Three Great Tips

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 22:55:56 GMT, the cup of JPS@no.komm overfloweth with
the following:

> In message <ja8ta19mhkdjbus4m9e4gmaga5k7dqcrtq@4ax.com>,
> G Winstanley <stan@orange.net> wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 21:52:16 GMT, the cup of JPS@no.komm overfloweth with
> >the following:
> >
> >> [snip]
> >
> >> ...The difference
> >> is, the lower the ISO setting on the camera is, the less RAW, digitized
> >> numbers there are to represent the subject, therefore posterizing it
> >> more.
> >
> >How does this work exactly? Why shoudl a lower ISO reduce the digitization
> >range of the camera?
>
> Did you catch the context from which that was snipped. The context was,
> given a fixed *absolute* exposure (same f-stop and shutter speed; same
> lighting on subject), the higher ISO will digitize the data better (if
> it's gain-based ISO).
>
> >I don't see that the dynamic range is changed at all,
>
> I wasn't talking about DR, per se, but about digitization data. If a
> certain absolute exposure gives RAW data just short of clipping (4095)
> at ISO 1600, then the highest RAW numbers will be just below 256 at ISO
> 100. Dark areas that average 160 at ISO 1600 will average 10 at ISO
> 100, becoming highly posterized.
>

This makes a little more sense now. In fact after reading the rest of the
replies posted in this sub-thread I've got a better idea what you're trying
to say in general, although I think Ben seemed to get closest to a
real-world précis with his "...if that means going to a higher ISO, don't be
shy" comment.

Stan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 12:37:39 +0000, Owamanga wrote:

> While this is good advice in a perfect world, my preferred metering in
> these situations (scrambling in undergrowth after green monsters) is to
> allow matrix metering to do it's job. It's hard enough keeping focus,
> maintaining balance and breathing quietly without having to ah heck about
> trying to spot meter.

I have been using centre-weighted metering with the D70 a lot lately and I
find it works well for me. Using matrix metering means leaving it up to
the camera to figure out what you are trying to accomplish. In a lot of
the work I have been doing lately I am using existing light indoors and
matrix metering seldom gives me what I want.

> Better advice in this situation might be switch to motor drive and bracket
> like crazy.
>
> Still, since switching to RAW and yet maintaining my style of metering for
> this type of picture I've not had this problem happen again.
>
> BTW, if you look through the rest of my 'wildlife' images, they were all
> shot RAW (with the exception of the lizard above). Although in some of the
> jpegs here they have very slightly blown highlights, that was done by me
> on purpose during post-production - my personal preference for these
> images is a high contrast, fairly saturated punchy look. The lizard image
> is 'too blown' for my liking.

>>For me the joy of photography is getting out and taking the pictures.
>
> I respect that point of view, and it's one lots of people share.
>
> For me, the joy is shared between that, and looking at the pictures /
> processing them afterwards. I don't *love* photoshopping stuff, and
> prepping images for a on-line service to print is very boring, but I think
> the difference in the quality of what you end up with is worth it. 80% of
> the 'artwork' hanging in my house originated from my camera - some slide,
> some film and now lots of digital. The newer stuff is noticeably superior
> to the old, due in part to better lenses, improving technique and of
> course, better post-processing.
>
> Even now, I'm tempted to dig out the negatives from some of those old
> pictures, scan them and re-print them. This time having done the darkroom
> stuff myself in the digital domain.
>
> As someone else pointed out, shooting RAW is a bit like keeping the
> negatives. One day, you, or someone else may want to go back to that
> image, make some tweaks and reprint it on whatever fantastic equipment
> exists in the future.... JPEG/RAW longevity arguments aside, RAW has the
> edge.
>
> I'd also note that a good working environment is essential to being able
> to put up with sitting in front of Photoshop for any significant amount of
> time. A laptop on a rocking chair beside the pool in varying lighting
> conditions is far from perfect. A PC in it's own room with controlled
> lighting, full-size keyboard, mouse and a high quality screen in a
> configuration that's physically comfortable for periods of 3 or 4 hours is
> a must-have.

Funny you should mention that, because just this morning I have been
searching through my business shots to find some imagery for a new
advertisement I am placing on the front page of a magazine next month. I
came across some RAW images I had shot a few months ago, but the pain in
the ass was that I couldn't see any thumbnails of these images in Windows
Explorer - I had to open each shot individually in Nikon Capture to see
what it was. There probably is a better way of looking at thumbnails than
using Windows Explorer, but that's my current method of working. RAW just
slows down the process too much for me.

--
Save photography | shoot some film today!
email: drop rods and insert surfaces

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 10:37:54 +0200, Roxy d'Urban <not@home.com> wrote:

>> I'd also note that a good working environment is essential to being able
>> to put up with sitting in front of Photoshop for any significant amount of
>> time. A laptop on a rocking chair beside the pool in varying lighting
>> conditions is far from perfect. A PC in it's own room with controlled
>> lighting, full-size keyboard, mouse and a high quality screen in a
>> configuration that's physically comfortable for periods of 3 or 4 hours is
>> a must-have.
>
>Funny you should mention that, because just this morning I have been
>searching through my business shots to find some imagery for a new
>advertisement I am placing on the front page of a magazine next month. I
>came across some RAW images I had shot a few months ago, but the pain in
>the ass was that I couldn't see any thumbnails of these images in Windows
>Explorer - I had to open each shot individually in Nikon Capture to see
>what it was. There probably is a better way of looking at thumbnails than
>using Windows Explorer, but that's my current method of working. RAW just
>slows down the process too much for me.

Nikon Capture is a terrible piece of software, I avoid it for
everything except uploading custom curves and will stop as soon as a
decent alternative appears (and they are starting to).

On the D70 I shoot RAW+B, giving me an extra JPEG file I can use for
preview purposes. After renaming the files XXX_NNNN where XXX is the
roll number, and NNNN is the original shot number the camera gave
them, I move all the JPEGs into a subdirectory under the NEFs'. This
is achieved in three command lines in DOS.

Software of choice to browse them (the jpegs) is ACDSEE but anything
would work. As I go through each shot (a simple spin on the mousewheel
in ACDSEE) I pen-down any filenames I want to work with, ending up
with a paper list.

Later, when doing print-runs is to open the file-browser in photoshop
(now looking at the NEF-only directory), flag any files I want to
print (based on my paper list), filter to see only those flagged files
and then open them all at once (usually less than 30 per roll),
applying any RAW import adjustments as each one opens. Once they are
all loaded, I use an action to duplicate the background layer, apply
sharpening based on destination print size and tweak the opacity of
that sharpened layer by hand, finally saving them as High quality
JPEGs into a 'print' subdirectory ready for uploading to the printers.
Intermediate PSD files are dumped unless I've had to do any extensive
masking/burning etc.

It may sound exhaustive, but a cold beer or two helps keep the process
running smooth.

As you do commercial work, you'd probably also need some method of
tagging the files based on subject matter (eg, EXIF or an external
DB).... something I don't need to bother with.

--
Owamanga!
http/www.pbase.com/owamanga

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <pan.2005.06.17.08.37.52.207000@home.com>,
Roxy d'Urban <not@home.com> wrote:

>There probably is a better way of looking at thumbnails than
>using Windows Explorer, but that's my current method of working. RAW just
>slows down the process too much for me.

Most RAW files have an embedded JPEG in them. It is therefore possible
to "view" the files through their JPEG.

I view my 10D and 20D files with irfanview; it can read the embedded
JPEGs as fast as it can read JPEGs that end in ".jpg".

It is therefore possible that a properly-programmed thumbnail viewer
could do the same (and there is often a small thumbnail as well in RAW
files).
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Roxy d'Urban" <not@home.com> wrote in message
<snip>
I came across some RAW images I had shot a few months ago, but the pain in
the ass was that I couldn't see any thumbnails of these images in Windows
Explorer - I had to open each shot individually in Nikon Capture to see what
it was. There probably is a better way of looking at thumbnails than using
Windows Explorer, but that's my current method of working. RAW just slows
down the process too much for me.
>
> --
--------------
I am not sure of what version of Windows you are running but I use WinXP
Pro and can view thumbnails in Win Explorer.
I don't mean this to be an insulting question, but have you enabled
thumbnails in the "view" pulldown?
Don F

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JPS@no.komm wrote:

> In message <pan.2005.06.17.08.37.52.207000@home.com>,
> Roxy d'Urban <not@home.com> wrote:
>
>
>>There probably is a better way of looking at thumbnails than
>>using Windows Explorer, but that's my current method of working. RAW just
>>slows down the process too much for me.
>
>
> Most RAW files have an embedded JPEG in them. It is therefore possible
> to "view" the files through their JPEG.
>
> I view my 10D and 20D files with irfanview; it can read the embedded
> JPEGs as fast as it can read JPEGs that end in ".jpg".


That doesn't work with nikon, only canon raw files.


>
> It is therefore possible that a properly-programmed thumbnail viewer
> could do the same (and there is often a small thumbnail as well in RAW
> files).

--
Paul Furman
http/www.edgehill.net/1
san francisco native plants

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Owamanga wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 10:37:54 +0200, Roxy d'Urban <not@home.com> wrote:

>>came across some RAW images I had shot a few months ago, but the pain in
>>the ass was that I couldn't see any thumbnails of these images in Windows
>>Explorer - I had to open each shot individually in Nikon Capture to see
>>what it was. There probably is a better way of looking at thumbnails than
>>using Windows Explorer, but that's my current method of working. RAW just
>>slows down the process too much for me.
>
>
> Nikon Capture is a terrible piece of software, ...
>
> On the D70 I shoot RAW+B, giving me an extra JPEG file I can use for
> preview purposes. After renaming the files XXX_NNNN where XXX is the
> roll number, and NNNN is the original shot number the camera gave
> them, I move all the JPEGs into a subdirectory under the NEFs'. This
> is achieved in three command lines in DOS.


I put the nefs under the jpegs so browsing in, ACD or whatever doesn't
get bogged down.


>
> Software of choice to browse them (the jpegs) is ACDSEE but anything
> would work. As I go through each shot (a simple spin on the mousewheel
> in ACDSEE) I pen-down any filenames I want to work with, ending up
> with a paper list.
>
> Later, when doing print-runs is to open the file-browser in photoshop
> (now looking at the NEF-only directory), flag any files I want to
> print

The PS browser is actually pretty decent. I should try flagging. Instead
I rename with a + on the end with irfanview usually. The renaming that
way, moves them to the bottom of the list & I move so-so images into a
"seconds" folder so whenever I enter a sorted shoot, only the best jpegs
are on the top level. I use PS to batch the best raw images; overwriting
the basic jpegs.

> (based on my paper list), filter to see only those flagged files
> and then open them all at once (usually less than 30 per roll),
> applying any RAW import adjustments as each one opens.


If there are varying raw adjustments, I'll hit alt-update instead of
opening fully from ACR, then let the batching do the real conversion.


> Once they are
> all loaded, I use an action to duplicate the background layer, apply
> sharpening based on destination print size and tweak the opacity of
> that sharpened layer by hand, finally saving them as High quality
> JPEGs into a 'print' subdirectory ready for uploading to the printers.
> Intermediate PSD files are dumped unless I've had to do any extensive
> masking/burning etc.
>
> It may sound exhaustive,


Not at all <g>.


> but a cold beer or two helps keep the process
> running smooth.
>
> As you do commercial work, you'd probably also need some method of
> tagging the files based on subject matter (eg, EXIF or an external
> DB).... something I don't need to bother with.
>
> --
> Owamanga!
> http/www.pbase.com/owamanga

--
Paul Furman
http/www.edgehill.net/1
san francisco native plants

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:31:25 -0400, "Don F" <donf11@NOSPAMhome.com> wrote:

>"Roxy d'Urban" <not@home.com> wrote in message
><snip>
> I came across some RAW images I had shot a few months ago, but the pain in
>the ass was that I couldn't see any thumbnails of these images in Windows
>Explorer - I had to open each shot individually in Nikon Capture to see what
>it was. There probably is a better way of looking at thumbnails than using
>Windows Explorer, but that's my current method of working. RAW just slows
>down the process too much for me.
>>
>> --
>--------------
> I am not sure of what version of Windows you are running but I use WinXP
>Pro and can view thumbnails in Win Explorer.
> I don't mean this to be an insulting question, but have you enabled
>thumbnails in the "view" pulldown?
>Don F
>

Of course you can always download Nikon View from the Nikon website which will
give you browsing capabilites for NEF files.

Dave Head

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:31:25 -0400, Don F wrote:

> I am not sure of what version of Windows you are running but I use WinXP
> Pro and can view thumbnails in Win Explorer.
> I don't mean this to be an insulting question, but have you enabled
> thumbnails in the "view" pulldown?
> Don F

Yes, I have it enabled and I can see thumbs of jpgs but not NEFs.

--
Save photography | shoot some film today!
email: drop rods and insert surfaces

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Roxy d'Urban" <not@home.com> wrote in message
newsan.2005.06.18.07.01.10.436000@home.com...
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:31:25 -0400, Don F wrote:
>
> Yes, I have it enabled and I can see thumbs of jpgs but not NEFs.
>
> --
------------
I just searched and I found this link which might help

www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/nef-windows-xp-sp2.html


Don F

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <v_Cdnahr3tDeHC7fRVn-pQ@speakeasy.net>,
Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote:

>That doesn't work with nikon, only canon raw files.

Ah, well, then there isn't much hope for speed, unless you create
thumbnails separately.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JPS@no.komm wrote:
> In message <v_Cdnahr3tDeHC7fRVn-pQ@speakeasy.net>,
> Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote:
>
>
>>That doesn't work with nikon, only canon raw files.
>
>
> Ah, well, then there isn't much hope for speed, unless you create
> thumbnails separately.

Yeah, there's the new winxp plugin for explorer to view raw files but no
way it's going to be fast enough to be very useful. PS CS is pretty fast
for creating NEF thumbnails & the browser lets you get a decent size
preview at a reasonable speed but you have to launch it into ACR to get
a full zoom. I wonder if DNG can make full size embedded jpegs for quick
browsing?

--
Paul Furman
http/www.edgehill.net/1
san francisco native plants

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Paul Furman wrote:
[snip]
> Yeah, there's the new winxp plugin for explorer to view raw files but no
> way it's going to be fast enough to be very useful. PS CS is pretty fast
> for creating NEF thumbnails & the browser lets you get a decent size
> preview at a reasonable speed but you have to launch it into ACR to get
> a full zoom. I wonder if DNG can make full size embedded jpegs for quick
> browsing?

Photoshop CS2 with the ACR 3.1 plug-in has options for full-size or
medium-size previews. Unfortunately, I found that using "full-size" was
too slow on my old PC. So I don't use it.

Therefore, I can't confirm to you that it really does provide a genuine
full-size preview. All I can say is that it says so, so perhaps it is
worth exploring.

--
Barry Pearson
http/www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http/www.birdsandanimals.info/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 07:21:37 -0400, Don F wrote:

> "Roxy d'Urban" <not@home.com> wrote in message
> newsan.2005.06.18.07.01.10.436000@home.com...
>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:31:25 -0400, Don F wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I have it enabled and I can see thumbs of jpgs but not NEFs.
>>
>> --
> ------------
> I just searched and I found this link which might help
>
> www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/nef-windows-xp-sp2.html
>
>
> Don F

Fantastic! I down'oaded and instaled the Nikon fix and it works like a
bomb!

Thanks very much Don - you're a star!

--
Save photography | shoot some film today!
email: drop rods and insert surfaces

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 19:16:52 -0700, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net>
wrote:

>Owamanga wrote:
>
>> On the D70 I shoot RAW+B, giving me an extra JPEG file I can use for
>> preview purposes. After renaming the files XXX_NNNN where XXX is the
>> roll number, and NNNN is the original shot number the camera gave
>> them, I move all the JPEGs into a subdirectory under the NEFs'. This
>> is achieved in three command lines in DOS.
>
>
>I put the nefs under the jpegs so browsing in, ACD or whatever doesn't
>get bogged down.

That makes more sense. I'll switch to that in future. Currently I use
windows explorer to navigate to the subdirectory, then double click on
a jpeg to launch ACDSee and start the whole process. But moving from
roll-to-roll would be sped-up using your directory structure.

--
Owamanga!
http/www.pbase.com/owamanga