I have yet to dabble with my Canon 20D’s RAW format but figure it’s high time I tried. I have Photoshop Elements, which has a RAW processor plug-in, and it handles Canon’s files. However, is it the optimal way to do this, or should I be using Canon software? (I can’t seem to locate software that shipped with my camera; it must have included RAW processing but I can’t find it.) The functionality in Elements for RAW files seems pretty rudimentary, but might be all I need.
There should be a BUNCH of experts along in a minute; but it will help if you define “What you need”. What are you trying to do with the files? What is your end-product?
Adobe’s RAW support is supposed to be top-notch, and better than what the camera manufacturers provide. If the Elements version of the RAW processing is equivalent to the full Photoshop version (its a plug-in, so it may be identical in both products, but I don’t know if this is the case), it should serve you well. Using Lightroom is probably better, but I think you may have all you need for now.
Irfanview works just fine for me… And the price is right…
Since you have a 20D, I would strongly recommend RawShooter Essentials 2006. It doesn’t officially support any DSLR after the 30D, (which isn’t a problem here) but it’s an excellent and powerful RAW image-processing utility. You have lots of control over the output, and can handle batch images, save predefined workflow patterns and lots more. And, just like Irfanview, the price is perfectly suited to a lean wallet.
Well, you see, that’s half the problem. I don’t understand much about RAW processing.
Currently I work with JPG files, and mostly adjust contrast, brightness, and saturation using a program called ThumbsPlus. I also use Elements for overall color adjustment and more complex things that require layers, or retouching using cloning, and on occasion tune for individual color components. I haven’t figured out how to use that profile line (a 45 degree diagonal line that you can grab and drag around to change the shape). I am also trying to figure out histograms. I have a vague understanding of what they tell me about tonal range but I have an engineering background and would really like to know what they mean on a more technical level. Specifically, what is on the x and y axis?
What I’ve read about RAW is that you can manipulate the photo without losing the original information. Although I understand that JPG is a lossy compression, I don’t completely understand how working with RAW then converting to JPG is any different that working with the JPG. I know that TIFF is used more for photos because it’s lossless, but I used a 3MB JPG to order a 20" x 30" print of a photo I took, and it looked beautiful with no apparent compression artifacts (although I see flaws in my lens optics).
So I don’t completely know what I *should *be doing with the files, could use some advice on that as well!
You don’t convert to JPEG unless you have a specific need for a JPEG file. Programs like Aperture, for example, always maintain the converted RAW file with all of its data intact. You’re free to make your adjustments over and over and over again. You can have several “copies” of the original RAW file, each with its own adjustments as well. Because only the changes are being saved, this also eliminates having several copies of multi-megabyte files lying about as well.
Here are some useful histogram resources:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-histograms.shtml
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/histograms.htm
The x-axis represents intensity (brightness, if you will), with totally black on the left and totally white on the right. The y-axis is a representation of the number of pixels at that intensity. What you’re looking at is a quick thumbnail representation of the distribution of tonal intensity in the photograph - and you can very quickly see if the image is under- or over-exposed in various regions, and the overall tonal balance. I almost always check my histogram after taking a shot, to make sure I don’t have blown highlights or severely under-exposed regions that will be impossible to recover from.
Colour histograms are even more useful, because you can tell if a particular channel is clipping without affecting the other ones.
The important difference between working with a RAW file and a JPG processed by the camera is control over that crucial step of taking the raw sensor data and converting it into an image. There are several steps involved in this process, including running image filters over the data, applying a contrast curve, and sharpening algorithms. What the camera does might not be what you want, and working directly with the RAW image allows you to control how much noise reduction, sharpening and other image correction you want. One of the most useful features for me is the ability to apply white balance correction after the image is taken - nothing ruins a good image like having the white balance setting at the wrong point.
Another very useful feature is being able to recover blown highlights. If you compare the images from this page of DPReview’s review of the EOS 5D MII (Canon EOS 5D Mark II In-depth Review: Digital Photography Review), you can see the extent of the highlight recovery that’s possible. Once the image is converted to JPG, those blown highlights are permanently lost. With a RAW image, there’s often a stop or more of recovery potential, which can rescue images quite dramatically and improve the effective dynamic range of your camera.
I must admit I don’t shoot RAW all or even most of the time, but when I’m working with images where I’m really concerned with the final output, it’s the first thing I do. Memory cards and hard drive space are cheap, and it’s saved images for me more times than I can count, especially long-exposure, high-noise photographs like star trails.