help saving images from silkypix

Hi

I downloaded the free version of silkypix to play around with. I can open raw files I have saved in My Pictures and manipulate them but then I dont see how to save them? Can anyone offer advice one what I should be doing to save my manipulated images, why is it not obvious?

It automatically saves changes as you go. When processing images, you never need to click a "Save" icon (there is isn't one) when going from one image to another or closing the program.

RAW files are never actually changed, but all your settings for them are automatically saved in separate small files in a sub folder called "SILKYPIX_DS". There is an undo function to undo each change, or you can go back to default settings at any tme.

When processing JPEG instead of RAW, you have the choice of the original file being changed or not. (The latter is recommended). See Options.

To convert RAW to JPEG or TIFF, you need to use the "Development" or "Batch develoment" function.

For instructions there is Silkypix's Help file or an independent eBook at £2.50

Hope this image help you.


Best regards.
________________
Dirk TROTTEYN.
K10D+ Sigma 18-50 1:2.8 DC; DA 10-17 fish-eye.
Image counter: 5426.-

Dirk : I got so annoyed at trying to use Silkypix on my first ever RAW photos I have un-installed it ! I too could not find out how to 'save' images; I find it very difficult, even reading the manual and the guide on this site - Jpegs RULE - OK !!

As far as I know, there is no Save option in any RAW converter. I use Adobe Lightroom and Phase One - Capture One, neither has a Save function.

The changes you make are stored in additional files, the RAW (PEF/DNG) file remains unchanged, so there's nothing to save.

JPG's afford simple post processing and use less storage space. RAW (PEF/DNG) files together with good post processing software offers so much more. I prefer RAW.

Dirk's illustration above shows how difficult it is. It's even fewer clicks than Dirk describes as there is a "Development" icon at the top of the screen.

I am getting a little confused about why have raw images. Once you have manipulated a raw image then surely it is no longer a raw image, is this right. Therefore you have got to save it as a JPEG, what is the advantage doing this over taking an intila JPEG and then porcessing if need be. Also if you cant save Raw images what use are they? Is it better to shoot a raw image and then process it and save it as a JPEG or is it better to shoot JPEG if you are going to convert it to JPEG anyway. Sorry I am not asking this question very well but hopefully you will get the idea of what I am trying to find out.

Cheers

The theory goes that the RAW data is not processed by the camera but is then processed by more powerful and sphisticated software on the computer. The aim is better quality.

Once it is processed it needs to be saved in a format useable by Photoshop and similar programs.

The basic rule for best quality is to save in a lossless format and generally this means TIFF. Now JPEG is a "lossy" format that compresses information, so this should be reserved for purposes where it has to be used, such as saving an image for web use.

Some people shoot RAW, some shoot JPEG and we can look at their work and see if any difference shows. In the case of shooting JPEG then never save the JPEG again as a JPEG after it has been opened, always save as a TIFF. Except as noted for web.

Saving a JPEG as a JPEG and continuously doing so will keep re-compressing a compressed file and data will be lost, eventually showing as unwanted artifacts.

I understand your question Johna, and it's one that gets asked frequently.

A RAW file contains much more data than a JPEG and it has been processed less already by the camera. It gives you the advantage of being able to start again from scratch and process the data with your computer and software better or differently than the camera can manage, or that you could manage with a JPEG.

So, even though you still end up with a JPEG, it can be a better JPEG. You can also convert to a TIFF instead of a JPEG which is slightly better quality (but TIFFs are larger and not compatible with so many other things).

However, the quality does depend on the software used and the settings. There may be little or no improvement in some cases. In some cases the quality may even be less to your liking.

I would say it's not worth using RAW if you don't change the image much and tend to get correct exposures in the first place with the camera. But if you do often like to change the image (particularly the sharpening or brightness & contrast), then there are distinct advantages to shooting RAW.

were you ever a film shooter?
getting a finished image file from digital is like getting a print from film.
I like to compare:
jpeg to slide film....the range of color, contrast, grain, exposure lattitude, are all limited at the moment of capture, and there is only a few degrees of variables when printing off a slide.

raw to color negative film... .the film itself has more lattitude, more optoins to control grain, contrast, exposure, color...the printing process has more options still.

back in the film days, a slide was really a finished (good or bad) product, as it came out of the camera. A negative, was a starting point for a print.

It was always easier to fix, (or change) color, exposure, contrast on negative film than slides.

It was way easier to get a usable print off a bad negative than a bad slide.
I think the same holds true for raw vs jpeg.

think of the raw file as your negative, from which you extract a file.
you don't destroy your original negative when you make a print off it? right?

Yeah I guess that makes sense when put like that. So therefore I am presuming that I could not save a Raw image as a JPEG image without first having to do some image processing, is that right.

No, if you want to you can just open the file and save it as whatever you want.

Be aware that some RAW converters will automatically apply some adjustments unless you tell then not to.

You can straight away convert to JPEG with just Silkypix's default settings if you like, without having to do any "processing" yourself. (The program does the processing for you).

The default settings include some sharpening and noise reduction - of an amount intended to produce "natural" looking images.

Bear in mind that the camera would apply sharpening if you shot JPEGs with the camera's default settings. Your images would look soft with no sharpening at all.

I suggest starting off with Silkypix's default settings, then tweak a few of them if you are not happy with any aspect of the image. Exposure Bias (near top left) is the most useful basic one to compensate for under or over exposure.

Thanks guys.

What I am understanding then is this. Raw files are uncompressed unprocessed images, so no WB, no sharpening, no contrast, etc. Therefore you need to add the processing you require afterwards before saving the image has a JPEG. You still then have the raw file to work with at a later date if you wish, is that the sole reason for shooting raw? Now what I am not understanding what is the benefit of shooting raw and processing then converting to JPEG, rather than just shooting JPEG in the first place-obviously you dont have a raw image to work with. I am also unsure about is what affect on image quality does processing JPEG's have using software pacakeges such has HP Image zone or PS Elemnets say, how much can you keep altering various parameters without loss of image quality and does in camera processing have any pro's or con's over software packages

if hardware (ie computer, harddrive space, ram etc) are limited shoot jpeg.
if you're really good at exposure, colorbalance, etc, and don't do much photoshopping, go with jpeg.
If you're just starting to learn, go with jpeg.

I use raw for the following reasons:
I got lots of cameras, lenses, memory cards, fast computers, color calibrated workflow, Aperture (Apple's competitor for Lightroom).
I sell large prints often. I do weddings (fast paced. unpredictable environments), and some studio work. I do lotz of photoshop work. I do video and web work.
My clients are demanding.
Raw gives me the control, and safety net I like, to ensure I can meet thier needs.

one example is wedding work, I usually set my camera up to get an ambient exposure a half stop to 2/3 stop less than normal, and use my flash off camera as a main light. this way my subject pops from the background, and is color balanced to match the flash (which may be gelled to match the ambient).
If something goes wrong (flash doesn't pop for example too short recycle time) I can still recover the shot and match it to the others in the album.