7D Soft Images

General_T wrote in post #13037999
Hi Copidosoma,

Havent tried Canons DPP, but will. I've read that ACR was better but now you mention it maybe better. As well, I believe TeamSpeed also uses DPP. I wonder if there is a poll about what percentage used ACR vs DPP vs LR?

Also, is there sharpening if shooting straight RAW? I thought that was zeroed out for RAW?

Tony, I don't know if you bothered to read my post from earlier (it was maybe too long...winded), but I asked an important question and also made what I feel were good suggestions!

On thing, though, that I would stress that is evident from your shots you posted is the need for you to realize that some degree of "input sharpening" is needed when you are shooting Raw. As you have observed, Camera Raw does not apply the in-camera settings for Sharpening as well as Contrast and Saturation to Raw files, only "mild" defaults. It is up to you to determine how to "optimize" your image.

If you set your camera Picture Style to, say, Landscape and shot those batteries using Raw+jpeg and looked at the jpeg, I'm sure you would see a difference. The captured image from the Raw was good, it just needed some "capture sharpening" like the camera applied to the jpeg. In ACR that is one of your tasks. In DPP, it is the default setting.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #13037593
Nope, I do not do all my PP with the raw. I adjust white balance and exposure, play a little with shadows, highlights, and maybe saturation/contrast. I don't do anything with sharpness if the ISO is at 800 or higher, I prefer sharpness actually turned down.

I then take the JPG, clean up any noise if needed, and then do the sharpness there. I could actually just get away with just adjustment white balance and exposure and do all the other things as a JPG action.

If I were doing this as a career and had hundreds of photos to process, this methodology just wouldn't work though. It would indeed be too time consuming, IMO.

Do I understand right, you take the partly processed raw image and save it as a jpeg and THEN do the rest of the PP? Why do you compress the heck out of it before you're finished with it. (or do you mean save it as some sort of uncompressed RGB file?) Many people do raw processing and save as a (usually 16bit) tif or Photoshop file (to preserve all that IQ we care so much about) do the final tweaking and only save as jpeg for a medium that requires it (e.g., email or outside printing service) while keeping a copy of the full image in Photoshop or tif.

I go to JPG and process it for whatever size I am displaying it, print or web. I keep the raws around, because I have found that DPP improves generation after generation, and I can go back to old Raw files and get quite a bit back out of them. I don't store TIFFs or work with them. CR2 and JPGs...

Generally for higher ISO images I use ACR which has an awesome (much better than DPP) NR, while low ISO images look better in DPP in my opinion. I also have Capture 1, which also does a good job on lower ISO images.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #13038086
I go to JPG and process it for whatever size I am displaying it, print or web. I keep the raws around, because I have found that DPP improves generation after generation, and I can go back to old Raw files and get quite a bit back out of them. I don't store TIFFs or work with them. CR2 and JPGs...

Then do you at least use the highest possible quality (lowest possible level of compression)?

Quick question here, for those with a 7D are you using on camera noise reduction when shooting RAW? Or do you just do NR in post.

tonylong wrote in post #13037108
What do you mean by "soft"?

To explain, there are two general meanings for sharpness/softness that we see come up in photography.

"Technical" sharpness is the ability of your body and lens to focus on detail in a scene and return that detail well-rendered. This assumes that your technique "optimizes" good focus/sharpness. As we've seen, an image viewed at a close zoom can and should have good apparent sharpness. I don't own a 7D, but I've seen plenty of shots that, viewed at 100%, do show fine detail with a perfectly acceptable degree of sharpness.

The other "meaning" of sharpness/softness is not technical but more about the "look" of an image at any level of zoom. The "sharpness"/"softness" is apparent. Rather than technical sharpness, this "look" is typically a result of things like Contrast and some high level of sharening applied either by the camera when creating a jpeg or by post-processing, typically in your Raw processing software.

I believe I am referring to your first definition of "soft". The wholw area of focus not being crisp/detailed enough.Edges just don't seem crisp (although this coul

I haven't tried this yet but will most definately

Will start to use DPP and learn it better over the next week.

Definately, I kinda expected the picture to be sharp as soon as opened up in ACR. Then I could decide what to do with it. It seems awfully labour intensive to have to PP each and every photo you want to keep - is this the norm?

Thank you for this explanation. I will read and reread these insights to help me improve. I am definately feeling it is my problem and not anything the camera is doing.


Tony

Dasweb wrote in post #13038152
Quick question here, for those with a 7D are you using on camera noise reduction when shooting RAW? Or do you just do NR in post.

Click on the mini-review link in my signature, I started a post on different ways to get the most out of the 7D images, including what in-camera settings to use. I use standard most of the time, but at the end of the post I did come across an interesting situation with the strong setting.

OK, reading this leads me to a question.

Is it possible to get a nice, sharp and crispy straight out of the camera (JPEG), or is it the nature of this beast, that you have to shoot in RAW and process in DPP (the best PP for this camera according to the general consensus of what I've read), in order to get a decent usable image?

The reason for asking is that I prefer to get the image straight out of the camera, and tweak here and there if I want to (not have to). I prefer to have done all the work (composition, lighting, ISO, shutterspeed, and focus point), and get an image without having to build an image out of loads of RAW data.

I don't shoot in RAW, I just don't . From my understanding, RAW is basically unusable without processing, which I know is a great way to shoot as you capture lots more data than JPEG, but call me old fashioned , I just don't want to have to Post Process every image in order to have an image that I can use. I'm not against learning how to process RAW, but for me it just not capturing an image there and then, whereas for others, it is part of capturing a moment and then spending the extra time to build that moment even further. I'm sure that there will be moments where I really want to build an image in order to get a certain mood, so I will learn how to shoot RAW and process accordingly. I want that to be my choice, not a forced issue because that is how this camera works.

Regards, Dutch

TeamSpeed wrote in post #13038259
Click on the mini-review link in my signature, I started a post on different ways to get the most out of the 7D images, including what in-camera settings to use. I use standard most of the time, but at the end of the post I did come across an interesting situation with the strong setting.

Reading now, thanks!

mangrovedutch wrote in post #13038264
OK, reading this leads me to a question.

Is it possible to get a nice, sharp and crispy straight out of the camera (JPEG), or is it the nature of this beast, that you have to shoot in RAW and process in DPP (the best PP for this camera according to the general consensus of what I've read), in order to get a decent usable image?

Certainly. The picture style has a sharpness setting embedded in it. Just crank it up until the sharpness you're getting suits your tastes.

You can modify the user-based picture styles to suit your tastes as well, and base them off of the default picture styles.

mangrovedutch wrote in post #13038264
OK, reading this leads me to a question.

Is it possible to get a nice, sharp and crispy straight out of the camera (JPEG), or is it the nature of this beast, that you have to shoot in RAW and process in DPP (the best PP for this camera according to the general consensus of what I've read), in order to get a decent usable image?

The reason for asking is that I prefer to get the image straight out of the camera, and tweak here and there if I want to (not have to). I prefer to have done all the work (composition, lighting, ISO, shutterspeed, and focus point), and get an image without having to build an image out of loads of RAW data.

As I've said earlier on, I don't have a 7D.

But, these cameras are designed to put out good images, including good jpegs. I can't imagine (and I've never heard) that the 7D would put out "inferior" jpegs, assuming you used good exposure settings and used good shooting techniques, and assuming you didn't want or need to do any of the "serious" post-processing for which the Raw file can give the most benefit.

But, TeamSpeed mentioned something worth considering and that is that he has actions/routines that are made to prepare an image for final output. One important consideration here is "output sharpening". Your jpeg has been given "input sharpening", which may be plenty for your needs, or it may not. Many images, after sizing to an output size (for Web, sharing or print) can benefit from some type of sharpening at that size and for that use. In fact, Lightroom has a built-in Output Sharpening function for this. The "traditional" way for Photoshop users is to have actions for a given need -- either for typical USM settings, maybe one that gives you a layer with a mask so you can brush in sharpening selectively, maybe some more elaborate setup. In Photoshop you can run an action in the editor, but there is also a nifty utility called the Image Processor that you can run from Bridge -- you can run a Resize action and then a Sharpen action and then PS converts and saves the resulting jpeg in a destination you have chosen.

Other apps will require a different approach, depending on its capabilities and your needs.

I don't shoot in RAW, I just don't . From my understanding, RAW is basically unusable without processing, which I know is a great way to shoot as you capture lots more data than JPEG, but call me old fashioned , I just don't want to have to Post Process every image in order to have an image that I can use. I'm not against learning how to process RAW, but for me it just not capturing an image there and then, whereas for others, it is part of capturing a moment and then spending the extra time to build that moment even further. I'm sure that there will be moments where I really want to build an image in order to get a certain mood, so I will learn how to shoot RAW and process accordingly. I want that to be my choice, not a forced issue because that is how this camera works.

Regards, Dutch

You don't "need" to shoot Raw to get a good image. If the light and your shooting work together to get a great jpeg, well, more power to you! Raw comes into its power play when you want or need to do post-processing for luminance and color tones because it has a significantly greater amount of image data than the jpegs and, because of that, you have greater latitude in making adjustments to those things without creating "arifiacts" that are destuctive to your IQ. Plus, a Raw file is preserved, despite how much processing you do with it. Changes are only applied when you convert to an RGB image. The software can "remember" your settings so that you can return to the version that you have created, or you can also revert to the original or some other state to create a new version.

As to Raw requiring more work in post-processing, all I can do is reiterate the strength of DPP -- with a Raw file you start with a preview that is pretty much what a jpeg would have been, and if you are pleased, you can quickly convert it to a jpeg for output, or to a tiff if you want to edit in an app like Photoshop at the higher quality of the tiff file. So, it takes a bit of time to do the conversion, but that's time, not so much "work".

So, Raw is a great format, but it's not required -- I and many others here put years into shooting jpegs. But, as we became aware of the benefits of Rw shooting, at some point we made the leap.

mangrovedutch wrote in post #13038264
OK, reading this leads me to a question.

Is it possible to get a nice, sharp and crispy straight out of the camera (JPEG), or is it the nature of this beast, that you have to shoot in RAW and process in DPP (the best PP for this camera according to the general consensus of what I've read), in order to get a decent usable image?

The reason for asking is that I prefer to get the image straight out of the camera, and tweak here and there if I want to (not have to). I prefer to have done all the work (composition, lighting, ISO, shutterspeed, and focus point), and get an image without having to build an image out of loads of RAW data.

I don't shoot in RAW, I just don't . From my understanding, RAW is basically unusable without processing, which I know is a great way to shoot as you capture lots more data than JPEG, but call me old fashioned , I just don't want to have to Post Process every image in order to have an image that I can use. I'm not against learning how to process RAW, but for me it just not capturing an image there and then, whereas for others, it is part of capturing a moment and then spending the extra time to build that moment even further. I'm sure that there will be moments where I really want to build an image in order to get a certain mood, so I will learn how to shoot RAW and process accordingly. I want that to be my choice, not a forced issue because that is how this camera works.

Regards, Dutch

Well, certainly yes!. Even if you are shooting in RAW, if you connect your camera to a HD TV (I do this by using a HDMI cable), the camera will generate a nice JPEG image which is the one shown in the TV screen (actually, I think is the same image you see in the camera screen and which is saved as part of the RAW file).

Miguel

Hi amfoto1,

Thank You for this reply. Can you claify something for me?

amfoto1 wrote in post #13036289
If you want to stick with RAWs instead, that's cool. You can use Canon Digital Photo Pro (DPP) and it will use whatever sharpening parameter you've set in the camera during RAW conversion, or you can change it at that time if you wish. Or, using a thrid party software such as Photoshop (etc.), just set the default sharpening higher in your RAW converter. That's possible with most RAW converters. Going from 50D to 7D crop sensor cameras two years ago, I also found the images a bit soft. I now tend to use 75 or 85% more sharpening now, on average, with 7D. The detail is there, you just have to do a bit more to find it in your 7D images.

How do you sharpen in the Camera, when shooting RAW, before downloading the pics for PP. I thought you can only adjust sharpness using a Picture Style when shooting JPEG's?

Will definately experiment with this suggestion.

Thanks for the advise on the AF. I will work more with the single point/AI Servo settings in the future.

Thanks agin for the time and effort.


Tony

General_T wrote in post #13044730
Hi amfoto1,

Thank You for this reply. Can you claify something for me?



How do you sharpen in the Camera, when shooting RAW, before downloading the pics for PP. I thought you can only adjust sharpness using a Picture Style when shooting JPEG's?

The picture style sharpening value will be used by Canon's DPP (Digital Photo Professional) when processing the RAW images. You can, of course, change the sharpening value in DPP afterwards if the setting you used in camera was not to your liking. I believe you can also configure DPP to ignore the in-camera setting and use some other default value.