Raw Shooter - WOW

[syburn]

I took some interior room shots in RAW and they looked a bit dark so I played with them in the Canon supplied software. OK... Im just a beginner so I was not expecting miricales.

Then I downloaded the Raw Shooter to see if it was better and looked at the same RAW images. WOW!!! They looked like pure images, not dak at all. Pristeen and light, without all the dark shadows. These images looked closer to what I saw with my eye, very strange to me...

Whats happening - why is there a difference before I even start to alter the files?

And all these settings in the camer such as :white balance: processing parametres etc - seems they can be changed in the RAW software, which suggests to me that you dont need to bother to much about the settings in the actual camera menu, just alter it in the software?

I thought I had grasped RAW basics but now I'm confused.

(I would include the images but im still trying to learn how to do it)

[lostdoggy]

You can also change exposure, level, WB, etc in DPP as well. And if you lke RSE, you should try PhaseOne C1 Pro IMO its the best out there.

[lostdoggy]

(I would include the images but im still trying to learn how to do it)

Choose Go Advance/manage attachment/browse/upload there is a maximum file size of 100KB. Uploadclose wndo and Submit Reply

[RAitch]

I've heard other people talking about that.
How does it compare with the built in RAW software in Photoshop? To me, that's my preference until anybody else tells me otherwise.

[gsniegow]

I came here to post the exact same thing!!!

Two things...

1.) From this borad, I've learned and have had my eyes open to switch to shooting RAW all the time now.

2.) RAWShooter product ROCKED! My brother and sister in law had their twins on Thursday. I went to see them Friday night. Not wanting to use the flash (it's not good from what I hear for newborns eyes) I snapped a bunch of pictures. They looked OK, but were kind of dark. Download RAWShooter and BAM! My pictures look awesome! THANK YOU ALL for guiding me down this path.

Disclosure: While I do have PS7 and Elements 2, I found that RAWShooter was easy to use and supurb in claning up my pictures. Now I'm no expert, so please don't flame me if you could obtain similiar results in PS. My point was RAWShooter turned out excellent pictures with a ver easy to follow interface.

- Gene -

[syburn]

Hmm............ I saw my RAW images in RAWshooter and the look light and nice as I said, but when I try to convert them, they just go back to the darker images that I first saw in the Canon Raw Edit software.

Why is that? How can I keep the lighter Raw images from RAWshooter?

Simon

[mwinog2777]

I've used the free version.

It produces only 8 bit output.

Hence, any advantage it has is outweighed by this limitation.

[syburn]

Oh so the free version will not allow me to achieve the look of the image I see in the Rawshooter screen.

Ohhhhh....Are all free softwares like this?

[mwinog2777]

Oh so the free version will not allow me to achieve the look of the image I see in the Rawshooter screen.

Ohhhhh....Are all free softwares like this?

Two issues:
1. The lack of 16 bit output will impact your ability to make adjustments to the image when using PS or another product. It shouldn't have anything to do with what it looks like on the screen when you look at it immediately. Generally, you get what you pay for, and a free demo is just that, its not the full product.

2. I don't have your problem; looks pretty much what it should once converted. But, will stick to 16 bit conversion programs.

[syburn]

I have just used the other software (Phase One Pro 3.7) that can convert to Tiff 16bit and it is the same situation. In the RAW software my interior shots are bright but after it has been converted it looks dark. I dont understand why I cant just convert exactly what I see on the Raw software? Why is it altering the final image (or to lokk at it another way - Why is it making the raw image seem so bright and clear?)

Help meeeee. I'm I crap or what?

[tumb]

Rawshooter 1.1.3 does allow 16 bit, and I'm pretty sure the first free version I used did also. It is a great program, especially if you are working on a file or two at a time. I actually prefer it over PSCS2. I do use both, but if I'm in a hurry I usually use this program.

Don't have an answer for the image changes you experience, I have not had this problem.

[BigRed450]

syburn:
I think we need to clear up some little misunderstandings with RAW. RAW is merely "RAW" information from your cameras sensor. There is NO image there. The program you are using decifers the image information to give you a preview of what the RAW file will look like. When the program adjusts the preview of a RAW file it/you do not save the changes to the RAW file information, but merely adds what they call a sidecar file (XMP) in the same or different folder for that image that tells the program what settings you have choosen, so every time you open that RAW image in that program it will preview it with those settings. These changes do not become reality until you save the image to a different format i.e. JPEG, TIFF.

Next issue.. All those initial "bright" RSE images you saw were the auto presets determined by RSE for your camera. When you convert and save to jpeg you will have that look, but not until as explained above.

[mwinog2777]

Rawshooter 1.1.3 does allow 16 bit, and I'm pretty sure the first free version I used did also. It is a great program, especially if you are working on a file or two at a time. I actually prefer it over PSCS2. I do use both, but if I'm in a hurry I usually use this program.

Don't have an answer for the image changes you experience, I have not had this problem.

I have 1.1.3 free version; only 8 bit.

[CRE@TE]

Mine does 16 bits also. You have to select it from the pull down list.

[tumb]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v505/mdwsr/rawsh.jpg

[CRE@TE]

I see that 16 bit is only saved in Tiff , Jpeg will only do 8 bit.

[gsniegow]

Mine also does 16 bit. Then again, I have been saving them in TIFF format. I then brought them into Photoshop and converted them over to JPG (8 bit, most of the processing options would not work with 16 bit).

As for darkness... Just to make sure, you are sending them to be batch processed and then running the batch, right? If so, I can't help you. If not, like me my first few attempts, you need to make sure to mark them for batch processing which converts them into 16 bit TIFF files. Just under 50 MB files too!

I am probably one of the boards biggest amatuers / newbees, so I am not saying this product is better than another. Rather, I'm stating how impressed I was with it's abilities and ease of use.

- Gene -

[Sathi]

I have just used the other software (Phase One Pro 3.7) that can convert to Tiff 16bit and it is the same situation. In the RAW software my interior shots are bright but after it has been converted it looks dark. I dont understand why I cant just convert exactly what I see on the Raw software? Why is it altering the final image (or to lokk at it another way - Why is it making the raw image seem so bright and clear?)

Help meeeee. I'm I crap or what?

I am having the exact same problem. Determined that Raw shooter displays in a brighter more saturated mode on screen, and then when converted becomes less saturated. Pase One gives me a more magenta output than what it displays before conversion. I can't figuere out what is going on.

[syburn]

I am having the exact same problem. Determined that Raw shooter displays in a brighter more saturated mode on screen, and then when converted becomes less saturated. Pase One gives me a more magenta output than what it displays before conversion. I can't figuere out what is going on.

Yes - I understand one of the previous helpfull explainations, but It is hard know what settings to play with when your final Tiff iamge does not look like the RAW display.

Actualy the Canon RAW software did show the RAW looking as the TIFF does, so I find these other softwares a bit deceiving.

All I want to know is if the RAW software shows the image looking one way, once converted it should look that same way. just lower quality etc.

Cheers - simon

[BigRed450]

Simon, what you see at 100% view in RSE is what you should get in your TIFF if you made sure all the setting chosen were transfered to the TIFF in conversion. Be sure that the drop down menu does not say "Save As Shot" in your conversion.

Seems to be a color/saturation issue if the image is viewed at less then 92%. See other thread for that info.

[dave_bass5]

I am having the exact same problem. Determined that Raw shooter displays in a brighter more saturated mode on screen, and then when converted becomes less saturated. Pase One gives me a more magenta output than what it displays before conversion. I can't figuere out what is going on.

Are you saving as sRGB from RSE rather than AdobeRGB?
AdobeRGB will look flatter when viewed using an winXP picture/fax viewer or a web page.

Dave.

[syburn]

Oh i seem to be closer to solving the above mystery of the differing colours in RAW and converted files.


I think its the colour management in both Photoshop and my Raw software.

I never have bothered setting the colour management - maybe thats why. So now i need to see how to do that.........so many hurdles to cross.

Its it easy to Colour Manage??

Simon

[dave_bass5]

Oh i seem to be closer to solving the above mystery of the differing colours in RAW and converted files.


I think its the colour management in both Photoshop and my Raw software.

I never have bothered setting the colour management - maybe thats why. So now i need to see how to do that.........so many hurdles to cross.

Its it easy to Colour Manage??

Simon

its taken me a while to figure this out but what ive found is that if you want to view the pics on screen, say on a webpage or just by double clicking on a file in windows then the working space should be sRGB to save to from RSE. if you are going to then put it into PS then the recomended profile is AdobeRGB.
If when you go to convert your RAW file you look at the histogram at the bottom when you change colour space's you will see the histogram change as well, showing which colours are getting boosted or cut.
Ill leave it to someone more experianced to tell you how to set up PS

Dave.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Its it easy to Colour Manage??

Simon


:(
It's more difficult than a job interview!

[tumb]

Yep, it can be very confusing and I'm still not sure I understand it all. I've settled on a workflow that I came to more by trial-and-error than anything else.

[syburn]

Yes the colour does look flat and quite bright. Strange thing is, when RSE first shows the RAW files in the slide show at the top, they were normal (dark) then like half a second later they all were automaticaly changed to the bright washed out look.

Then when I messed around and turned off colour management they looked darkish again. Then when convert to tiff and view in PS thet are also darkish.

So I think the washed out look is just a setting, maybe I have my color settings all wrong so they looked washed out.

Oh its hard to explain and hard to understand myself. Simon

[syburn]

I think I need to manage my colour settings but I only want to make sure each software shows the image in the same way. I dont print from my PC. Only view on monitor and post on the web.

Does that mean its a simpler process to do the colour management, like once for all the applications to share?

[dave_bass5]

I think I need to manage my colour settings but I only want to make sure each software shows the image in the same way. I dont print from my PC. Only view on monitor and post on the web.

Does that mean its a simpler process to do the colour management, like once for all the applications to share?

I could be wrong here but i think you should set everything to sRGB including your output from RSE and it should look the same when viewed on your pc and on the web.
You may need to set proof view in PS to windows but again ill leave that for an expert to deal with.
I use C1 and was getting the same problem, looked great in C1 but flat when i uploaded to smugmg. i ended up changing the convert to destination colour space to sRGB and all was fine.
hope this helps

Dave.

[syburn]

haha - i cant look at my monitor now, i have set monitor to sRGB, and everything is washed out and white. Only way seems to set monitor to standard settings. Or Rebel 350D settings but its a bit dark....hmmmmm my eyes are tired

[tumb]

Here are a few links that will help. Don't try to soak it all up in one read, there are a lot of opinions out there but using these as a guide and a little trial & error it will finally start to gel (many of these I got from this forum by the way):

http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/monitor_calibration.htm

http://photoshopnews.com/2005/06/09/understanding-prophoto-rgb-update/

http://photoshopnews.com/2005/06/08/shooting-in-the-raw-perfecting-the-image/

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/214217

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/techniques/process.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/colour_theory.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/monitor_profiling.shtml

http://photoshopnews.com/2005/05/02/getting-the-colors-right-when-soft-proofing/

[Sathi]

Are you saving as sRGB from RSE rather than AdobeRGB?
AdobeRGB will look flatter when viewed using an winXP picture/fax viewer or a web page.

Dave.

Yes I have tried all combinations of tiff/jpeg/srgb/argb. But my goal is to save as 16bit aRGB tiffs. I am opening these in CS2 which I am assuming is diplaying things correctly. My workspace in CS2 is set to aRGB.

[Sathi]

Yes the colour does look flat and quite bright. Strange thing is, when RSE first shows the RAW files in the slide show at the top, they were normal (dark) then like half a second later they all were automaticaly changed to the bright washed out look.

Then when I messed around and turned off colour management they looked darkish again. Then when convert to tiff and view in PS thet are also darkish.

So I think the washed out look is just a setting, maybe I have my color settings all wrong so they looked washed out.

Oh its hard to explain and hard to understand myself. Simon

This is exactly my problem, RSE switching display modes. I think it has allot to do with the zoom settings which I outlined in this thread with screenshot.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=84257

[BrianEE93]

I see that 16 bit is only saved in Tiff , Jpeg will only do 8 bit.

I could be mistaken but aren't JPEGs only 8-bit with any program?

[superstar]

I could be wrong here but i think you should set everything to sRGB including your output from RSE and it should look the same when viewed on your pc and on the web.
You may need to set proof view in PS to windows but again ill leave that for an expert to deal with.
I use C1 and was getting the same problem, looked great in C1 but flat when i uploaded to smugmg. i ended up changing the convert to destination colour space to sRGB and all was fine.
hope this helps

Dave.


I am having the same problem in C1. I will have a RAW image open in C1, then the converted tiff open in PS, and they look different. PS one has less color saturation. I will try switching to sRGB and see if that help. C1 has many different options and I am still learning them.
Richard

[dave_bass5]

with C1 you have different output options. you can set destination as AdobeRGB, web as sRGB. give it a try. its in the colour menu i think. then when you go to output your shot select the different destinations from the drop down menu.
I took me a while and a few questions here to get it sorted.

dave.

[syburn]

Yes My RAW "head aches" seem to have stopped for now. I went to colour management in C1 and made all the settings sRGB and the image looks the same in both PS and C1.

Seems that the reason why my images looked so light and flat was some colour mangement settings.

Having said that I feel C1 seems way too compicated for me. I dont know what the PSCS2 is like but as Im still on a steep learning curve I will continue for now.

One werid side bar is that it seems impossible to change a TIFF 16 bit to a JPG in PS. I have try to make it PSD file and even save to web but no luck. I remeber cursing over this once before but cant remeber how I did it. Seems silly to me though!!!!

Simon

[BigRed450]

One werid side bar is that it seems impossible to change a TIFF 16 bit to a JPG in PS. I have try to make it PSD file and even save to web but no luck. I remeber cursing over this once before but cant remeber how I did it. Seems silly to me though!!!!

Simon

Must convert the TIFF to 8 bit (image > mode > 8 bit ) before it will allow you to save as JPEG.

[dave_bass5]

In PS if the working space is sRGB then your pics should look the same as if they were viewed on the web. there is also a proofing view which you can change to simulate different outputs.
C1 is worth sticking with. it seems to work in a slightly different way to some windows programs but once you get the hang of it its produces gret output.
Alot of my RAW shots go through C1 then straight on to the web or to a lab. i do use PSCS2 but i try not to for my "snaps".

Dave.

[Hellashot]

Canon's supplied File Utility is very basic. Other programs have more options. I use PSE 3 and I'm sure it's quite comparable to Raw Shooter. When I open a RAW file it automatically gives me it's "auto fix" settings. I do not think Canon's software does this. It only allows changes in 5 different steps I believe.