Forgotten in its old age

by Aditya

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tag Info

New answers tagged

0

If you saved your TIFFs with 16bit per color channel, you didn't loose any quality. If you saved them with only 8bit, then yes, you lost color resolution, just as with a high quality JPEG. (the TIFF is losslessly compressed, so you don't loose anything by that, but a JPEG with maximum quality isn't noticeably degraded either).


1

It does not show clipping in the raw file, it shows clipping on what you have generated from it. You will see that if you decrease the exposure or the highlights slider, the red area will change its size. One way to see clipping in raw files (and dozens of other things) is to get a copy of RawDigger. Highly recommended, btw.


1

The only way to examine the RAW histogram (pre WB, pre demosaic) is to use a program that has this capability. The only one that I can think of offhand is RawTherapee, but I'm sure that others will chip in with more choices.


1

The clipping highlights show the current state of your picture, ie. with all the development settings applied. as such, they can not really tell you accurately whether there is clipping in the RAW data. For this, you'll have to inspect the ends of the histogram to see any suspicious bars at the ends, and watch what happens when you manipulate the sliders. ...


0

In other words, why not keep ISO at 100 and adjust exposure later (aside from in-camera previews)? The effect depends on implementation in your particular camera. Some cameras implement analog gain (of various extent) before the signal is digitized, some don't. You could shoot a set of exposures at various ISO, then look at the noise level and ...


1

Hmm, I think ISO is the control to how much electric potential you put through the sensor. Think of it like photovoltaics(solar cells), when it stores up an electric potential into a capacitor or battery, eventually the resisting potential stops more charge from building unless a stronger light source illuminates the photovoltaic. The resistance of low ISO ...


4

Just to be clear: the clipping warnings and histogram in lightroom are tools for development of photos. Not for analysis of the RAW-files itself. The warnings does (in the best case) warn you if you're clipping in the output format such as JPEG. The histogram works the same regardless of which module you're reviewing it in. In Lightroom the histogram ...


2

On the quality front, in general, it will be better to do it in camera when the sensor is particularly subject to hot pixels (those that only appear stuck when heated) or when there is other heat related noise introduced in the image. At that point, the current conditions in the camera are more accurately represented by a dark frame taken at the same time. ...


2

Since there are many variables that affect the sensor read noise, taking the dark frame at the same time increases the chances that it is also taken under the same conditions as the exposed frame, particularly with regard to the temperatures of various areas of the sensor.


2

In order to match the type and character of noise accurately, the dark frame subtraction should be done at the same time as the exposure. So doing it in camera should yield better results.


2

The current unstable version of darktable includes full support for this camera and many others (including most or all modern Fujis). It uses rawspeed, a more modern raw parsing/decoding library, to handle it. An Ubuntu PPA that includes this support is available at: https://launchpad.net/~pmjdebruijn/+archive/ubuntu/darktable-unstable The normal ...


4

The only advantages to saving your RAW files as 8-bit is for memory conservation or if certain tools only work with 8-bit images. There is no advantage from a quality point of view, if you're going to do a lot of editing especially in a wide colour space then you may get posterisation when working with only 8 bits. Regarding colour spaces, it is advisable ...


0

Since the destination for many photos is the web, conversion to 8-bit does not really hurt anything. Even most printers (even many pro printers) have an 8-bit pipeline. The main concern in editing with an 8-bit file is that you may introduce banding in smooth areas (usually the sky) but for skin smoothing there's probably not much danger. As for using ...


1

RAW files are 12 ~ 14 bits. I'm pretty sure he knows that. Why an 8 bit TIFF? This was a given for him, so I'm puzzled. The higher bit depth is certainly safer for major corrections of exposure, contrast etc. I would especially be cautious when using ProPhoto RGB that may have tendency to posterization in 8 bit. But 8 bit may be enough for his type of ...


6

I didn't have enough "reputation" to address some of these answers as comments. AJ Henderson is wrong, 30 1s exposures will (for the most part) be identical to 1 30s exposure. If it shows up in a 30s exposure, then stacking 30 1s exposures will also show it. I am actually the author of the article that Trengot linked (thanks!). In fact, unless you are ...


4

Fundamentally you're capturing the same amount of light in either case so the results should be the same. Practically, there are 2 differences between stacking 30 one second exposures and shooting one 30 second exposure. The first is the light lost between each one second exposure after the shutter closes before it reopens for the next exposure. This can ...


1

No, 30 one second exposures is not equivalent to a single 30 second exposure. You do gain a lot of information from doing 30 1 second exposures, but you are not able to detect anything that is too faint (which might have shown up on a 30 second exposure, but still registers as 0 on the 1 second exposures). It is a good technique to avoid noise, but does ...


-4

i don't think it is possible. amount of light on every photo is the same, it means no additional information in details you can add, so it's like you have only one photo


0

Yes it is possible. Put all images as layers and choose Add to on every layer in Photoshop. For night sky images, there is a software called deepskystacker. DeepSkyStacker is a freeware for astrophotographers that simplifies all the pre-processing steps of deep sky pictures. http://deepskystacker.free.fr/english/index.html This image is stacked from 4 ...


2

This explains how to merge multiple short exposures to mimic the effect of a longer exposure. It's aimed at emulating ND filter photos but the principal should be the same. The basic premise is to take multiple shorter shots and then use a tool like Hugin to align and ImageMagick to convert them into in a single image. The result is effectively the same as ...


0

You can find a lot of potrtait/model RAWs at this ModelMayhem Forum section Challenges, Contests, and Samples.


2

http://rawsamples.ch has 230 files from various camera manufactures. Please add to the collection if your camera isn't represented.


0

Since my other answer (while popular) is not really an answer to the question, I'll go ahead and post the right answer. If your camera shoots in DNG 'natively', then I would go ahead and go with DNG, because it's what the manufacturer adopted as its 'raw' format. It will contain every bit of information the camera can produce. I believe that this is what ...


0

Whether there is any benefit of shooting in the proprietary format depends on the particular implementation of the two raw formats by the manufacturer. For example, is the DNG format storing the same metadata? Is it using lossless compression? If the files give identical results and contain identical metadata, then it might be beneficial (more future proof) ...


0

Make sure to rule out the obvious: that your monitor is incorrectly calibrated. Try viewing the images on another computer, or attach an external monitor to your laptop. If possible, try printing a sample with a reputable printing company. Is it still green? Ok, then the conversion is the problem. If not, you have a problem with what your monitor is ...


1

This kind of thing can happen if your NEFCDC is out of date, since it needs to be updated for every new camera that comes out. If that doesn't work then try opening the NEF with with the View NX or Capture NX 2. Each NEF image includes a JPEG preview image. If the embedded JPEG preview has a green tint, then the NEF will too. You can also get a green ...


0

try the free Capture NX-D from Nikon's website. There you can adjust the photos before exporting them


0

Note: For your particular case where your camera actually shoots in DNG there's no reason not to use it as that IS the RAW format of your camera anyway. Note the definition of DNG is Digital Negative (DNG): an open lossless raw image format. That is, DNG is also a RAW format. While there're very strong arguments about DNG VS RAW let me summarize a couple of ...


0

Yes. You still need an exposure. RAW is not magical, it is just the sensor data for a certain exposure. You must choose the aperture according to the depth-of-field you want, the shutter-speed according to the motion you want to capture and the ISO to balance between them which will set the gain on the sensor to make a balanced exposure. Sure, RAW is more ...


0

One of the benefits of the DNG file is the size. They are around 15-20% smaller in file size than PEF files without any loss of quality. Also, with the DNG format the XMP data is included in the DNG file, so you don’t have to worry about the XMP data getting separated from the original DNG.So in that case there is a huge benefit in terms of organization ...



Top 50 recent answers are included