RAW processing

I just ment to say that i agree with Peter that this may be a reason why some togs choose to shoot RAW. I dont know, i dont really shoot RAW myself and I prefer to get it all correct in camera. However i can understand in certain situations and with particular subjects (as He points out above) why togs may think that RAW gives them more latitude with PP, when they dont have time to get it all right in camera

Hope i explained myself second time around

Daniel

"...The only question I have is why spend £1000 on a camera to balk (sic) at £100 for RAW editing software? When tested, none of the free software packages have the same, or even the rated, capability of (insert name of favourite expensive package) and some are dismal..."

You don't always agree with "why balk" questioners, do you Smeggy?

Really interesting thread, this. I always used to just take jpegs, but now take jpg + raw. I am building up a stack of raws that I can work on when I retire! but right now I just don't have enough free time (or software knowledge) to process raw photographs, just as I didn't have time for colour processing in the days of film. In-camera processing usually gives results that I can accept and be pleased with instantly (provided the photography is ok!). Put another way, I guess I am not serious about photography, it's just something I happily enjoy!

I am ok about the additional cost of good software but I understand why some people are curious to know what is better about Elements over the Silkypix package included with the K-5.

I found the Adobe Photoshop family – Comparison guide link helpful in understanding the differences between CS6, Lightroom, and Elements

I guess there must be a survey into which software Pentaxusers use. If anyone wants to post a link to it, please do; I'm interested.

Big thanks to everyone who posted to this thread, I do learn from your comments.

Sorry don't understand that at all.

Sorry Smeggy.

I was making a bit of mischief, because when a well known moderator put a question (that I paraphrased above) about batteries (oh God, no, not again), I thought that you rejected his argument.

Mannesty's recent question about software seemed to be phrased in a very similar way to the "battery" question, even spelling balk the same way (isn't it baulk?).

Regarding RAW conversion, I am using PSE-10 and only now a year on getting to grips with some of what it can do. I have no great desire to sit for ages at a computer to manipulate what I have shot, nor do I know what processing I should be applying (other than to recover the results of poor technique). I have used "Enhance lighting" to lighten shadows and darken highlights (which sometimes gives artificial looking results), but what else?

Well I did type "baulk" to start with, but my spill chucker baulked at it and changed it to balk.

I have always saved my images as both jpg and dng files as I was not too sure what to do but knew that processing the RAW files would eventually give a better result.

If you are new to RAW processing (as I was) why not give the free PDCU4 which came with the camera a try (as I did) ?

There are NUMEROUS people on this forum who will insist that it is no good but just ignore the doubting Thomas's !

Have a read of Nigel's Guide, published elsewhere on this forum, and you may just be surprised, as I was, just how good it is once you get through the initial barrier ! What were dull jpegs now 'sparkle' !

THEN, if you are still not too sure, is the time to decide whether or not to spend out on something else ?

Don't listen to the mob - make up your own ideas !

Best wishes

Peter

Darktable is even better value than Lightroom

http://www.darktable.org/

Ah but doesn't work on windoze.... I don't fancy going down the Linux route again....

Yes, sorry, only Linux and OSX are supported. I don't think there's any plans for a port to Windows

I was flicking through my K7 Magic Lantern Guidebook, and it suddenly struck me that we never really seem to consider the option of IN CAMERA RAW CONVERSION. Yes, its all there. RAW conversion on a computer clearly suits many people, myself included, who enjoy it, but there are plenty who find it all too much trouble, or who don't get the results they are trying to.

All the RAW conversion software you need is right inside our DSLRs. You can make straight conversions from RAW to JPEG or TIFF, with no further adjustments at all, or you can apply a number of parameter adjustments including White Balance, ISO, & Custom Image Mode. There is even the option of converting multiple RAW files by selecting them on the screen with ticks first, and applying a set of adjustments as a batch to each of them.

The images are saved as new JPEGs or TIFFs on the memory card, and the RAW file is unaffected also, available for additional conversions if needed. If you save out as high quality JPEGs you could conceivably connect the camera to a printer (if DPOF is supported) and print the RAW converted and edited shots without even needing a computer at all!

How to do this? Well, best advice would be to check the camera manual, but in basic terms you start out in Playback Mode, then display the shot you want to work on and press the down button on the four-way-controller. Choose the 'RAW Development' option and go from there!

Yes i did that the other day converted raw to jpeg and raw to tiff files(k-5) it makes another file with it leave the original raw file untouched, have yet to put them on the computer .. but planning to on friday.

I think it is easy to imagine that this sort of operation is rather fiddly on the camera, and of course you only have a 3 inch screen to work with. But there are a good number of fine controls to apply. There are obvious 'in the field' situations when it may be a great convenience to produce a JPEG output and do without a computer, but in general most of us probably imagine that working with an image is easier on a beg screen.

How did you find the controls on the camera, and did it take long to make the conversions?

But you'll still need a computer eventually to store the images. But some people may actually find they prefer manipulating the controls on the camera rather than dealing with complex PC / Mac operating systems and sophisticated conversion programmes.

Actually darktable is now getting SO good that it is worth considering a Linux desktop just to use it. Those already using Linux are more than fortunate.

Apparently Darktable has no catalog/file management features, which basically makes it completely and utterly pointless for my workflow.