Working with RAW files.
My PC is by todays standards of limited power - 800mhz, 128mb ram, Windows 2000pro operating system.
My only experience of RAW has been to use it in tricky lighting situations where W/B might be a problem ie in the hangers at Duxford. Images being then adjusted and converted to JPG for fast processing anything else ie; crops, dust removal etc in PSP7 or 8.
Yesterday I spent around 8 hours playing with a few RAW files and the following are my personal thoughts based on that experience. Two RAW converters were used = Nikon Capture V3 ( released 2002 )and Rawshooter essentials ( released 2005 ).
Doing more than tweaks to exposure or W/B was a fairly painful business due to lack of processing speed. With more adjustments than that, such as those as available in RSE, I found that I was loosing intimate contact with the image and consequently the end results required far more work on the conversion in Paint Shop to get back to the desired result.
Each program had its advantages and disadvantages. Although NC was slower I found it easier to use, and with my lack of previous use that cannot be put down to familiarity with it. Other than a straight conversion of the RAW file I cannot post a comparison, as neither program recognises changes made in a saved copy of the RAW file from the other program. I was not able to achieve a suitably accurate match on a single image with both progs for a comparison of a conversion to be posted.
My conclusion therefore is that to use RAW and not be driven mad by it you do need a powerful PC. With more limited PC resources then using JPG fine with the occasional use of RAW is a more satisfying way to go. A well exposed and not overly in camera processed JPG is still makes a good negative.
So a couple of thoughts for the melting pot.
1) For those with less PC resource the origonal question of in camera processing is still valid.
In these discussions I think it important not to lose sight of the costs of some of this kit, and peoples ability to afford it. Fast PC with large HD £400+ Adobe CS2 £500+. I ask myself the question would any of my images directly benefit from this spend, or have I been in anyway been limited without it, and the answer is a resounding NO. Nice to have but far from essential.
2) A correctly exposed JPG is NOT inferior to RAW. With the very sophisitcated light metering systems now built into cameras how often do you really need, or rely on the exposure compensation of + / - 2 EV offered by RAW.
Don
|