and other devices. If you focus on your screen and printer, there are ways in which these can be adjusted individually (e.g monitor calibration, color profiles).
Sorry if this isn't what you were looking for, but I hope it's s a start.
Joined: 05 Mar 2003
Posts: 3987
Location: Cheltenham, UK
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 5:06 pm Post subject:
Quote:
but if you aren't going to do some work in camera raw, your pictures might actually look better if you just use the jpeg setting on your camera.
Whilst I hear your sentiment renata I don't entirely agree; although almost completely I would tend to leave Clarity alone in RAW and do all final sharpening in Photoshop, I prefer Split Frequency Sharpening now, although it's only a year or two that I learned the technique. My largest gripe against shooting anything but RAW is compression and loss of shadow/highlight detail.
As you say, beware contrast, masquerading as sharpening!
I'm a retoucher not a photographer, but I would say that without knowing the actual RAW settings out of camera vs your Adobe RAW changes, it tough to say. Shot in the dark says you have your clarity slider in RAW pumped up quite high, perhaps this is the difference you see?
Also do a comparison of your RGB with your image and Adobe conversion again vs. your RAW settings, do you have anything set aggressively either on your camera or Adobe settings?
(to my mind you have a cool setting temperature wise and then pump up the saturation and vibrance) _________________ If life serves you lemons, make lemonade!
Joined: 24 Jul 2009
Posts: 26
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa PS Version: 7 OS: Windows XP SP2
Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 12:56 am Post subject:
Hi
Thanks for the comments.
What I have started doing, is the following.
I start in RAW and follow the sequence- white balance, light, contrast, vibrance and then some sharpening in RAW- usually go up to more than 100 in RAW, etc. Then I am normally satisfied with the output as a photo.(I would be happy to print- but still in RAW format)
For every photo, I would then go to the "normal" PS, but this is where I see the discrepancy between the edited RAW and PS.
In PS, I would do levels, but then I get unsure- should I sharpen more (I like the High Pass filter) as in PS it needs more, as in RAW I was quite happy with the outcome, but not in PS.
I usually use High Pass and then save as a JPEG to print.
So, in general, if needed, I leave the sharpening till last.
Perhaps I should just take a few photos in and get them printed.
Joined: 24 Jul 2009
Posts: 26
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa PS Version: 7 OS: Windows XP SP2
Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:04 pm Post subject: Settings for Canon EOS 450, Adobe Camera RAW, PS CS 5 and pr
I have a Canon CS EOS 450, have used PS CS5 in the past. I have now been made aware of Camera RAW and have started using it. My problem is that the images varies when I open the photos in different programs. My laptop is a HP Probook, 64 bit, Windows 7, etc.
So, my question is about settings on the different devices; Camera and programs:
1. I shoot in RAW, so I believe no change in camera settings.
2. Adobe CR- I use white balance, contrast, clarity, and vibrance. Any programme changes on ACR programme necessary (ie colour, etc in the programme to match with my screen?))
3. Biggest difference between moving from ACR to PS CS5- usually a big difference between these two (colour; sharpness)
4. And what would be the best proramme to use the photos that will look as close to what I will get if I print these in photos?
Joined: 26 Nov 2010
Posts: 368
Location: Australia
Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:10 pm Post subject:
I'm sorry I can't help more... I do admit to taking most of my pics in jpeg and going straight to PS... So I don't really know about differences in sharpness etc. between ACR and PS...
But I think that each picture would be different and require different settings to be adjusted. And that once the obvious was taken care of, that there would also be an element of personal taste involved? In other words, I'm not sure that there would be a fixed set of things to try which work for every picture.
As for printing, it wouldn't hurt to just print a few trials, using different printers (both home and commercial) and see what comes out.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
I would tend to leave Clarity alone in RAW and do all final sharpening in Photoshop, I prefer Split Frequency Sharpening now, although it's only a year or two that I learned the technique. My largest gripe against shooting anything but RAW is compression and loss of shadow/highlight detail.
