Raw and camera parameters?

[JZaun]

Reading the manual. page 47 ref RAW. Quiote book. <RAW>images are processed according to the white balance, color space and processing parameters set at the time of shooting. unquiote.

I ran test and white balance setting does affect raw images but you can still change WB in PS. I was unable to prove one way or the other about "color space" but I do believe the statement.

Quiote. and processing parameters set at the time of shooting. un quiote
This I don't understand. Changing contrast, sharpening ets in the parameter menu doesn't affect the raw image in my 20 so what parameters is the manual refering to?



JZ

[evilenglishman]

I think what is being said is that, whatever settings you have chosen in the camera will appear by default if you just open a raw file without doing anything to it.
For example: if you select the black and white effect of the 20D it will appear as black and white by default in the raw converter. You can still change everything though.

[scottbergerphoto]

The Raw image is only affected by the parameters in the camera if you select "as shot" in the conversion. You are free to change them to any of the other selections.
Scott

[JZaun]

Ha Evil, you are in Louisville KY now ? :) Yea I did knowtice the BW thing but forgot to mention it. Ok Scott I gotta try again. I didn't see any diff with I set contrast, sharp, etc all the way plus then all the way minus but maybe they weren't in "as shot" in the conversion program..I had thought AS SHOT only applied to WB, so back to the drawing board. We seem to keep going around and around about what settings affect raw so I thought I would prove it one way or the other. I now know WB settings will affect raw as shot. Obviously as Evil said BW affects raw and you can't apply color after.

thanks

Jerry

[PacAce]

Ha Evil, you are in Louisville KY now ? :) Yea I did knowtice the BW thing but forgot to mention it. Ok Scott I gotta try again. I didn't see any diff with I set contrast, sharp, etc all the way plus then all the way minus but maybe they weren't in "as shot" in the conversion program..I had thought AS SHOT only applied to WB, so back to the drawing board. We seem to keep going around and around about what settings affect raw so I thought I would prove it one way or the other. I now know WB settings will affect raw as shot. Obviously as Evil said BW affects raw and you can't apply color after.

thanks

Jerry

Bear in mind that when Canon is talking about processing RAW, they are talking about processing RAW using their own software (EVU and DPP). So, what you read in the manual may not necessarily translate one for one when the raw conversion is being done with PSCS.

[KennyG]

All RAW conversion software that I am aware of has the ability to read the tags that the camera attaches to the file to indicate settings such as WB, sharpening etc. Remember, these are just tags, the file itself has not been altered. The more sophisticated conversion software allows you to use your own, or as shot parameters for individual settings, so you could accept as shot WB but change the saturation for example.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Although I agree with Kenny,..

I still think PSCS is the issue...

PSCS' RAW converter.. (even when it says camera default) never looks ANYTHING like the camera default coming out of DPP, EVU or Breeze browser. At least this has been my experience.

I understand that it is possible to fine tune the PSCS ACR to your camera so these auto defaults become more accuate.. but I had never taken the time,.. thus any RAW file I ever opened in PSCS ACR looked like "poo" untill I tweeked the hoy hell out of it... (in whcih case I was indeed able to get excellent rseults,.. but I could NEVER just accept the "camera defaults" )

This is part of why I got fed up with PSCS and mostly used C1.. and now BB.

[tim]

I found this confusing enough that I just bought a book called something like "RAW workflow with Photoshop CS". I'll read it over the next few weeks and report back what I find.

[KennyG]

I must say that I prefer C1, followed by BB Pro. My workflow is built around C1 and I have very little to do in PS. I use BB Pro mainly as an image manager with the ability to do the odd quick conversion, but I much prefer C1's background conversion method for speed and accuracy.

Just try taking a shot of a Daglo pink racing car against bright green grass on a very sunny day and see which of the converters copes with the WB. PSCS fails every time. Oh, and yes, there is a team stupid enough to race in Daglo pink.

[JZaun]

What brought this up was a recent thread that stated that no incamera settings affected raw images. I am now satisfied that at least WB does in fact affect the raw image. I viewed the image in 2 programs and in both the image was different for each WB setting I set in the camera with out further processing. Yes in PSE3 you can change the WB at will. The statement said "processing parameters as set at the time of shooting". This would seem to imply in camera settings not post processing software settings. Also as Evil said WB parameter setting does affect raw images in the camera. So at least 2 in camera settings do affect the raw image , as I see it. Any more?

JZ

[tim]

I agree after trying it, white ballance seems to be applied to the raw image. Does anyone know if anything else is applied, like sharpness?

[Hellashot]

I have noticed that in PSE 3, that the white balancing is slightly different than the camera's balancing. I've compared "as shot" to "flash" on images shot with a flash and they are a little different. And I've seen that PSE 3's autofix cranked all the way to the right will correct white balancing problems in images I shot in JPG mode.

[scottbergerphoto]

When you view a Raw file in a converter or any program that can view Raw files, it appears with the settings as shot in the camera. Just as Kenny G said above, These settings have not changed the Raw data. You can change them to any WB, saturation you want. The camera settings are only applied in the conversion if you select them for the conversion. The image viewing program has to use some set of parameters to show the image. It can't display the Raw data without some instructions on how to interpret it. By default they show the image with the settings from the camera. That does not imply that the Raw data has been altered. Raw is just what it implies, Raw data. The only exception to this just to make it complicated, is that Canon does some small amount of sharpening to Raw files that can not be turned off anywhere.

Regards,
Scott

[PacAce]

What brought this up was a recent thread that stated that no incamera settings affected raw images. I am now satisfied that at least WB does in fact affect the raw image. I viewed the image in 2 programs and in both the image was different for each WB setting I set in the camera with out further processing. Yes in PSE3 you can change the WB at will. The statement said "processing parameters as set at the time of shooting". This would seem to imply in camera settings not post processing software settings. Also as Evil said WB parameter setting does affect raw images in the camera. So at least 2 in camera settings do affect the raw image , as I see it. Any more?

JZ

Jerry, the WB does NOT affect the raw image in any way. However, it is true that it will affect the image you see when the raw image is displayed on the monitor in that a WB has to be set to something so by default, the shot setting WB is used. But that does not mean that the raw file itself has that WB applied to the image.

[Reminisce]

It is true that PSCS doesnt show RAW files straight from the camera as they were when they were shot. However, PSCS seems to have MUCH better color representation and RAW flexibility over DPP for me. When I open RAW files in DPP, they are usually underexposed and undercolored, but thats not the point.

From my understandings, the camera applies white balancing to RAW files inside the camera but they are not written in stone as they are in JPEGs. JPEGs are processed in camera and then compressed. RAW files are only processed for incamera viewing, but once the RAW file is extracted into a RAW converter its all open world from there. I could be wrong but Im using my computer knowledge here because I've analyzed this over and over and its ultimately why I shoot in RAW now everytime instead of JPEG unless I necessarily have to.

[JZaun]

Jerry, the WB does NOT affect the raw image in any way. However, it is true that it will affect the image you see when the raw image is displayed on the monitor in that a WB has to be set to something so by default, the shot setting WB is used. But that does not mean that the raw file itself has that WB applied to the image.

Here is a link to 4 test shots.

2323 was shot in raw with WB set for Tungston
2324 was raw WB set to flash ( flash off)
Processed to jpeg with settings as shot.

Whatever WB affects, tags or the image, the WB set on the cam does get applied (AS SHOT)to the image if you don't change it When you convert to jpeg.

2326 was shot raw with parameters set to the far (-) side
processed to jpeg with AUTO parameters off in PSE3

2327 was shot raw with parameters set to the far (+) side
processed to jpeg with AUTO parameters off in PSE3

http://www.bytegallery.com/showgallery.php/cat/3247

I don't see any diffference in these pic's. Doesn't look like parameters are applied in any way.

It looks to me that the book is right on WB but wrong on parameters :? unless there is something I am missing.

By the way I have almost comvinced myself to shoot raw :) I kinda like the extra control even if it does take more time!!

Tonight our club is shooting christmas lights outside at a 4 acre display. Yep I think I am gonna shoot raw for this one :D

Thanks for all the input, I am sure others will benefit form this as well as I have.

JZ

[PacAce]

Here is a link to 4 test shots.

2323 was shot in raw with WB set for Tungston
2324 was raw WB set to flash ( flash off)
Processed to jpeg with settings as shot.

Whatever WB affects, tags or the image, the WB set on the cam does get applied (AS SHOT)to the image if you don't change it When you convert to jpeg.

2326 was shot raw with parameters set to the far (-) side
processed to jpeg with AUTO parameters off in PSE3

2327 was shot raw with parameters set to the far (+) side
processed to jpeg with AUTO parameters off in PSE3

http://www.bytegallery.com/showgallery.php/cat/3247

I don't see any diffference in these pic's. Doesn't look like parameters are applied in any way.

It looks to me that the book is right on WB but wrong on parameters :? unless there is something I am missing.

By the way I have almost comvinced myself to shoot raw :) I kinda like the extra control even if it does take more time!!

Tonight our club is shooting christmas lights outside at a 4 acre display. Yep I think I am gonna shoot raw for this one :D

Thanks for all the input, I am sure others will benefit form this as well as I have.

JZ

Yes, you are correct there. If you set the WB to "As Shot", whatever WB you used when you took the picture is what's set for the image that's converted from RAW. But that is done after the fact when you are doing your conversion from RAW to an image you can view on the screen. The WB processing is not done to the image in the RAW file itself but to the image that's derived from the raw image during raw conversion. If two WB test pictures are taken with the same parameters except for the WB being set at opposite ends of the WB adjustment spectrum, both converted images will look exactly alike if you set the WB to the same setting during post processing.

Actually, we can take this a step farther. If you use EVU, FVU or DPP, when you use the default "As Shot" setting for the converion, even the sharpness, contrast and saturation of the converted image will look just like it would in a JPEG file (if RAW+JPEG is selected).

[tim]

When you view a Raw file in a converter or any program that can view Raw files, it appears with the settings as shot in the camera. Just as Kenny G said above, These settings have not changed the Raw data. You can change them to any WB, saturation you want. The camera settings are only applied in the conversion if you select them for the conversion. The image viewing program has to use some set of parameters to show the image. It can't display the Raw data without some instructions on how to interpret it. By default they show the image with the settings from the camera. That does not imply that the Raw data has been altered. Raw is just what it implies, Raw data. The only exception to this just to make it complicated, is that Canon does some small amount of sharpening to Raw files that can not be turned off anywhere.

Regards,
Scott

The raw workflow book i've just started reading supports this.

[scottbergerphoto]

The raw workflow book i've just started reading supports this. Some things are debateable and some things just is cause they is! ;)
Regards,
Scott

[OviV]

Just for the record, Photoshop RAW converter does not go by what is stored in the file for the most part. It does take white balance into effect as long as you have the As Shot selection selected. Sharpening, Saturation, Shadows, etc. can all be modified and set as your camera default. Just be sure not to mess with exposure or WB or any of those variable adjustments before saving as camera default. Once I found the correct settings for my taste, PS RAW does a great job.

Regards,
Ovi

[dsze]

This topic is one of those that never seems to die... some topics are brought up over and over again and get the old response; "do a search." This one comes up again and again, but it always generates conversation. I find that fascinating. RAW is such a mystical concept I guess. ....and I think Canon likes it that way. Canon could easily explain this issue away, and to my knowledge they haven't done so. RAW explainations from Canon never seem to be quite as comprehensive as we'd like. ....just my observations. :)

Now, a question that I asked probably close to a year ago....I will ask again:
Knowing what we know about Camera RAW, how many of you set your parameters to Adobe RBG and how many select custom parameters. I'm curious.... I'm one of those photographers who switches back & forth between jpg & raw, because I think each have their place in my work. So, this issue of parameters is very interesting to me.

Personally, I find it more beneficial to leave my camera set on Adobe RGB and never mess with setting up other parameters. This way:

1. every file comes into PS as an aRGB file not an sRGB file whether its RAW or jpg.
2. most files require similar sat., contrast, sharpening whether they are raw or not
3. I believe less degradation of the file occurs when processed in PS than in camera.

These 3 reasons lead me to believe that always shooting in Adobe RGB (jpg or raw) is the way to go for anyone who does post processing as opposed to those who pop their card right into a printer at WalMart or something.

Opinions?

-daniel

[dsze]

...from the PSCS Manual, p.67:

in reference to working with RAW files in PSCS, "A digital camera records the white balance at the time of exposure as a metadata entry. This is read by the Photoshop Camera Raw plugin and set as the initial setting when opening an image in the Camera Raw dialog box."

-daniel

[scottbergerphoto]

As already stated above, a Raw image can only be viewed if you give the image viewer instructions on how to interpret it. The Raw file has data attached to it that tells the image viewer how it was shot in the camera so you can view it. This does not alter the Raw data. You can tell the Raw converter to ignore those instructions and pick a whole new set of instructions on how to view the file as to WB, saturation, sharpness, etc. This is not in any way changing the Raw data. Raw is Raw except for a small unquantified amount of sharpening in camera. Canon will not disclose how much.

Jpegs on the other hand do have a permanent set of parameters that can not be discarded but only modified.
Scott

[Pekka]

Raw is just what it implies, Raw data. The only exception to this just to make it complicated, is that Canon does some small amount of sharpening to Raw files that can not be turned off anywhere.

Just a side note that in 1D series there is no "base" sharpening at all with RAW. It applies only to consumer models.

[scottbergerphoto]

Thanks for the clarification. I was thinking of my 10D. I wasn't aware that Canon treated the 1 series differently in this regard.
Scott