How long does it take to convert a raw camera file to "default" JPG?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Forget Dpreview's B.S., "diplomatic language" NEX 16mm lensis not good
Next: How long does it take to convert a raw camera file to "default"JPG?
From: nospam on 14 Jun 2010 20:18 In article <4c16c3a2$0$5491$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, Peter <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >> It is also worth noting, that Adobe has a completely new process for > >> ACR 6.1 delivered with CS5 and LR3. The first substantial change to > >> their ACR process since 2003. > > > > good point. that's a huge step forward, especially in noise reduction. > > I haven't played with NR or sharpening in ACR 6.1. In the past I have been > doing all NR and sharpening in PS. > > Is there a significant advantage to doing it in ACR? photoshop uses camera raw, so you may already be doing it there, but definitely look at 6.x (which means upgrading ps or lr). noise reduction is best done in the raw converter and sharpening should be done initially in the raw converter and then later specific for the output. sharpening for print is going to be a little different than for screen, for example.
From: Peter on 14 Jun 2010 20:28 "nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:140620102018417739%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... > In article <4c16c3a2$0$5491$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, Peter > <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >> >> It is also worth noting, that Adobe has a completely new process for >> >> ACR 6.1 delivered with CS5 and LR3. The first substantial change to >> >> their ACR process since 2003. >> > >> > good point. that's a huge step forward, especially in noise reduction. >> >> I haven't played with NR or sharpening in ACR 6.1. In the past I have >> been >> doing all NR and sharpening in PS. >> >> Is there a significant advantage to doing it in ACR? > > photoshop uses camera raw, so you may already be doing it there, but > definitely look at 6.x (which means upgrading ps or lr). > > noise reduction is best done in the raw converter and sharpening should > be done initially in the raw converter and then later specific for the > output. sharpening for print is going to be a little different than for > screen, for example. I'm using PS 5, now. Formerly I used PS 7, then CS3. I have never found a satisfactory NR technique, I saw too much color blurring. My workflow has been to set ACR sharpening to 0 and then use either LAB color sharpening, high pass filter sharpening, or some combination of both, depending on the image. I have a feel for what I am doing, but am willing to change if there is a good reason. -- Peter
From: nospam on 14 Jun 2010 20:39 In article <4c16c941$0$5496$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, Peter <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > I'm using PS 5, now. Formerly I used PS 7, then CS3. do you mean photoshop elements? photoshop 5 came out in 1998 and predates camera raw by a few years. or do you mean photoshop cs5, which supports camera raw 6? photoshop 7 came out in 2002 and photoshop elements 7 was in 2008, if i recall. > I have never found a > satisfactory NR technique, I saw too much color blurring. My workflow has > been to set ACR sharpening to 0 and then use either LAB color sharpening, > high pass filter sharpening, or some combination of both, depending on the > image. I have a feel for what I am doing, but am willing to change if there > is a good reason. i would suggest doing as much as possible in camera raw, especially since it's non-destructive. i never found the high pass sharpening method to be that useful, but some people like it.
From: nospam on 14 Jun 2010 20:45 In article <2010061417420227544-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: > As Scott Kelby has noted the "Adobe Camera Raw" ACR 2003 process seemed > to have had little to no effect when it came to noise or sharpening > correction, and he recommended not wasting time with those adjustments. the late bruce fraser disagreed, saying there should be some sharpening initially and then final sharpening later. it's all subjective, when you get right down to it. > With ACR 6.1 and the 2010 process, noise reduction and sharpening > works, and works well. Kelby now recommends it as part of the RAW > conversion process when needed. yes, it's all quite a bit better now. > Also ACR 6.1 supports lens correction profiles so Distortion, CA, and > vignette correction for a particular lens can be applied during > conversion. that too.
From: nospam on 14 Jun 2010 22:28
In article <87o5oqFu5vU1(a)mid.individual.net>, ray <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: > >>> That's not such a slow system. How much memory do you have? If it's > >>> less than 2 gigs, that's probably the bottleneck. Memory is cheap. > > > >> Doubtful. It shouldn't take 2gb memory to convert a 12mp image! > > > > Vista alone uses 2GB, for example ... and the rest of the system needs > > RAM as well. > > Many users are more intelligent than that. those are the ones that stuck with xp or bought a mac :) |