PhotoShop CS Raw support is way cool!

[toddb]

I know some of you, like me don't get over to the Software forum, so I'll post this here just to make sure you didn't miss this. PS CS raw importer is simply awesome. Thanks to a post by Plexiprs Upgrade to Photoshop CS from Elements (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19876) I was able to get CS for half price without having to have a previous version of PhotoShop. I've used PS for many years, just never had my own copy until now.

Take a look at this screen when you open a RAW 10D file: http://www.toddburke.net/forumpost/pscs_raw.jpg

You can tell right away that I'm under exposed and the white balance is off not by looking at the picture (though you can) but by the new historgram. It's just a slider away from being corrected in realtime...that's right, no "processing, please wait" to see the results like in the Canon utility. Even better, if you taken allot of the same pictures, you can save your RAW import preference and apply the same settings to as many RAW images as you want...huge time saver.

I'm not sure if I'll ever shoot JPG again. Why bother now unless I'm running out of memory on my CF card.

Simply amazing, this is only one of the many new features. For someone that uses a digital camera, this is not a minor upgrade, it's huge!

[Dale]

toddb wrote:
Simply amazing, this is only one of the many new features. For someone that uses a digital camera, this is not a minor upgrade, it's huge!
CS Raw is an improvement over the first release however my preverence is still C1.

[shafiq]

Dale wrote:
toddb wrote:
Simply amazing, this is only one of the many new features. For someone that uses a digital camera, this is not a minor upgrade, it's huge!
CS Raw is an improvement over the first release however my preverence is still C1.


I absolutely agree..I have been using C1 Lite and have found it to be the most important part of me workflow. I am now finding that I very rearly go to Photohop to do any kind of exposure/color correction.

However, must admit I have not had an opportunity to try out the new PhotoShop yet!

Regards
Shafiq

[MiG82]

"white balance is off not by looking at the picture (though you can) but by the new historgram"

The peaks don't match up? They shouldn't unless the pixels making those peaks are meant to be grey.

[UK_Terry]

why is the tint 16?

mine is 0 from default

[PacAce]

UK_Terry wrote:
why is the tint 16?

mine is 0 from default

Funny you should mention that because I was just wondering about the tint value myself last night. I noticed that the value changes with the image so it can't have a "default" as you put it.

[UK_Terry]

pacace wrote:
UK_Terry wrote:
why is the tint 16?

mine is 0 from default

Funny you should mention that because I was just wondering about the tint value myself last night. I noticed that the value changes with the image so it can't have a "default" as you put it.


i think you are correct..the one below is from my S45 and is different from my 10D

http://www.robinsfc.co.uk/Forum_Posts/rawconv.jpg

[toddb]

I absolutely agree..I have been using C1 Lite and have found it to be the most important part of me workflow. I am now finding that I very rearly go to Photohop to do any kind of exposure/color correction.

However, must admit I have not had an opportunity to try out the new PhotoShop yet!


I didn't really like using photoshop before the Raw support. It was a pain to have to go into the Canon utility then import the Tiff. I guess C1 would be better for processing photos and you where not interested in doing much tweaking other then the basic treatment. I use PS allot to do other things like to fix blemishes, add text, or add some digital effects or frames. So C1 would still not complete my workflow where PS does from start to finish.


The peaks don't match up? They shouldn't unless the pixels making those peaks are meant to be grey.

I just notice that when I adjust the white balance slider the colors come to gether on some pictures and it starts to look really even, your right though, probably not for every case.


I need to get a bad lens to try out some of those lens adjustment options. :-P

[CyberDyneSystems]

I have been using the RAW plugin with PS 7.01 and loving it....

I guess I will have to try the upgrade to CS.. it does look like there is a lot more to the raw converter there.

Likewise at some point I really need to try C1,. I know that most the Digital gurus I admire the most are using that. I like the PS RAW though as it eliminates any need to use two or more apps on a single file,. I ccan do it all in PS. Much more streamlined that way.

[imago57]

I have being using Photoshop Raw conversion plug in since it came out, and I was always happy with it. Then a few days ago I discovered a thread on this forum about C1 and I start evaluating the program.

My first impression is that C1 does a much better job at preserving the highlights than photoshop, and I like the ability to do all of my corrections before saving the file.

Having said that, I do wonder about one thing: when I do the conversion using Photoshop Raw I only play with color temperature and if necessary over/under exposure. Then I open Photoshop and I make Levels/Curves/Saturation/Sharpening using layers (so that I can come back and fix any possible over correction). This is what I consider non disruptive correction. With C1 I can integrate all of these steps in the conversion process with a noticeable saving in processing time (and I like the results, this far), but once I save the TIFF I will have to repeat the whole conversion process if I am unsatisfied with the result.

I guess I am getting to like a lot the C1 interface, and how it's always reminding me when I start burning out some highlights, and most of all the fact that I can start working on the next file while the first one is being processed...while at the same time I would love to have the ability to go back and undo something I did wrong, just like I can in Photoshop using layers.

Any comments on these thoughts?

Regards:

Max

[maderito]

I haven’t used C1 and I’m looking for specific arguments on why it is better than Camera Raw if you’re going to be processing in Photoshop anyway. The conventional wisdom is to get the exposure and white balance right in Camera Raw and then correct everything else in Photoshop. That works for me. Correcting lightness and contrast in the highlights and shadows (and tonality in general) is more easily done in PS.

White balance in Camera Raw IMO is one of its best features. It is controlled by two parameters (temperature and tint) and indirectly by exposure. Adjusting temperature changes the relationship of the reds and blues (you can see the change on the red and blue histograms as you adjust the value). Tint controls green/magenta. If you change the tint value, you’ll see peaks in the green histogram move towards or away from the blue/red peaks. Thus temperature controls warmth (red/blue) and tint controls green/magenta castes. When you “white balance” at a given white/gray point, R,B,G are equal. Thus you can “white balance” to any neutral value. When you use the eye dropper to adjust the white balance, you’ll see the R/G/B histograms converge at the appropriate luminosity value (e.g. 127, 255, or whatever you choose).

See: http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw/raw_04/essay.html for more info on Camera Raw.

Sometimes we like best what we’re most used to. I’m guilty. I’m looking for good reasons to consider C1 more strongly (since so many think of it so highly). Opinions wanted :).

[toddb]

imago57 wrote:

My first impression is that C1 does a much better job at preserving the highlights than photoshop, and I like the ability to do all of my corrections before saving the file.


PSCS also has a new feature that specificly deals with shadows and highlights. It works wonders. You can add fill flash after the fact. Check out the adobe site, I think they have an example movie on that.


Having said that, I do wonder about one thing: when I do the conversion using Photoshop Raw I only play with color temperature and if necessary over/under exposure. Then I open Photoshop and I make Levels/Curves/Saturation/Sharpening using layers (so that I can come back and fix any possible over correction). This is what I consider non disruptive correction. With C1 I can integrate all of these steps in the conversion process with a noticeable saving in processing time (and I like the results, this far), but once I save the TIFF I will have to repeat the whole conversion process if I am unsatisfied with the result.

Another new feature is that you can now export the history. So when you close out your project, you can come back and undo stuff if you want. This was done before by creating extra layers. For a bigger PS projects, this is a pretty neat addition. There has been allot of user tweaks as well. You can define any short key, export them, and the shortcut key shows up in the menu incase you forget. Also, any numeracal setting can be changed by dragging on the property.


I'm impressed with this release. I've only been using it for a couple days, but I like it allot. I just watch some of the training cd it came with and found out somemore cool stuff like the pallet well and the new file explorer is also pretty amazing. I hated the file explore in PS 7.

The only reason I don't use C1, which I was almost going to get, but only tried the LE version and being limited to the number of batch things you could do made it pretty much out of the question for me (I am an automater at heart). But the full version was a couple hundred dollors more then I got CS for (see original post) and over all, PS CS does allot more stuff. C1 is a great program though, I can't knock it. Those guys did a great job with it, but I think Adobe has pulled ahead again.

[CanonUser]

This is my first thoughts on working with RAW in PSCS and C1:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=20581

Regards,
Alan