Raw lab question

[dave2800]

I just purchased PSP X3. I just shot some RAW photos and want to edit them in PSP X3. When the Raw lab opens my photo is thumbnail size (right around 9%). I know I can magnify the photo but the image on the screen stays the same size. Is there a way to make the viewing area larger in the Raw lab? Adobe Photoshop gives a nice size view of the photo you are editing and I'd like to be able to do that in X3. I'm I missing something in the setup? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Dave

[Black Lab]

Sorry I can't help you, but nice car. Yours?

[dave2800]

I wish it was mine. I shot a lot of photos at local car cruises. Here is my site http://70.85.214.93/starlite-car-cruise/

Dave

[Trev Bowden]

The answer is no. add to that PSP is not good for converting Raw owing to it making limited adjustment after conversion rather then before. You no doubt received a program with your camera that can do the conversation to tiff Much better, then open in PSP for any further adjustment.
I could no resist the image. From last years Bfd Classic and guess what its that time of year again

[Rob717]

The preview window can be increased in size when you make it full screen and is limited to the resolution of your display settings, the higher the resolution the bigger you will be able to make the preview window.

[dave2800]

Trev,
It's funny but I never even thought about using the camera software. I have a Canon Pro1 and it came with ZoomBrowser program where I can then edit RAW files. I decided to try it and do as you suggested saving it as a TIFF and then to JPG. What is the advantage of doing it in that order? I did some real quick adjustments in 2 photos of the 57 Olds and I think they look pretty good compared to the as shot originals. I am going to post the before and after photos below.

BTW, great shot of the Gulf car. Would love to see the full photo.

Rob717,
I appreciate the info on changing display settings. I am kind of use to the 1024x768 settings and would rather work in those settings instead of switching back and forth.









Thanks,
Dave

[Trev Bowden]

The psp raw converter leaves a lot to be desired.
as for the cars I have knocked up a web page http://www.trevorbowden.co.uk/BFDClassi ... c2009.html
I have been having Health problems so I don't get out much to take pics But seam to get fit at about this time each Year Its the 2010 show this weekend.
We seam to be getting hijacked by the Jaguar trust and Speed master and are losing the real old classics. Last year their was a shortage of Jowet's and Bradford is where they where built. If you want to see the previous shows http://www.trevorbowden.co.uk/photopages.htm

[ronzie]

First the differences between a RAW file and TIFF, etc.

A RAW file consists of pixel values plus a metadata file stating how those pixels should be treated. (This is not the EXIF data.) A RAW editor typically has several tonal and color sliders such as highlight, shadow, etc., that can be adjusted to let us say bring in values outside of the reproduction range into that range. As long as you stay even with a saved image in RAW format, those original metadata values can be changed to bring back previous values since the tonal values of the pixels themselves have not been altered.

When you save RAW data to another format, the conversion sets the pixel values before writing the file and the metadata is gone. (EXIF data is saved with .jpg in at least your camera supplied editor.) If something has been clipped regarding tonal values there is no way to retrieve that data in a non-RAW format.

I have a Canon 50D which came with its RAW editor Digital Photo Pro. After I do initial tonal adjustments for exposure, color correction, etc., I convert to .tif for further processing. I have the option of converting to 16 bit or 8 bit .tif formats. (As I understand it the real RAW bit depth is 12 but is padded to 16 to comply with standards.)

In general a .tif file is not compressed but can be in a non-lossy format unlike .jpg. All of the details are there. I stay with the high detail .tif until final resizing and cropping is done to preserve the resolution including the .tif tonal value depth. Important photos are stored in .tif format. I only convert to .jpg generally for Internet display. .jpg has a a deteriorating effect regarding introducing noise artifacts in areas of constant color. This increases with each iteration as a .jpg is further edited and saved.

Another advantage of using your Canon RAW Editor is that you can see histograms to aid in highlight and shadow exposure adjustments without having to reduce the file to eight bit pixel depths as PSPX3 now requires. (See the pinned topic of feature requests.)

Within X3 I noticed on converting RAW to .tif there appeared to be compression of the shadow areas (darkest tonal values) more than just due to the 16 to 8 bit conversion.

The Canon Digital Photo Pro RAW editor does have a color management setting for matching your monitor profile. There is no proof mode for your output media as in X3.

So you use each for what it does best. Get your exposure corrected in your Camera RAW editor and save another version there so your original is protected. Then convert your edited RAW to another folder for editing in X3 where you can apply the usual retouching, color effects, and adjustments for proofing if needed.

As backup, with prices low on DVD, I backup as data files all of my original RAW shots and first edits in RAW format.

Regarding your version of Zoom Browser, I thought it only viewed the .jpg files stored along with your RAW files as a preview type function. It then refers editing to a full RAW editor program. A previous version of Zoom Browser that came with a simpler Canon SuperZoom (IS 5) I have only worked with .jpg because that's all that camera stored. I now store both formats with the 50D, about 20 MB for the RAW and 5 MB for the .jpg.

I acquired two books on X3. The first was in release and I was impatient so it was:
http://www.amazon.com/Picture-Yourself- ... 807&sr=1-1 which is an expansion of the manual delivered with X3. It is more I'd say oriented for the web or presentation target audience but does give you a hard copy. While principles of color management are discussed it is only briefly in theory only.

If you are more oriented to photography in the sense of film media but working in the digital domain, then this later released book might be of better interest:
http://www.amazon.com/PaintShop-Photo-P ... 139&sr=1-1 which is more from the photographer's viewpoint and goes into more on color management, exposure adjustment, best and worst tools for specific tasks, and so forth. The RAW format was better explained.

I came from strictly 35 mm film format and lab printing to scanning negatives or slides for the digital darkroom and now it is digital origination, processing, and outputting on my own prosumer inkjet printer or producing images for web viewing. The book opinions are my own from initial viewing of the first to more in depth reading of the second which was in release two weeks earlier than announced.

I only mention these in this post to give the sources of my comments on RAW vs. other formats.

[LeviFiction]

Not to get too off-topic, I won't say anything more beyond this post, but PaintShop Photo Pro for Photographers disappointed me in the X2 version. They don't take the time to check all of the features and learn the tool. Some of the methods described were sub-standard, and some of the "finished' photos were anything but. Also if they didn't feel the feature had changed at all they didn't update the chapter areas even though the chapters clearly made reference to earlier versions than the one being discussed. So be weary.

[ronzie]

Not having the previous version I can't say but so far this appears fairly complete with some updates mentioned. It is just the application from a photographer's viewpoint seems better as opposed to the other book I mentioned. Your comment context I read in his X2 edition reviews but I'm happy to get it for a starter. They may be more better manuals out there. "Picture" was written by a business consultant who also writes on spreadsheets, word processors, etc., and just follows the Corel user guide adding the basics. I picked up from that too but "Photographer" translates traditional terms and goes into what X3 offers and was more complete even if not current for quite a few subjects. His style of stating that there's an automated tool for this can do a good job but you might want to constraint or modify or use this to get a better result is in my opinion a better touch.

Corel bought my favorite editor Micrografx Picture Publisher which had poor CM but an excellent context sensitive GUI. When I saw an offer for X3 I could not refuse and in general I am not disappointed in the context sensitive tool GUI. A few years ago I did not care for the JASC GUI leaving droppings around consuming screen real estate.

Not to get too off-topic, I won't say anything more beyond this post, but PaintShop Photo Pro for Photographers disappointed me in the X2 version. They don't take the time to check all of the features and learn the tool. Some of the methods described were sub-standard, and some of the "finished' photos were anything but. Also if they didn't feel the feature had changed at all they didn't update the chapter areas even though the chapters clearly made reference to earlier versions than the one being discussed. So be weary.

[dave2800]

Trev,

Sorry to hear your health is preventing you you from getting out more. You photos are incredible! I really like the shots of the Jowets. I have always loved anything that races and always enjoy great shots of the cars. I have bookmarked both links you posted and want to go through them again as soon as I wake up and get some coffee in me. I am so glad I joined this forum as I have already learned a lot to keep me busy trying different things.

Keep up the great work.
Dave

[dave2800]

Ronzie,

I didn't know ZoomBrowser EX could edit RAW files either until Trev mentioned about the software that came with my Pro1. I decided to open it up and look deeper into the program amd low and behold found it did more the downloading my files from the camera which is what I had used it for. I will post a screen shot of the program at the bottom of this post.

Thanks for all the information you provided. I am going to read through all of it a few times so I have a better understanding of how all of this works. I just started using the RAW format and I know I have a lot to learn. I am quite the amateur when it comes to photography but I really enjoy taking photos.

Thanks,
Dave