| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Canon RAW coming up flat
Caleb Simpson, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Dallas | TX | USA | Posted: 9:16 PM on 02.01.05 |
->> I could use some help here with my RAW files in Photoshop. Last night I batch converted about 70 or so RAW files into JPG's. When I went to edit them today they where all flat. The RAW files were also flat. I then checked another set of RAW files I shot and did not convert and they are also appearing flat. Is there some setting I am missing? This is the first time I have shot RAW. Both games I shot were strobed and had great contrast in the images and now they all look flat. So if somebody could give me some advice or get me pointed in the right direction, it would be greatly appreciated.
p.s. I set the white ballance to as shot and tried settings in every possible combination. Also tried changing the color profile and still nothing. |
|
Ed J. Szalajeski, Photographer
|
Portland | ME | USA | Posted: 9:23 PM on 02.01.05 |
->> WHat version of PS were you using?
Ed |
|
Michael J. Treola, Photographer
|
Neptune | NJ | USA | Posted: 9:38 PM on 02.01.05 |
->> I've noticed a huge difference in my Photoshop 7 Raw files using the purchased raw converter and the new converter built into Photoshop CS. The CS files were flat and the colors seemed dull. These variations of results are on a routinely calibrated computer system. I'm finding I'm spending a bit more time on Raw files in CS then I did in previous versions though the final products looks roughly the same.
Tree
http://www.michaeltreola.com |
|
Ed J. Szalajeski, Photographer
|
Portland | ME | USA | Posted: 9:41 PM on 02.01.05 |
->> Caleb,
I should have added, I noticed exactly the same thing Michael J. Treola pointed out.
In fact, if I convert I either use PS 7, and not PhotoShop CS, or Canon software, which knows the file format better than Adobe.
I have not upgraded my PS with the new patch on their site, but this might help you.
Ed |
|
Caleb Simpson, Photographer, Assistant
|
Dallas | TX | USA | Posted: 9:56 PM on 02.01.05 |
| ->> I am using CS, I kid you not yesterday the files looked beautiful today they look like poo, and I did not touch the settings. I also just re-calibrated the screen on my PowerBook and they still look flat. |
|
Nathan Simpson, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Santa Barbara | CA | USA | Posted: 1:31 AM on 02.02.05 |
| ->> Raw files are flat by default. The cmos and ccd sensors have more highlight an shadow latitude than most seines. Slide film has about 5-6 stops of latitude while most high-end digi chips have 8-11stops of latitude and some scanning backs have 15 or more. It is standard procedure to darken the shadows, lighten the highlights and increase saturation in adobe camera raw cs. then add more contrast and set your d-max in PhotoShop later using curves. Or if your lazy you can just do auto levels on PS and it turns out ok most the time. And why are you saving in JEPG. That is the fastest most shore way to degrade tour image quality. Every time you save a JEPG you chop more and more file info (quality) off because it recompresses every time. The much higher quality way is to save in PSD or TIFF. Yes the files are bigger but that’s because they are better. Good luck |
|
Jason Orth, Photographer
|
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 11:02 AM on 02.02.05 |
| ->> Open question/comment: does this have to do with your proof setup viewing on your monitor? I know that I have to make sure I have the proof setup (View > Proof Setup) in Windows RGB when I'm working on web material, and when I print, I change the view to Adobe RGB (View > Proof Setup > Custom >Adobe RGB). The color differences are noticeable. |
|
Garrett Hubbard, Photographer
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 2:23 PM on 02.02.05 |
->> Caleb, from what I understand the files come out flat (less difference in luminosity from neighboring pixels as compared to how the camera process' the jpg) to leave all power and control to you. Essentially you are left a file that you can process...because that is what raw is likened to--an unprocessed neg. You choose wb, exposure (to some extent), and contrast. I too have seen more favorable results from the Nikon and Canon software than the ps plugin (cs). But I believe that ps still leaves the file fairly unprocessed and that contrast/saturation control is in the advanced settings of camera raw while opening your respective raw file.
Nathan-
I disagree with your lattitude #'s. C-41 is around 6-7 and E-6 round 5. I know the ccd cameras I have owned are lucky to get anything over four and I would say my mkii is maybe just a little over four. scanning backs on larger format cameras getting 15?!?! wow. I think even the masters such as ansel adams were somehow getting 10 out of film and that was considered magical. I didn't think digital has surpassed film in lattitude yet, but I could be wrong. The human eye is near 20 stops of lattitude and I have never seen anything close to what my eye sees.
all things aside, the colors that come from raw files sure are beautiful!
-garrett |
|
Ron Scheffler, Photographer
|
Hamilton (Toronto area) | Ontario | Canada | Posted: 11:50 PM on 02.02.05 |
->> What kind of color management are you using within CS?
Is it possible that the RGB Color Management Policy is turned off?
Is it possible that you converted the raw files into a color space such as Adobe RGB or ProPhoto RGB (both have a wider color range than sRGB) but have your working space set to sRGB (or any other narrow color range profile) and color management turned off? This will definitely result in flat images. I just tested it - converting a file into ProPhoto RGB, turning off the RGB Color Management Policy and setting the working color space to sRGB... the image looks really bad.
Without knowing more info, it sure sounds like a color management issue, such as a color profile mismatch. When you say the files are flat now as opposed to when you converted them, are you viewing them in CS, or in something else (such as Photo Mechanic version 3) which may not be a color profile aware application?
I'd also like to give my 2¢ about Adobe's raw converter in CS - I don't care for it. I have been much happier with Canon's software, particularly DPP. I'm not sure if you use a camera compatible with DPP, but if so, and you have the software (you should be able to download it from Canon), give it a shot. It takes a bit to get used to, but there is a lot more flexibility built into that converter than is at first apparent. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|