If I'm shooting in RAW on my 300D, am I correct in thinking that the parameter settings don't do anything? Is it then better/more efficient to set the camera to Adobe RGB rather than a parameter setting?
-daniel
dsze Goldmember 2,241 posts Likes: 1 Joined May 2004 Location: On The Lake! More info | Jun 01, 2004 16:29 | #1 If I'm shooting in RAW on my 300D, am I correct in thinking that the parameter settings don't do anything? Is it then better/more efficient to set the camera to Adobe RGB rather than a parameter setting? -daniel
LOG IN TO REPLY |
psk4363 Senior Member 720 posts Joined Jun 2003 Location: Bolton, UK More info | Jun 02, 2004 04:42 | #2 Hi Daniel, A little G9
LOG IN TO REPLY |
scottbergerphoto Cream of the Crop 5,429 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jun 2003 Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA More info | Jun 02, 2004 07:09 | #3 dsze wrote: If I'm shooting in RAW on my 300D, am I correct in thinking that the parameter settings don't do anything? Is it then better/more efficient to set the camera to Adobe RGB rather than a parameter setting? -daniel The parameter setting affect the embedded JPEG and you can use them as the settings for the Raw conversion if you choose to do so. Some photographers use the embeded jpegs to quicky show clients their results, so the parameters are useful. Personally when I shoot Raw I use Adobe RGB for the larger color gamut. One World, One Voice Against Terror,
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 02, 2004 09:52 | #4 Thanks! Thats pretty much what I thought, but wanted someone more knowledgable to confirm. For my purposes, I think the larger gamut is more important than the JPG. Is there anyway to adjust the size of the JPG that is saved with the RAW file with the current Canon 1.1.1 firmware? -daniel
LOG IN TO REPLY |
slin100 Senior Member 976 posts Likes: 1 Joined Sep 2003 Location: Cupertino, CA More info | Jun 02, 2004 10:17 | #5 dsze wrote: Is there anyway to adjust the size of the JPG that is saved with the RAW file with the current Canon 1.1.1 firmware? Yes. The size of the JPG can be set using CFn 8. Steven
LOG IN TO REPLY |
yb98 Goldmember 2,625 posts Likes: 36 Joined Feb 2003 Location: Paris More info | Jun 02, 2004 10:26 | #6 slin100 wrote: dsze wrote: Is there anyway to adjust the size of the JPG that is saved with the RAW file with the current Canon 1.1.1 firmware? Yes. The size of the JPG can be set using CFn 8. No, not with the canon firmware. But with the hack firmware yes. Best DPP Threads
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CyberDyneSystems Admin (type T-2000) More info | Jun 02, 2004 11:05 | #7 The same thing that applies to the parameter settings.. also applies to Adobe RGB... GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
slin100 Senior Member 976 posts Likes: 1 Joined Sep 2003 Location: Cupertino, CA More info | Jun 02, 2004 11:22 | #8 yb98 wrote: slin100 wrote: dsze wrote: Is there anyway to adjust the size of the JPG that is saved with the RAW file with the current Canon 1.1.1 firmware? Yes. The size of the JPG can be set using CFn 8. No, not with the canon firmware. But with the hack firmware yes. Sorry. I didn't notice the OP had a 300D. What I said is definitely true with the 10D. Steven
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tommykjensen Cream of the Crop More info | Jun 02, 2004 11:30 | #9 Can someone expand on this? EDITING OF MY PHOTOS IS NOT ALLOWED
LOG IN TO REPLY |
yb98 Goldmember 2,625 posts Likes: 36 Joined Feb 2003 Location: Paris More info | Jun 02, 2004 12:32 | #10 It depends on which software you use to view the pics. Not All viewers take into account the profile. Best DPP Threads
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CyberDyneSystems Admin (type T-2000) More info | Jun 02, 2004 12:57 | #11 ...indeed.. what software are you using? GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tommykjensen Cream of the Crop More info | Jun 02, 2004 13:19 | #12 I just viewed the test images in PS CS and see no difference. EDITING OF MY PHOTOS IS NOT ALLOWED
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 02, 2004 13:20 | #13 If I am correct, I think what happens when you have the parameters set is when you convert from RAW to JPG in PSCS, PS recognizes the new JPG as an sRGB file. When I have the camera set to Adobe RGB, and then convert to JPG, PS automatically recognizes the new JPG as an RGB, not sRGB. -daniel
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tommykjensen Cream of the Crop More info | Jun 02, 2004 13:38 | #14 I just compared the histograms and they are different. The histogram The image in srgb colorspace And the histogram Anybody see the difference in the actual image? EDITING OF MY PHOTOS IS NOT ALLOWED
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Roger_Cavanagh Goldmember 1,394 posts Joined Sep 2001 More info | Jun 02, 2004 14:49 | #15 The whole point of colour management is to get consistent colours across systems. The two pictures don't look quite the same in my browser (IE) because PCs "default" to using the sRGB space (more or less). Images in larger colour spaces, such as, Adobe RGB will tend to look flat and unsaturated.
Adobe RGB
The outline in the plots is the sRGB profile. Regards, =============
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2570 guests, 94 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||