Attn: Tareq JPEG with different paramenter setttings

It seems your post on the equipment forum is gone...don't know where it went so I'm posting this here...hope you find it...

My last post to you was about different parameter settings for jpegs IN THE CAMERA...and whether you were aware of them...
so here is an example of one scene and one exposure with different parameter settings...
No changes were made in photoshop...the differences are significant and should show clearly that you CAN make your JPEG images look the way you would prefer...it is within your control.
I hope this helps...

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

I don't know where is my thread.

anyway, i replied to you that i used different parameters and in fact my shots in that threads are all with values at maximim [2,2,2,0] so only color tone was on 0 and the rest were at maximum, but still i feel they are not sharp or saturated enough maybe, so i know with standard i can't get more pop shot so i rised all sharpness and saturation and contrast up to 2[maximum value], and i did try to lower contrast or sharpness to 1 but couldn't see big differences, so i think 350D is not good enough to match picture styles in 30D or 5D or 1-series cameras.

The top was only sharpened (to +2, the max on my 10d)
...the bottom was set for maximum sharpening, contrast and saturation.

Can you post a similar comparison? Maybe a RAW shot and a jpeg shot with the max values...maybe you need to set somewhere in the middle

[QUOTE=Tareq;3118699]I don't know where is my thread. quote]

Possibly removed due to some of the attacks against you Tareq.
I posted my dissaproval of one of those attacks in particular , now your thread is gone....

kitacanon wrote in post #3118868
The top was only sharpened (to +2, the max on my 10d)
...the bottom was set for maximum sharpening, contrast and saturation.

Can you post a similar comparison? Maybe a RAW shot and a jpeg shot with the max values...maybe you need to set somewhere in the middle

Forget RAW, but for JPEG i will post a comparison and see, but anyway, you saw the "snapshots" of my deleted thread, what do you think about color and contrast raher than exposure?

[QUOTE=Choderboy;31190​02]

Tareq wrote in post #3118699
I don't know where is my thread. quote]

Possibly removed due to some of the attacks against you Tareq.
I posted my dissaproval of one of those attacks in particular , now your thread is gone....

I appreciate that very much that they deleted the threads due to some rudeor offended replies, but for now i will try to post only those threads where people will not get interesting to attack again [I hope so], so thank you for all who support me and help me, and thank you for all who attacked me as well because i am a friend to all and i have to accept whatever to happen to me from friends, but i wish only one thing which is very very important:


"
I HOPE YOU ACCEPT ME AS A GOOD FRIEND HERE OR ANYWHERE IF I MEET YOU IN THIS WORLD.
"

Tareq wrote in post #3119728
Forget RAW, but for JPEG i will post a comparison and see, but anyway, you saw the "snapshots" of my deleted thread, what do you think about color and contrast raher than exposure?

I'm sorry but without side-by-side or top-and-bottom comparisons I can't give you any advice...
by shooting two shots of the same scene, one RAW (converted to jpeg only for posting here) and one in jpeg (listing the parameter settings - maximum I believe you say) I can offer you some advice on how I might adjust your settings...

BUT...as you said before, there's a difference between CRTs and LCD monitors...I use a CRT monitor while others see your shots on LCDs...I'd like to think that people HERE have adjusted THEIR LCD monitors for color fidelity, but you can't ever be sure that they're not too bright or contrasty...like most people's HD TVs...There's not one setting on my HDTV (brightness, contrast, color, sharpness) that is over the 50% mid-range...

Tareq wrote in post #3118699
I don't know where is my thread.

anyway, i replied to you that i used different parameters and in fact my shots in that threads are all with values at maximim [2,2,2,0] so only color tone was on 0 and the rest were at maximum, but still i feel they are not sharp or saturated enough maybe, so i know with standard i can't get more pop shot so i rised all sharpness and saturation and contrast up to 2[maximum value], and i did try to lower contrast or sharpness to 1 but couldn't see big differences, so i think 350D is not good enough to match picture styles in 30D or 5D or 1-series cameras.

I felt the same way about my 350D... I never had the lever of saturation or sharpness I wanted with the JPEG. Since then I shoot raw and PP the images in ACR. A bit more time consuming but the results are better then the in cam processing.

popolz wrote in post #3121645
I felt the same way about my 350D... I never had the lever of saturation or sharpness I wanted with the JPEG. Since then I shoot raw and PP the images in ACR. A bit more time consuming but the results are better then the in cam processing.

I am a RAW fan love addiction by the way, just i shoot jpeg for some people in some occasions, otherwise i will never use jpeg in camera.

Picture Styles on the Mk2N.......for whatever it's worth.

SeanH wrote in post #3121943
Picture Styles on the Mk2N.......for whatever it's worth.

sure, i agree about MK2N

I like making the corrections myself on picassa or some other free crud

VERY nice Sean, but Tareq isn't as much concerned with picture styles as he is with jpeg settings that don't seem to give him satisfactory results...

What Tareq needs to do is exactly what you did but with HIS different jpeg settings so we can see exactly what his dissatisfaction is...

kitacanon wrote in post #3122818
VERY nice Sean, but Tareq isn't as much concerned with picture styles as he is with jpeg settings that don't seem to give him satisfactory results...

What Tareq needs to do is exactly what you did but with HIS different jpeg settings so we can see exactly what his dissatisfaction is...

I am talked about JPEG from 350D, not from 5D or 1-series.
I got great results from 5D and/or 1-series, but not 350D mostly, so if you telling me that i can get that with 350D then great, just show me.
By the way, on that my deleted forum all shots were when i used parameters adjusted to maximum and hence not match JPEG on 5D or 1-seires, i will test my 30D if it is close to 350D or much better, so don't post from 1DMK2 or 5D to show me that JPEG great enough, use 350D only.