Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
Thread started 01 Jun 2004 (Tuesday) 16:29
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Parameter Setting or Adobe RGB For Raw Shooting

 
dsze
Goldmember
Avatar
2,241 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2004
Location: On The Lake!
     
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


-daniel
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away."
-Gear List-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
psk4363
Senior Member
Avatar
720 posts
Joined Jun 2003
Location: Bolton, UK
     
Jun 02, 2004 04:42 |  #2

Hi Daniel,

You're absolutely correct re both of your questions - parameter settings have no effect of you shoot in RAW, and Adobe RGB is the better setting as it covers a wider colour space.

Cheers,
Barry


A little G9 :D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scottbergerphoto
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,429 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
     
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.
Regards,
Scott


One World, One Voice Against Terror,
Best Regards,
Scott
ScottBergerPhotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dsze
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,241 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2004
Location: On The Lake!
     
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


-daniel
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away."
-Gear List-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
slin100
Senior Member
976 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2003
Location: Cupertino, CA
     
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
7D, 10D, 17-40/4L, 50/1.8 Mk I, 85/1.8, Tamron 28-75/2.8, 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS, 80-200/2.8L, 550EX, Pocket Wizard

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yb98
Goldmember
Avatar
2,625 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Feb 2003
Location: Paris
     
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
DPP++ Video Channel (external link)
New Version DPP++ 11.3 released (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
52,927 posts
Gallery: 193 photos
Likes: 10124
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Jun 02, 2004 11:05 |  #7

The same thing that applies to the parameter settings.. also applies to Adobe RGB...

ie; It does not effect the raw image....

All selecting Adobe RGB does is tell the conversion program to use Adbobe RGB by default.. but just like parameter settings.. you don't need to have the camera in Adobe RGB to then convert the RAW file to a file with an Adobe RGB color space... :)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
slin100
Senior Member
976 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2003
Location: Cupertino, CA
     
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.

My memory is faulty but I also seem to recall that 300D RAW files embed two JPGs: a thumbnail-size and a larger one. I'll see if I can find the article that mentions this.


Steven
7D, 10D, 17-40/4L, 50/1.8 Mk I, 85/1.8, Tamron 28-75/2.8, 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS, 80-200/2.8L, 550EX, Pocket Wizard

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tommykjensen
Cream of the Crop
21,013 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 260
Joined Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark.
     
Jun 02, 2004 11:30 |  #9

Can someone expand on this?

I just took a RAW shot and converted it first with the sRBG..... profile saved it, then I converted the same RAW shot and converted it with the Adobe profile and saved it.

When I compare the 2 shots I don't see any difference?


EDITING OF MY PHOTOS IS NOT ALLOWED

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yb98
Goldmember
Avatar
2,625 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Feb 2003
Location: Paris
     
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.
If you open your pics with photoshop you will probably see a difference.

Yacine.


Best DPP Threads
DPP++ Video Channel (external link)
New Version DPP++ 11.3 released (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
52,927 posts
Gallery: 193 photos
Likes: 10124
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Jun 02, 2004 12:57 |  #11

...indeed.. what software are you using?

also... if you were to view th two images in there proper working spaces .. there is no guarantee that you will be able to see any difference..

Adobe RGB allows for a larger color gamut.. ie more colors are possibe in the image.. but this does not mean that the image you take will have more color.. nor that the image you take will reveal the additional color space...


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tommykjensen
Cream of the Crop
21,013 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 260
Joined Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark.
     
Jun 02, 2004 13:19 |  #12

I just viewed the test images in PS CS and see no difference.

Does anybody have an example that show the difference?


EDITING OF MY PHOTOS IS NOT ALLOWED

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dsze
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,241 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2004
Location: On The Lake!
     
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.

So, if I have parameters set on my 300D and convert the RAW to JPG in PS, I am essentially asking PS to work with a smaller gamut (sRGB) and if I have camera set to Adobe RBG, then PS is working with the larger gamut, which may or may not even be noticable in every shot, but it can't hurt to have the larger gamut available......right?

-daniel


-daniel
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away."
-Gear List-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tommykjensen
Cream of the Crop
21,013 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 260
Joined Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark.
     
Jun 02, 2004 13:38 |  #14

I just compared the histograms and they are different.

The image in adobe colorspace

IMAGE: http://www.klein-jensen.dk/external/adobe.jpg

The histogram

IMAGE: http://www.klein-jensen.dk/external/adobe_histogram.jpg

The image in srgb colorspace

IMAGE: http://www.klein-jensen.dk/external/srgb.jpg

And the histogram

IMAGE: http://www.klein-jensen.dk/external/srgb_histogram.jpg


Anybody see the difference in the actual image?

EDITING OF MY PHOTOS IS NOT ALLOWED

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Roger_Cavanagh
Goldmember
Avatar
1,394 posts
Joined Sep 2001
     
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.

Loading these images into Photoshop, they look very similar, which is what you expect and want. Depending on the colours in the original subject, sRGB may clip some colours that Adobe RGB does not. However, the colours are different as you can see from these gamut plots of the image data:

sRGB

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


Adobe RGB

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


The outline in the plots is the sRGB profile.

Regards,

=============
Roger Cavanagh
www.rogercavanagh.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

4,205 views & 0 likes for this thread, 8 members have posted to it.
Parameter Setting or Adobe RGB For Raw Shooting
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

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!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

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

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.