X7 - RAW Conversion

[photodrawken]

Tadjio,
Oh...oh! I didn't realize you were using ASP to adjust your image. My bad!

The experiment I was looking for is to use the PSP Camera RAW Lab to make the adjustments and compare its results with using the built-in tools in the Editor. I would expect ASP to achieve better results (as does RawTherapee), being a dedicated RAW image processing program.

P.S., I use ImageShack to embed an image URL because I hate the way this forum's attachment facility surrounds the image with a huge box. Just a matter of aesthetics....

[photodrawken]

Guys I think you are better off uploading a raw "image" so that you can both apply those changes to the data you are debating rather than a second hand jpg of low resloution and quality.

Not necessary for this discussion. I'm not looking to see who can achieve better results, just want other users to see if they can achieve the same (or better) results directly in the PSP Editor than they get using the Camera RAW Lab on their machine. I can here, which is why I've disabled loading RAW images into the Camera RAW Lab.

As an aside, did you realise that a jpg can show approx 16 million variations of shading / colour(256x256x256), a 14/16 bit image approx 4 billion variations ( 16384 x16384 x16384) , and the average human eye can only detect about 10 million variations.

You're absolutely right, but the value of a 16bpp image comes into play when making tonal and colour adjustments. From the Adobe PSCS Help file:

(Photoshop) For critical work and maximum preservation of image data, it’s best if the image you work with is 16 bits per channel (16-bit image) rather than 8 bits per channel (8‑bit image). Data is discarded when you make tonal and color adjustments. The loss of image information is more critical in an 8‑bit image than a 16-bit image. Generally, 16-bit images have a larger file size than 8‑bit images.

The RT Help file explains that RT calculates the tonal and colour adjustments using 32-bit floating point numbers before converting the result into a 16-bit pixel value. That's why it can retain a lot of subtle variations, which is noticeable even when the resulting image is displayed on an 8bpp computer monitor. The inevitable numeric rounding that occurs degrades the image much less.

[Tadjio]

Tadjio,
Oh...oh! I didn't realize you were using ASP to adjust your image. My bad!
The experiment I was looking for is to use the PSP Camera RAW Lab to make the adjustments and compare its results with using the built-in tools in the Editor. I would expect ASP to achieve better results (as does RawTherapee), being a dedicated RAW image processing program.

Ok, understood. This is how I introduced this thread:-

I think it would be useful to start a new discussion thread as to what we feel about X6 Camera RAW Lab and (hopefully) it's replacement in the next PSP Version - X7.
Personally I need to say that I abandoned trying to use Camera RAW Lab and instead use Corel's AfterShot Pro ASP (or else Canon's Digital Photo Professional DPP).
My stance is that Corel should aim to reproduce as much as possible of ASP within PSP. Fundamentally this means a new RAW Conversion mechanism for PSP.

The bottom line is that I don't believe Camera RAW lab is a viable starting point for us or for Corel

[photodrawken]

The bottom line is that I don't believe Camera RAW lab is a viable starting point for us or for Corel

I agree wholeheartedly.

I apologize for the long, drawn-out series of responses, but I wanted to establish my reasons for this answer to your message about RAW Conversion in the next version of PSP:

I assert that the following two statements are true:
1. The adjustments to RAW images made using the main Editor window are equal to or better than the adjustments made using the Camera RAW Lab.
2. Corel, in its wisdom and for its own internal reasons, has decided that the quality of the adjustments available in the Camera RAW Lab are good enough for a general-purpose image editor like PSP.

Therefore, my suggestions are these:
1. Drop the Camera RAW Lab completely. Simply open RAW images directly in the main Editor and use the built-in adjustments on them, as is done with PNG, TIF, and JPG images.
2. The suggestions I've read from others about desiring better this or better that adjustments for RAW images are all valid. I simply suggest implementing those suggestions directly in the main Editor by either enhancing the existing adjustments or creating new types of adjustments. This will have the added benefit of those adjustments also being available for other image formats.

Of course, those suggestions don't preclude establishing a tighter integration with ASP or, hopefully, other 3rd-party RAW image processors.

[Tadjio]

Simply open RAW images directly in the main Editor and use the built-in adjustments on them, as is done with PNG, TIF, and JPG images.

This can be done now - under File / Preferences / File Format Preferences.
I believe it uses the 'default' Camera RAW lab settings to render the RAW Image in order to make it adjustable in PSP.

It is important to note that every RAW processor program does something like this i.e. DeMosaicing the RAW Image and then Rendering it - some do it better than others. (See Wikipedia)

Some of the RAW Adjustments such as changing the Exposure Value, Highlight Recovery and setting the Black Point have to be done as part of the demosaicing and cannot be done later in PSP.
It is this process that I think Corel should lift from ASP into PSP rather than using the existing Camera RAW Lab demosaicing.

[photodrawken]

Simply open RAW images directly in the main Editor and use the built-in adjustments on them, as is done with PNG, TIF, and JPG images.

This can be done now - under File / Preferences / File Format Preferences.

Yes, that's what I stated earlier I'm doing. I'm proposing to not have to even bother with a setting like that.

Some of the RAW Adjustments such as changing the Exposure Value, Highlight Recovery and setting the Black Point have to be done as part of the demosaicing and cannot be done later in PSP.

My point is that once you stop thinking that making those types of adjustments have to be a part of the RAW demosaicing, then you realize you can accomplish the same thing using the Editor's adjustments -- Histogram Adjustment, Shadows/Midtones/Highglights, Curves, etc.

I'm not saying that those adjustments couldn't be done better and more accurately in a sophisticated RAW image processing program, just that they're as good as what's now achieved using the Camera RAW Lab.

Of course, if Corel decides that a more sophisticated RAW image processor should be included in PSP that would be nice; but if not, then my proposals seem reasonable.

However, I'm not going to go to the mat arguing about how sophisticated a RAW image processor PSP should have. I'm only casually interested, because once I discovered the RawTherapee program, whatever RAW processing features PSP (or PSE, for that matter) have to offer became irrelevant.

[Tadjio]

As 380 people have viewed this discussion and nearly half of them viewed the images themselves, I think it is worth pursuing

Simply open RAW images directly in the main Editor and use the built-in adjustments on them, as is done with PNG, TIF, and JPG images.

This can be done now - under File / Preferences / File Format Preferences.

Yes, that's what I stated earlier I'm doing. I'm proposing to not have to even bother with a setting like that.

Sorry but I don't recall you ever saying that here. Anyway it is academic as Corel wouldn't remove that switch setting as it would negate all RAW conversion flexibility!

Some of the RAW Adjustments such as changing the Exposure Value, Highlight Recovery and setting the Black Point have to be done as part of the demosaicing and cannot be done later in PSP.

My point is that once you stop thinking that making those types of adjustments have to be a part of the RAW demosaicing, then you realize you can accomplish the same thing using the Editor's adjustments -- Histogram Adjustment, Shadows/Midtones/Highglights, Curves, etc.
I'm not saying that those adjustments couldn't be done better and more accurately in a sophisticated RAW image processing program, just that they're as good as what's now achieved using the Camera RAW Lab.

I have two points to make / re-iterate:-

1) In PaintShop Pro Edit Mode it is not physically possible to reproduce true Highlight Recovery and Exposure Adjustment which removes clipped Shadows and/or Highlights. This is why I produced my example. Using your techniques, I cannot get from my original image to anything like my "v2" image. [having eliminated the pinks;] RAW demosaicing (including PSP Camera RAW Lab) is required to tackle these fringes.

2) The whole premise of my thread is that we ought to have a sophisticated RAW image processing program (demosaicing algorithm) as part of PaintShop Pro X7 which ideally should be tightly integrated into PSP Edit Mode. This is done with AfterShot Pro where options that apply only to RAW are shaded out if you edit a JPG.

I hope I've made myself clear

[photodrawken]

Sorry but I don't recall you ever saying that here.

From my earlier post (emphasis added):

...achieve the same (or better) results directly in the PSP Editor than they get using the Camera RAW Lab on their machine. I can here, which is why I've disabled loading RAW images into the Camera RAW Lab.

Using your techniques, I cannot get from my original image to anything like my "v2" image.

Of course not. I never said they would duplicate the results achieved by using ASP, just the results from the Camera RAW Lab.

The whole premise of my thread is that we ought to have a sophisticated RAW image processing program (demosaicing algorithm) as part of PaintShop Pro X7 which ideally should be tightly integrated into PSP Edit Mode.

Yes, that would be nice to have. My point is that it's probably not necessary for a general-purpose image editing program like PSP.

[laundromat]

A lot of useful requests and suggestions,however, let's accept and appreciate: We are talking about an excellent imaging software for roughly $ 80. How much more can Corel really offer at this price. The RAW conversion in PSP is 'ok' but for me this is only a quick rendering solution.
If you are seriously working with RAW files you will not be able to avoid buying a RAW conversion software.

Corel After Shot Pro: $ 99
Lightroom: $ 149
Capture One Pro: $ 299

Some years ago I decided to go max and invested in Capture One Pro and have been very satisfied with that package.
I have never really tried After Shot Pro which was put in the market when I had Capture One already.

Having said this, there is always room to improve and I also hope Corel will further improve the RAW converter within PSP. One thing I really miss is the possibility to determine how many dpi the converted RAW should have. At the moment everything is automatically converted to 72dpi only.

[charles1023]

The RAW format has a meaning that almost matches its name: A RAW format image is something that is unprocessed -- in other words, raw. It also cannot be read by your computer. For your computer to be able to process the information, you need to convert your images from a RAW format to a readable format (such as TIFF or JPEG). The purpose of raw image formats is to save, with minimum loss of information, data obtained from the sensor, and the conditions surrounding the capturing of the image (the metadata).

[joe1512]

For me, a huge usability upgrade would be to include profiles for various cameras built into the RAW conversion. For example, my RX100 has horrible barrel distortion. I can use Adobe RAW to DNG converter but it doesn't correct it. While PSP supports Sony's wierd ARW as well as DNG, it cannot automatically make the geometry adjustments. Ideally I'd use Sony's converter to convert to DNG or RAW but of course that doesn't work.
This isn't exactly PSP's problem, but converters like DXO and Lightroom (with ACR) handles this.